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

Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

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

  • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

    I didn't get to see him really. He and Randolph are my two main unknowns that I didn't get to really look at.

    I will say that other than those 2, I really would be pleased with Arthur at 11 because of his excellent offensive post fundamentals. He gives you Harrison-Ike post work but seemingly without the attitude or poor passing. KU ran some nice systems and he seemed solid enough to work them.

    To me Kansas was sort of the Utah Jazz of the NCAA, constrasted to the more NBA traditional play of Memphis (letting key players work for theirs, solid compliments focused on one role). KS really had all 5 guys work together on a lot of plays, so I suspect that Arthur brings decent awareness at least on the Off end.

    I'm really hoping to get a chance to dig up and watch some footage of Spreights and Randolph prior to the draft.

    I want zero part of Jordan. Sene ringing a bell here. Big, big risk I think. To many other lower risk guys at 11 to make that jump, especially given Jordan's disinterest up to this point at being the best he can.

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

      Nice Chad Ford Chat talking about the draft going on right now 1:40 ET 5/15/08

      http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/chatESPN?event_id=20609

      Steven (Toronto): Is Bill Walker a 1st rounder with a good pre-draft workout?

      Chad Ford: (1:34 PM ET ) He might be. I hear he's working out with Kobe's trainer, Tim Grover, in Chicago. He's supposedly down to 220 and really regained his explosiveness. Walker was a top 5 pick before getting hurt last season. If he shows he's back 100 percent, he'll move into a mid to late first round pick.






      Kyle (SD): Chad, I'm not sure why but Derrick Rose doesn't do a lot for me, with that being said who do you see having the better PRO career between him and Beastly??

      Chad Ford: (1:35 PM ET ) GMs in the league are very split. Both guys project as NBA superstars. Personally, I prefer Rose. I think he's a better leader and has a huge size, athletic advantage at his position. He could be unstoppable as a point guard in the pros.






      Te (The Cuse): How high will Donte Green go in the draft? Will he end up back at Syracuse?

      Chad Ford: (1:36 PM ET ) He's hired an agent, Bill Stickland, so I think he's staying. I talked to a few teams who have him in the 5-10 range. Most have him late lottery to mid first round. He has tremendous upside, but he's rawer than some of the other freshmen.






      Steven (Toronto): Would the Sonics really take Beasley if they won the lottery? Seems a PG in Rose is the perfect fit.

      Chad Ford: (1:37 PM ET ) I think they'd take Rose.






      Ariel (Albany, NY): With DJ Augustin molding his game after Steve Nash, he seems like a perfect fit for the Knicks. Should they consider trading down to pick him if they can move a contract or pick up another piece?

      Chad Ford: (1:37 PM ET ) I'm not sure how far you could trade down. The Bucks would have interest and so would the Pacers.






      greg (toronto): Is Joe Alexander going to stay in the draft?

      Chad Ford: (1:38 PM ET ) Looks like it. He's working out in Las Vegas with trainer Joe Abunassar. Abunassar trained Joakim Noah and Corey Brewer last year among others. I'll see him on Monday.






      Trent Plaisted (Provo): Do you pity the team that drafts me? I sure do.

      Chad Ford: (1:40 PM ET ) I've heard Plaisted is in the draft for good -- that he's hired an agent. I will see him on Friday at a workout. He's here working out in LA with Don MacLean.






      Joe (Laredo, TX): Chad, would you compare Kevin Love to a Carlos Boozer type, a player with limited athletic ability, but strong and very solid in the block.

      Chad Ford: (1:40 PM ET ) Not a bad comparison, though I think Boozer is a quicker and a more nimble athlete. Love is a better passer.






      Charles (orlando): What are your thoughts on Westbrook? Can he play PG in the NBA?

      Chad Ford: (1:41 PM ET ) I think so. He reminds me a little of where Rondo was coming into the draft. His athletic ability is so high, I think he'll be a very good pro.

      Joe (MI): Which players do you think should most seriously consider staying another year?

