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

BLOCKBUSTER: Kawhi Leonard & Paul George both to the Clippers in massive deal

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

  • This reinforces two things:

    1.) PG is an ***. There were a ton of people on this board who blamed our FO. PG was going to screw us regardless.

    2.) The NBA is an amazing product that is completely broken. The only way to "build" a team now is to tank for three years while trading away all assets and accruing picks. You better hope you can draft a superstar or two. Philly showed the league how to do it. Other than that you essentially need your team in a destination city.

    3.) Just a bonus thought. I'm really happy that the Warriors were decimated with injuries. It allowed Toronto to win which was great. However; don't think that Toronto showed the league how to "win".It required an abnormal amount of bad luck for the warriors. Teams are going to try and replicate what Toronto did by trading all the future assets for a one year shot, and it isn't going to work out.
    Danger Zone

    Comment


    • If Toronto didnít win it all, Milwaukee would have. Neither of those teams were in destination markets and neither of them tanked for talent. They did it through outstanding drafting outside of the lottery and very screwed trades and lower tier FA signings. All avenues very open to the Pacers.

      It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

      Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
      Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
      NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Rogco View Post
        Philly showed the league how to do it.
        How, by making it to the 2nd round twice after 6 years of tanking?
        BillS

        A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
        Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Kstat View Post
          If Toronto didnít win it all, Milwaukee would have. Neither of those teams were in destination markets and neither of them tanked for talent. They did it through outstanding drafting outside of the lottery and very screwed trades and lower tier FA signings. All avenues very open to the Pacers.
          Fingers crossed. Been waiting my whole life for it.

          Comment


          • I'm loving this new NBA it seems to me like we have at least ten contenders, its also very obvious that veterans are going to be more valuable than in the past ten years, the Joe Johnson's are going to get picked up fast as teams need depth.


            Teams are still going to value young players but if you are the Lakers, Clippers, Denver, Portland, Bucks, Philly, Boston, Houston and any other team that is in win now mode you are going to try to get as many vets that can help you to win now as possible.

            The new strategy is to have two big stars and a bunch of vets in 1/2 year deals.
            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

            Comment


            • Originally posted by BillS View Post

              How, by making it to the 2nd round twice after 6 years of tanking?
              touche!
              Danger Zone

              Comment


              • Originally posted by BillS View Post

                How, by making it to the 2nd round twice after 6 years of tanking?
                4 years, and the 4th year was only because Ben Simmons broke his foot. The year before they started tanking they had a bad record, but it was not tanking at all. They actually went for it that year, tried to make a big trade, and struck out worse than any team has struck out in a long time.

                I don't agree with the premise that you have to go that far though. The Clippers model even before they got the big prizes was working really well, because they kept willing to trade key pieces of their team when desperate teams were willing to overpay for them. That model can absolutely work as well.

                Comment


                • Philly will also have the highest payroll in the league soon, with zero depth. They can still win that way, but itís not the stability tanking is supposed to supply you with.

                  It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                  Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                  Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                  NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post

                    4 years, and the 4th year was only because Ben Simmons broke his foot. The year before they started tanking they had a bad record, but it was not tanking at all. They actually went for it that year, tried to make a big trade, and struck out worse than any team has struck out in a long time.

                    I don't agree with the premise that you have to go that far though. The Clippers model even before they got the big prizes was working really well, because they kept willing to trade key pieces of their team when desperate teams were willing to overpay for them. That model can absolutely work as well.
                    Here's what kills me. If another team is getting first round and second round outs while occasionally missing the playoffs, they are clearly "working well" because they make trades - even though the trades didn't move them forward in the playoffs until they finally landed a great free agent.

                    If the Pacers historically do the same thing, only they do it by trying to build their current roster rather than churn players through, and don't land a major free agent, they are 'mired in mediocrity' because they 'only want to make the playoffs' and are 'cheap' and 'stupid' (note single quotes means I am using stock phrases, not putting words in your mouth.)

                    This really makes me think that it isn't the results that matter to some people, it is the flailing.

                    And I'm pretty sure Kawhi didn't pick the Clippers because of their all-star supporting cast...
                    BillS

                    A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                    Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by BillS View Post

                      Here's what kills me. If another team is getting first round and second round outs while occasionally missing the playoffs, they are clearly "working well" because they make trades - even though the trades didn't move them forward in the playoffs until they finally landed a great free agent.

