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

Kravitz: The Pacers are stuck in purgatory, and the NBA is to blame

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

  • #76
    Originally posted by Downtown Bang! View Post

    How many people are saying ďcause INĒ.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    The guy I quoted for starters. And being intellectually honest means just that. I am not sure if you have paid attention to my posts (fair if you haven't, nothing terribly exciting) but I am overall pretty ok with how this offseason went and how Pritch has done overall. I think he did an absolutely miserable job of squandering assets at the trade deadline, but pobodies nerfect.

    I just get sick and tired of the "woe is me the world isn't fair" crap whether it is from fans or worse from the front office. Do 25 teams maybe have a harder time signing guys than 5 teams? Probably. Now STFU and get to work.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
      Would a hard cap prevent this type of player movement in FA? Yes, but it won't stop players from demanding trades so it's a moot point. I kinda like the what the Pacers did here and think they could be really good this season once VO gets healthy so I'm not salty about it like many of you.
      The thing that a hard cap does is level the playing field so there is a FINITE and EQUAL amount of money from every team. Before any objects it will cost the owners a higher percentage of the profits. This is not an issue. Sure players can move around the same like they do now it just gives the the flyover teams a fair shake.

      As far as management making wise decisions the Pacers have made some good and some not so good.
      They KNEW Kwahi had some real potential and had second thoughts so I do not want to hear none of us knew he was going to be great.
      The Pacers CANNOT afford to not take talent regardless of what is on the team. They got it right with Goga but man they lost
      their minds by not taking Carsen Edwards because we have Holiday. This lack of foresight ranks number three on the dumbest decisions by the franchise
      After Bird and and Kawhi this one is going to be a stinker.
      I will agree with Vnla81 in this regard but not on the Free Agent AllStar thing. Those types are NOT coming here. We have 30 years of history to back that up
      regardless of GM or owner. Neither matter to any extent with the current CBA
      Last edited by owl; 07-17-2019, 06:15 PM.
      {o,o}
      |)__)
      -"-"-

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post

        That's not moving the goal post...real talk, he's not worth the max, and if he wasn't willing to accept less then on to the next player. Indiana should not be contacting and signing free agents just for the sake of getting them. Tobias Harris answers the question "Should Indiana have signed him for the max?".

        https://www.basketball-reference.com...harrito02.html

        There's nothing that says he's worth that type of money.
        This is exactly moving the goalpost.

        The article stated we couldn't even get Tobias Harris to talk to us to which you responded...

        Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post



        In my mind, we have 35+ years of history to backup that Indiana is not a free agent destination for whatever reason. Not to pull the race card, but sometimes I see it simply as...what does Indiana offer a young, black athlete?
        Now that it looks like he was willing to talk to us, we didn't want him anyway because he is overpaid? I didn't want the dude either, but I'm not out here talking about how we can't get a meeting with him because young black men don't want to live in Indiana.

        Again because for some reason people seem to think you always have to have an agenda on here...didn't want him, glad we didn't sign him. But still good to know he was interested in at least talking to us about playing in Indiana.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post

          Yep now the goal post has been moved to "well I'm glad they didn't talk to us because we didn't want to offer them a max anyways"

          So are the Pacers cheap because they did not offer the max or are they dumb because they did?
          {o,o}
          |)__)
          -"-"-

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by Wage View Post

            The guy I quoted for starters. And being intellectually honest means just that. I am not sure if you have paid attention to my posts (fair if you haven't, nothing terribly exciting) but I am overall pretty ok with how this offseason went and how Pritch has done overall. I think he did an absolutely miserable job of squandering assets at the trade deadline, but pobodies nerfect.

            I just get sick and tired of the "woe is me the world isn't fair" crap whether it is from fans or worse from the front office. Do 25 teams maybe have a harder time signing guys than 5 teams? Probably. Now STFU and get to work.
            Sure griping is not going to change anything and you work hard given the current rules. That does not mean we cannot ask for a fair playing field.
            {o,o}
            |)__)
            -"-"-

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by owl View Post

              So are the Pacers cheap because they did not offer the max or are they dumb because they did?
              Why are those the only options?

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by LilSean320 View Post
                One day I'm going to learn how to properly post articles. I thought this was pretty interesting because Kravitz just wrote about us not being able to get a meeting with Tobias and it looks like he was only interested in meeting with teams that wanted to offer him the max. Not sure how reliable a source this is. I remember Tobias saying that style of play is the most important thing that he will consider in free agency. I wrote that he is lying. He just wants the money and I guess I was right lol.


                https://clutchpoints.com/pacers-rumo...t-offer-a-max/
                Iííve been saying for months that Harris was the guy the Pacers would target and if Jimmy had agreed to stay in Philly I think he wouldíve probably had to settle for less with the Pacers. Who else was going to give him more than 27 million the first year that wouldíve been in a better position than the Pacers to get him?

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Wage View Post

                  This is exactly moving the goalpost.

                  The article stated we couldn't even get Tobias Harris to talk to us to which you responded...