      Chad Ford: (1:42 PM ET ) I would've told Donte Greene and Kosta Koufos to stay in school, but both have hired agents. Of the guys remaining? Marresse Speights and J.J. Hickson should stay.

      Michael (Atlanta): What teams would take Beasley over Rose? I think Rose hands down is the best player in this year's draft.

      Chad Ford: (1:44 PM ET ) I think Minnesota and Memphis would take him over Rose. Ditto for Chicago and New Jersey.




      Mike (los angeles, ca): With the situation concerning OJ Mayo..is that a concern with GM's? Or do they care?

      Chad Ford: (1:46 PM ET ) They don't care. One GM said to me (I'm paraphrasing here) that allegations like this swirl around every top draft prospect. If they were concerned about them, there would be no one to draft. I don't think O.J. is a bad person because he took clothes a TV and some tickets from a friend. How many college students do you know who would pass that stuff up? From what I can gather, OJ checks out as a good kid
      Last edited by Speed; 05-15-2008, 01:47 PM.

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
        I didn't get to see him really. He and Randolph are my two main unknowns that I didn't get to really look at.

        I will say that other than those 2, I really would be pleased with Arthur at 11 because of his excellent offensive post fundamentals. He gives you Harrison-Ike post work but seemingly without the attitude or poor passing. KU ran some nice systems and he seemed solid enough to work them.

        To me Kansas was sort of the Utah Jazz of the NCAA, constrasted to the more NBA traditional play of Memphis (letting key players work for theirs, solid compliments focused on one role). KS really had all 5 guys work together on a lot of plays, so I suspect that Arthur brings decent awareness at least on the Off end.

        I'm really hoping to get a chance to dig up and watch some footage of Spreights and Randolph prior to the draft.

        I want zero part of Jordan. Sene ringing a bell here. Big, big risk I think. To many other lower risk guys at 11 to make that jump, especially given Jordan's disinterest up to this point at being the best he can.
        Let me know what you think of Spreights. From what I have read about him....he seems like a solid Big Man that can ( at worst ) turn out to be a solid rotational Big Man and ( at best ) a solid Starter for the future.

        I'm with you on the type of player that we draft, we need a quick infusion of talent. IMHO that means that it's better to pick the best Big Man or PG that is available that is NBA-Ready that can make the most impact on this team in a short amount of time. This also means that I would pass up on potential in a Big Man like Jordan or McGee just because I don't want to gamble and roll Snakes Eyes.

        The only players with potential that I would take a chance on is Love, Westbrook and Gordon ( is he drops to the 11th spot )...only because they don't seem to be that raw and can contribute in a season or two.
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

          Holy crap, the lotto's on Tuesday? Who's going to be our representative there? I nominate Stanko.

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

            Originally posted by tdubb03 View Post
            Holy crap, the lotto's on Tuesday? Who's going to be our representative there? I nominate Stanko.
            Morway said it would be Bird on the radio last week.

            They wanted someone who spoke better English than Bird, but Stanko wasn't available so they went with Bird.

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

              Originally posted by Speed View Post
              Mike (los angeles, ca): With the situation concerning OJ Mayo..is that a concern with GM's? Or do they care?


              Chad Ford: (1:46 PM ET ) They don't care. One GM said to me (I'm paraphrasing here) that allegations like this swirl around every top draft prospect. If they were concerned about them, there would be no one to draft. I don't think O.J. is a bad person because he took clothes a TV and some tickets from a friend. How many college students do you know who would pass that stuff up? From what I can gather, OJ checks out as a good kid
              Yup.

              Thanks for posting this. I think that he's wrong about the Sonics picking Rose, especially since he's not going to be pick-and-rolling with Durant. An inside-outside combo of KD and MB would be much more effective (it would also make the Sonics have at least potential as the Blaze imo). The point about Augustine modeling his game after Nash's is so irrelevant; Paul has done similar modeling but so has Travis Diener. At this point, Westbrook is the player the Pacers should be hoping for though some of the big men Seth mentioned could work too.