                      If the Pacers historically do the same thing, only they do it by trying to build their current roster rather than churn players through, and don't land a major free agent, they are 'mired in mediocrity' because they 'only want to make the playoffs' and are 'cheap' and 'stupid' (note single quotes means I am using stock phrases, not putting words in your mouth.)

                      This really makes me think that it isn't the results that matter to some people, it is the flailing.

                      And I'm pretty sure Kawhi didn't pick the Clippers because of their all-star supporting cast...
                      I mean they have 2 Stars (one superstar) out the tanking I think they are doing OK.
                      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by BillS View Post

                        Here's what kills me. If another team is getting first round and second round outs while occasionally missing the playoffs, they are clearly "working well" because they make trades - even though the trades didn't move them forward in the playoffs until they finally landed a great free agent.

                        If the Pacers historically do the same thing, only they do it by trying to build their current roster rather than churn players through, and don't land a major free agent, they are 'mired in mediocrity' because they 'only want to make the playoffs' and are 'cheap' and 'stupid' (note single quotes means I am using stock phrases, not putting words in your mouth.)

                        This really makes me think that it isn't the results that matter to some people, it is the flailing.

                        And I'm pretty sure Kawhi didn't pick the Clippers because of their all-star supporting cast...
                        I look at it this way. How good is a team, and how many ways do they have to get better? So for example there was a discussion a couple months ago where I put Indiana ahead of OKC as teams I would have. OKC was likely a little better of a team, but they had no path left to get the rest of the way, while the Pacers still had some possibilities.

                        As for the Clippers, the Pacers were likely slightly better last year (although there are competing variables on that), but the Clippers had some big advantages even if they weren't in LA.

                        Let's pretend they weren't in LA. The Clippers still had 2 extra first round picks they could use in trades entering the offseason. The even bigger deal is that they had max cap space even after accounting for the free agents they wanted to bring back. While the Pacers had to make choices and lose some key guys in order to make upgrades (Thad, Bogey, Collison, Joseph), the Clippers could make additions to their roster without losing anybody. That's a big deal. And they had just as many young guys if not more than the Pacers who still have plenty of room to improve.

                        So while the Pacers were slightly better, the Clippers had so many more ways they could get better than Indiana did. If they weren't in LA they wouldn't be the favorites for the championship next season, but they would be significantly better than they were last season, and likely better than the Pacers would be.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Grimp View Post

                          He didnít want out until Kawhi called him up and pushed him to ask OKC for a trade. A very dangerous precedent has just been set here. This means the door is open right now for a superstar player to start tampering with Dame, Embiid, etc. while theyííre under contract. To set up a possible scenario where they team up two or three years from now. Itíís one thing for a player to force a trade because heíís discontent. Itíís another for him to force a trade at the behest of another player while also being under contract.
                          This has been going on since the Summer of 2011. I guess you forgot about LeBron, DWade, and Bosh conspiring to team up in Miami. Itís not illegal for the players to talk to one another. There are no rules preventing players who are all a part of the NBAPA from talking about teaming up. It doesnít matter if they are under contract or not.

                          We donít know what PG agreed to last Summer with OKC. Maybe he had an agreement to give them 1 more year and if they werenít a better team, he would ask for a trade to LA. OKC seems really okay with this move and Russ and PG still seem to be friends.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post

                            One thing is giving hall of famers s*** for not getting a championship another thing is pushing some uniformed agenda that certain players style of play is never going to give them a championship.

                            As far as we know Lebron would have never won anything if he didnít get together with two other hall of famers, KD had to go to a dynasty to get two rings that doesnít make his style of play unplayable and ďomg he gives you highlights but nothing elseĒ.

                            Guys like Lillard, Westbrook, Harden, Beal can win you a championship without a problem but like with any other super star with rings they need to be surrounded by the right people.
                            It's not some "uninformed agenda." Some pretty smart basketball people have commented that Houston's style of play with Harden being so ball dominant is not going to win a title. Kobe is a surefire Hall of Famer and a top 10 player of all time and he knows as much as anyone on what it takes to win a championship. You can disagree with me all you want but Kobe clearly stated that Houston won't win a title playing the way they are.
                            Last edited by ad24rouse; 07-08-2019, 06:48 PM.
                            "In 49 states it's just basketball ... but this is Indiana."

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X