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...

    Originally posted by croz24 View Post
    i think this just reaffirms my belief that alexander can play some pf in the league. if a guy like shawn marion is a perfect pf in our system (as many on here have stated), i'm not sure why joe can't be. joe is twice as strong as marion, probably has a slightly better vertical, and is just as long...shoot, joe is nearly as tall as beasley and just as big, but with a much higher vertical which joe utilizes in game action...

    at #11, i really hope the pacers draft joe, donte, or danilo (no, i don't know or haven't seen much of him), and wouldn't hate love...

    can we say joe is 24 times stronger than shawne williams? if i recall, shawne didn't even get the 185lb bar up once.

    And the comparison stops there. Beasley is better outside, inside, and mid-range player. He is quicker off of the dribble.

    Twice as strong as Marion? When Marion came out? Marion is elite because of his wingspan. I don't know Joe's, but if it is less that 6-8 I am done talking about him.

    Beware of the players that have strong second half seasons. Corey Brewer is one that was hyped toward draft and he may be a good player. But then he may be just a defensive specialist picked in the lottery.

    Joe as a PF worries me. He will not get you the rebounds. He maybe strong, but you need to be wide as well. Either that or have lanky arms and a lanky frame.

    Comment


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

      Originally posted by Rajah Brown View Post
      Alexander looks like Croshere with better lateral quickness and
      much better hops.
      Croshere was neither a PF or SF so he struggled. Alexander is much more mobile and has better control of his body. Croshere once he got started was going to the hoop no matter what was in the way. Alexander is a SF and if he is the best available the Pacers take him.

      Also Ty Lawson had a great showing at the Orlando camp and then stopped playing. RATS says
      he has a work out with the Pacers. Are the Pacers going to pick him up at 41 or
      late in the first?
      {o,o}
      |)__)
      -"-"-

      Comment


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

        Originally posted by owl View Post
        Alexander is a SF and if he is the best available the Pacers take him.
        So he can be our fifth SF off the bench?

        I'd rather trade the pick than grab another SF.
        This space for rent.

        Comment


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

          If Joe Alexander is at 11, and he's the best player available, I think we should take him and then trade from our strength. There are teams out there in need of a small forward, so I think we put in the call to them and go from there.

          Comment


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

            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
            So he can be our fifth SF off the bench?

            I'd rather trade the pick than grab another SF.
            Earlier I had a post put together on what you are saying, and deleted it by mistake. Basically, I pointed out Alexander doesn't meet the needs of what the Pacers are looking for. He's not going to be a PF, the Pacers already have a small one of those in Ike, and the Pacers are chocked full of SF. If the Pacers drafted him, who's minutes is he going to take? Shawne? Ike? Both need minutes to develop, unless the Pacers are planning on trading both plus others.

            I believe Alexander is going to be a good player, but his position with the Pacers is more than covered. Now, if the Pacers are planning on getting rid of Dun, maybe.

            Comment


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

              Originally posted by QuickRelease View Post
              If Joe Alexander is at 11, and he's the best player available, I think we should take him and then trade from our strength.
              The #11 pick is most valuable before it's used. If we're going to "trade from our strength" we should trade the #11 pick rather than trading Joe Alexander.
              This space for rent.

              Comment


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

                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                I believe Alexander is going to be a good player, but his position with the Pacers is more than covered. Now, if the Pacers are planning on getting rid of Dun, maybe.
                Even then. So we trade Dunleavy... then what? Do we now need another SF? If he's the best on the board, I'd rather trade down and get CDR.

                And honestly, I really don't see him being the best player available at #11. I haven't counted it, but I'm sure there are more than 10 players I'd rather have with that pick.
                This space for rent.

                Comment


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

                  Originally posted by owl View Post

                  Also Ty Lawson had a great showing at the Orlando camp and then stopped playing. RATS says
                  he has a work out with the Pacers. Are the Pacers going to pick him up at 41 or
                  late in the first?

