Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Odd Thoughts....blowing off the cobwebs to look at the team and where we go from here.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Taterhead View Post

    I know when someone cant play. You obviously dont.

    And who thinks CJ Miles is a sharp shooter? Nobody. But hes a hell of a lot better than McDermott, that's for sure.
    After today’s practice, Carlisle compared Doug McDermott’s play to Hall of Famer Reggie Miller, who played for Carlisle in Indy. Carlisle: “I think Reggie is a valid comparison. We just got to do everything we can to take advantage of him offensively and protect him on D.”

    I guess you know more than Rick Carlisle?? You must be a smart guy

    Comment


    • Originally posted by kent beckley View Post

      After today’s practice, Carlisle compared Doug McDermott’s play to Hall of Famer Reggie Miller, who played for Carlisle in Indy. Carlisle: “I think Reggie is a valid comparison. We just got to do everything we can to take advantage of him offensively and protect him on D.”

      I guess you know more than Rick Carlisle?? You must be a smart guy


      No I don't think I know more than Rick Carlisle. He just didn't say Doug was a good player. Read it again. In fact he made no attempt to bring him back.

      So, neither one of us want him on our team.

      "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Taterhead View Post



        No I don't think I know more than Rick Carlisle. He just didn't say Doug was a good player. Read it again. In fact he made no attempt to bring him back.

        So, neither one of us want him on our team.
        I will agree on one thing. The fact Doug gets minutes isn't a good sign. If he were really a poor man's Kyle Korver he would have already proven that.

        But the fact CJ Miles started for the Pacers is a worse sign. Let's just say I would much rather have Doug as a backup wing than CJ Miles starting. The only thing worse than CJ Miles starting was Rodney Stuckey starting. The only thing worse than Rodney Stuckey starting was some people thinking Solomon Hill was our 3 and D savior.

        Really, Doug is way down the list of Pacer mistakes even with that giant contract (in comparison to his worth).

        Comment


        • Carlisle is blowing smoke. Clutch vs un-clutch. Two players could not be more different.
          {o,o}
          |)__)
          -"-"-

          Comment


          • Originally posted by owl View Post
            Carlisle is blowing smoke. Clutch vs un-clutch. Two players could not be more different.
            Comparing Reggie Miller to Doug McDermott is like comparing Red Bordeaux to a juice box.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Taterhead View Post



              No I don't think I know more than Rick Carlisle. He just didn't say Doug was a good player. Read it again. In fact he made no attempt to bring him back.

              So, neither one of us want him on our team.
              Rick wanted to re-sign Doug, but unfortunately for him, the GM wanted DeAndre Jordan more. Thy tried to send Wes to the Clippers, but they didn’t want him, so they had to sign Deandre using cap space, and Doug’s cap hold was too high to afford Deandre.

              Comment


              • We will have a good sense of overall direction on Wednesday evening.

                It's unusual for the front office to have taken so much time for their end of season press conference.

                That implies to me that they've used the past week to sit down with the players and internally to decide upon a plan of attack.

                We will know quickly in the press conference as to whether this will be a retool or a fundamental reloading offseason.

                Retool to me = bring in complementary players to the current core.
                Reload to me = sign an additional long term core bedrock to the team

                Comment


                • Originally posted by docpaul View Post
                  We will have a good sense of overall direction on Wednesday evening.

                  It's unusual for the front office to have taken so much time for their end of season press conference.

                  That implies to me that they've used the past week to sit down with the players and internally to decide upon a plan of attack.

                  We will know quickly in the press conference as to whether this will be a retool or a fundamental reloading offseason.

                  Retool to me = bring in complementary players to the current core.
                  Reload to me = sign an additional long term core bedrock to the team
                  Hopefully they had a long talk with Victor. This team needs help at point number one and a scoring, defending wing

                  {o,o}
                  |)__)
                  -"-"-

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by owl View Post
                    Carlisle is blowing smoke. Clutch vs un-clutch. Two players could not be more different.
                    Exactly. He is posting Carlisles response to a direct question about Doug McDermott and what he brings to the team, likely after a good performance during that legendary 20 game stretch he had for Dallas. And in the response, he mentions he is a defensive liability and needs to be covered up on defense, which is my biggest problem with McDermott.