              Originally posted by tdubb03 View Post
              Holy crap, the lotto's on Tuesday? Who's going to be our representative there? I nominate Stanko.


              He's busy pimpin'.
              You Got The Tony!!!!!!

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                Y'know what'd be cool with the lotto, have a random fan be the representative. Something like pulling a season ticket holder out of a hat. Not like the reps actually do anything there anyway.

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                  Originally posted by AesopRockOn View Post
                  Yup.

                  Thanks for posting this. I think that he's wrong about the Sonics picking Rose, especially since he's not going to be pick-and-rolling with Durant. An inside-outside combo of KD and MB would be much more effective (it would also make the Sonics have at least potential as the Blaze imo). The point about Augustine modeling his game after Nash's is so irrelevant; Paul has done similar modeling but so has Travis Diener. At this point, Westbrook is the player the Pacers should be hoping for though some of the big men Seth mentioned could work too.

                  [/I]

                  He's busy pimpin'.
                  I don't know.....if the Sonics had the choice between Rose and Beasley.....I would go with Rose. I think that the PG and Center spots are the most difficult to fill. If Beasley was a supposed Franchise level Center ( a la Oden ), then it would be hard to pick between the 2.....but he's ( at least to me ) not on the level of a Tim Duncan ( a Franchise Level PF ) that would make me go with him over Rose.

                  If they get the 1st pick and go with Rose, it would seem that there is a better pick of Big Men in the early 20s that would likely pan out. With Watson or Ridnour as a future backup PG, they can move one of the two ( which I think that can easily do ) in the offseason and be set at the PG rotation for the near future.

                  But if they go with Beasley with their 1st pick, who could they pick up that would make sense as their 2nd 1st round pick?
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                    Originally posted by Speed View Post
                    Morway said it would be Bird on the radio last week.

                    They wanted someone who spoke better English than Bird, but Stanko wasn't available so they went with Bird.
                    Hahahahaha...

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                      Does anybody know much about DeVon Hardin? Sounds like he'd be a solid 2nd round pick to me.

                      http://www.nbadraft.net/admincp/prof...vonhardin.html

                      NBA Comparison: Darryl Dawkins
                      Strengths: Long and athletic bigman with great strength ... Has an NBA body, really trimmed down from a year ago and is moving much quicker... Very quick feet and explosive legs ... Runs the floor well ... Very aggressive under the basket ... With his long arms, plays big for his size ... Intimidating on the defensive end, good timing on shot blocks ... Loves to dunk the ball over guys ... Outstanding student with a 4.0 GPA in high school ...

                      Weaknesses: Must develop better moves around the basket ... Needs a couple years to develop his game ... Offensive game is still limited, his shooting form is good, just needs to keep working on it ... Needs to develop a mid range jump shot to complement his inside game ... Free throw shooting is really in need of improvement (under 40% as a freshman) ...

                      "I've got an idea--an idea so smart that my head would explode if I even began to know what I'm talking about." - Peter Griffin

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                        Originally posted by DanGrangerPwrRanger View Post
                        Does anybody know much about DeVon Hardin? Sounds like he'd be a solid 2nd round pick to me.
                        He stinks. He's just not that good. That's about all there is to know.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                          I think everyone in this draft will be a bust with the obvious exception of Kosta Koufos.

                          Oh, and CB34.
                          Last edited by LG33; 05-16-2008, 01:57 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                            "Stuckey is also the only rookie to both make the second round and average at least 12 minutes a game (he's getting 22.2). "


                            from Hollingers most recent article



                            http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playof...=Awards_080516




                            I just mention it to show that whoever the Pacers draft, the odds of them having an immediate impact on a really good team is not very likely.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                              I have a question, who is the best shooter in the draft?

                              Is there a pure shooter, if not who is the best?

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                                Haven't seen either of the Euro's. I'd imagine one of them is known as a shooter. Would have said Gordon was the best shooter in the lottery till he went off the deep end late in the season.


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X