                  Now that it looks like he was willing to talk to us, we didn't want him anyway because he is overpaid? I didn't want the dude either, but I'm not out here talking about how we can't get a meeting with him because young black men don't want to live in Indiana.

                  Again because for some reason people seem to think you always have to have an agenda on here...didn't want him, glad we didn't sign him. But still good to know he was interested in at least talking to us about playing in Indiana.
                  So let me get this straight....the article pretty much says/confirms that Indiana can't get meetings with the top tier free agents. Fine, I've been saying that Indiana is not free agent destination. So, we find the one off player who's willing to have a meeting with Indiana, BUT Indiana has to be willing to pay the max. Okay...fine again. My rebuttal was basically, if Tobias Harris had multiple teams willing to offer the max is Indiana an option for him? Does Indiana even get a chance to talk to him if 4 other teams are willing to offer the max already? Top tier free agents can IMMEDIATELY waive off Indiana, because they already know that the entire league is willing to pay for them, so they can save the trouble of the small markets contacting them. Tobias Harris DOESN'T have that same luxury, so he'll just follow the money. To me, he's a clear case of whatever team is stupid enough to offer the max to him which, to me, he's no different than any other free agent.

                  As for my comment about RICH black athletes....what does Indiana offer them compared to other cities? Nightlife? A thriving Black Community? An area to show off their riches to other celebrities? The money is nice, but they can get that anywhere.

                  EDIT:
                  Then you got videos like this...

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4PdDSritTU

                  That makes people think Indiana is just a bunch of lames. I live in a city with a lot people from larger cities (Chicago, St. Louis, Milwaukee, Minneapolis), and they generally think Indiana is some low-key racist state with its fake nightlife.
                  Last edited by ksuttonjr76; 07-17-2019, 07:08 PM.


                  Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by owl View Post

                    So are the Pacers cheap because they did not offer the max or are they dumb because they did?
                    They didnít reason why nobody wanted to talk to them.

                    Not saying they had to just saying that Pacers need to STFU we all know they are full of s***
                    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by Wage View Post

                      The guy I quoted for starters. And being intellectually honest means just that. I am not sure if you have paid attention to my posts (fair if you haven't, nothing terribly exciting) but I am overall pretty ok with how this offseason went and how Pritch has done overall. I think he did an absolutely miserable job of squandering assets at the trade deadline, but pobodies nerfect.

                      I just get sick and tired of the "woe is me the world isn't fair" crap whether it is from fans or worse from the front office. Do 25 teams maybe have a harder time signing guys than 5 teams? Probably. Now STFU and get to work.
                      I would much rather spend money as a fan with rules that align with competitive balance. When the deck is stacked against the majority of fans then why should we bet good honest money for a sleight of hand parlour trick league?

                      To me the star players and the owners or whatever we call them now will operate this league like the wwe. The script will be written and people will watch since it is entertainment even if it is really sort of scripted. The longer I live the less interested I am in the NBA.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post

                        No yet, there is potential he could be one but there is also a chance he is as disappointing as George Hill.
                        Donít you dog one of my favorite players that way (grr LOL). Love Hills game and of course, he was a big contributor for the Bucks in the playoffs.

                        Dude is a consummate team player, which is different than an alpha star. You need those players to win rings.


                        Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post

                          They didnít reason why nobody wanted to talk to them.

                          Not saying they had to just saying that Pacers need to STFU we all know they are full of s***
                          Yes I agree the Pacers should know their place and have to offer max contracts to low level almost all star players.
                          I would put that in the dumb category to do that.
                          Are the Pacers going to spend into the tax?. Rarely so basically no. We can agree on that
                          {o,o}
                          |)__)
                          -"-"-

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by docpaul View Post

                            Donít you dog one of my favorite players that way (grr LOL). Love Hills game and of course, he was a big contributor for the Bucks in the playoffs.

                            Dude is a consummate team player, which is different than an alpha star. You need those players to win rings.


                            Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
                            Sure but Iím hoping he is much better or we are all going to be disappointed, specially after giving up all that for him.

                            Lets also hope his foot is good to go as well.
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by docpaul View Post

                              Donít you dog one of my favorite players that way (grr LOL). Love Hills game and of course, he was a big contributor for the Bucks in the playoffs.

                              Dude is a consummate team player, which is different than an alpha star. You need those players to win rings.


                              Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
                              IDK. He made it to the finals with LeBron James and proceeded to shoot 31% from 3. In fact, he lost his touches to Lance Stephenson when he was a Pacer. I don't mind George but he has shown time and time that he doesn't show.
                              Vnzla81: Yep pretty much, they cut him because they were going to get "their guy" they couldn't get option 1,2,3,4,5 then they went to Lance he said "no thanks" and they had no other choice but to get Lance 2.0 for three times the cost.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

                                IDK. He made it to the finals with LeBron James and proceeded to shoot 31% from 3. In fact, he lost his touches to Lance Stephenson when he was a Pacer. I don't mind George but he has shown time and time that he doesn't show.
                                In the finals he shot 43.8% from 3.I don't think you perception of Hill is accurate.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X