                    "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by kent beckley View Post

                      After today's practice, Carlisle compared Doug McDermott's play to Hall of Famer Reggie Miller.
                      Let's keep it real.

                      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                      Comment


                      • Good post, Peck. The only thing I thing might’ve been a little overplayed is the narrative that free agents won’t come to Indiana. I can’t think of any Time in Pacers history where they have had max money to offer a top-tier free agent. It’s not that they can’t attract a big free agent, they can’t even get in the game.

                        They tried to to get some top 50 talent in Jrue Holiday and Gordon Hayward 2 summers ago but both bowed out for 2 good reasons. 1. Paul George requested a trade and 2. they only had about 20 million to offer. It’s no surprise that they turned it down. Last Summer they almost landed J.J. Reddick but the Sixers countered their offer and gave him a little more to stay.

                        What this shows shows me is that KP will go after free agents All-Star tiered players. Now that he actually has some cash to flash, I’m sure he’s going to try to get as much bang for his buck as possible. This could be done through free agency, through a trade, or a combination of both. Either way, I think the Pacers will get at least one really good player this Summer.

                        If if it was me, I’d throw a big deal to New Orleans for Anthony Davis and see if they bite. I know everyone is saying the Celtics have the inside track on him but You never know how things will pan out there so strike early and see if you can get them to bite on a deal centered around Myles Turner, Aaron Holiday, and McDermott. Super risky because AD will only have 1 more year but it would be a championship type move for the Pacers. With AD on the team, you might be able to convince Bogey and Thad to come back on a discounted rate

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Peck View Post

                          Then there is another way to go and believe me when I say this, it's going to be painful and unpopular. But you let the majority of your free agents walk, you might keep Bojan depending on length of contract and depending on what you can sign in free agency you might keep either Collison or Joseph (I don't really care which). But then you go and sign a couple of young players who have the ability to play above the rim, have length and have decent height for their position. You then pick between Sabonis and Turner and you trade the other. This will net you either a very good wing player or you potentially could get a top 5 protected draft pick (that might be high but I'm thinking you could get either an 8-10 pick.
                          I think there is a half measure between your two options I'd be totally fine with. I don't support any blatant tank strategy at this point and given the history of the organization, it ain't gonna happen. You seem to be advocating a quasi-tank here and I don't agree with that. Vic is in his prime now, a tank strategy just won't time out well for the team as currently constructed. I do agree that resigning everyone is totally spinning the tires and would be even worse, however.

                          The team should resign Bojan and that's it, let everyone else walk (maybe keep Matthews for depth but ONLY if he comes cheap). Then you look at NOT EXACTLY free agency, but using your cap space to facilitate a trade. This has always been the smarter plan and I'll never understand why people always freak out at the deadline, it seems like the real action usually happens in the offseason.

                          I also see this Turner vs. Sabonis narrative continue to be pushed and while that may come to a head eventually, I think you could stand to let that ride for a little longer. Let Thad walk and see increased playing time for the two together, even if it doesn't work out, it deserves more of a look. (Take a step back to ultimately take a step forward, I think this makes more sense than just dumping one of them in a trade prematurely)

                          Look to pool your assets and make a play for ONE major upgrade at a key position via trade. You're letting one starting forward and two Point Guards walk, conceivably. I think it should be a point guard, and right now I think a Holiday for Holiday trade makes the most sense. Trade the younger Holiday + other assets in a play to acquire Jrue Holiday, who looks like a guy who might be available, plays a secondary scorer and lead guard role, and has a huge contract which the Pacers are in the advantageous position to be able to absorb fairly easily into cap space.

                          You could also go after Kemba Walker, but I just think he's probably staying in Charlotte or aiming higher. Don't see many realistic targets in free agency at this time.

                          Upgrade Your starting PG spot while weakening your forward spot, BUT, possibly allowing for an addition by subtraction scenario with bigger minutes for Sabonis. Not to mention, forcing young guys such as Alize Johnson and Edmund Sumner into bigger roles off the bench (I kinda think both guys are sleepers).

                          If you feel like Turner/Sabonis isn't working, wait for the trade deadline and look to trade (more likely, sorry folks) Sabonis for a major upgrade at forward.

                          These things move the team forward without tearing down, because I believe a tank strategy now is just a kiss goodbye to Vic in two seasons and you're back to square one. Worse off than you started.

                          "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                          - ilive4sports

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X