                  After reading this yesterday, I tried and finally succeeded in finding the Pacers on the Star board. Nowhere was there anything about Ty Lawson.

                  What a screwed up board with few posters, and dayz between posts. Do they possibly have more than one site, and I got one the wrong one?

                  Comment


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

                    Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                    The #11 pick is most valuable before it's used. If we're going to "trade from our strength" we should trade the #11 pick rather than trading Joe Alexander.
                    How about if Joe is better than Ike or Shawne and Joe is the best available you trade
                    Ike and Shawne?
                    {o,o}
                    |)__)
                    -"-"-

                    Comment


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

                      Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                      After reading this yesterday, I tried and finally succeeded in finding the Pacers on the Star board. Nowhere was there anything about Ty Lawson.

                      What a screwed up board with few posters, and dayz between posts. Do they possibly have more than one site, and I got one the wrong one?
                      It was not mentioned in the discussion boards but in an article about Pacer draft picks.
                      I actually read in in the real paper and so it should be in the internet version.
                      I did not make it up.
                      {o,o}
                      |)__)
                      -"-"-

                      Comment


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

                        My comparsion to Croshere was nothing other then an
                        observation. I wasn't a Chroshere fan and I've no opinion
                        on Alexander. I see him as tweener/SF in the NBA which
                        certainly isn't a priority need for the Pacers.

                        Comment


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

                          Alexander has a better all around game offensively than Croshere and doesn't rely as much on the 3 pt shot for his success. If Alexander is by shoulders the best player available on the board at #11, then we should take him. However, if there is a player of comparable talent that actually fills a position of need then I'd rather take them. Alexander may be able to play the 4 in stretches, but it remains to be seen whether he could play that position on a regular basis. I do like his game though.

                          Comment


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

                            The whole best pick available thing has to come with some limitations. I like Joe Alexander, but he makes zero sense for our team. The idea that you are going to trade your extra small forward is flawed because it is the most easily filled position in the leauge. We already have a gluttony of small forwards, at least one of which will need traded after next year. Hopefully shawne steps up his game like danny did this year, than he can be traded.

                            yeah if there is like a lebron james level superstar of course you take him, but thats different. Joe Alexander is not signifigantly more talented than anyone else in that 10-20 range. You don't soley pick on need but you also prioritize certain positions, PGs and Bigs are obviously the big need, you also might take an SG if they look like they might be real special (mayo or gordon), but I don't see a small forward in this draft that looks better than Danny Granger (maybe the italian dude, but we need to avoid players with defensive problems), there are certainly no "sure things".

                            On another note, if Brook Lopez fell to 11, that would be great news. I don't think he will be a superstar, but he will be a very solid productive center both offensivly and defensively. He can play in the post, face up, block shots, and he is a big presence in the paint. He could fill our center position for years to come.
                            Last edited by Infinite MAN_force; 06-01-2008, 03:13 PM.
                            "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


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

                              With Alexander is comes down to whether or not he is significantly better than other players
                              in the range. That is where the talent evaluators better do their job. In Alexander I see a very
                              physically talented and driven player. I KNOW we don't have too many of those.
                              So I would not blow him off because the Pacers already have some "similar" type
                              players. The Pacers are sorely lacking in talent and can't be near-sighted. This team
                              is some time away from contending so don't reach for a position.
                              I could see a big at 11 and Ty Lawson later in the first via a deal. It really depends on
                              so many other factors.
                              {o,o}
                              |)__)
                              -"-"-

                              Comment


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

                                Question regarding trading the pick. What do you guys think about Leandaro Barbosa?

                                I like Barbosa better than any of our other opitions and I think he could be avaliable but not for sure.

                                He has a resonable contract and his salary could be matched fairly easily. Would the Suns accept Jeff Foster, the 11th pick, plus ? for Barbosa?

                                I think that Barbosa, Mike, and Danny would be a decent 1-2-3 scoring combination. I say if Flip can play point guard for Jim than surely Barbosa can.

                                I think the Knicks will probably be after Barbosa too. They probably can put together a more attractive deal for Phoenix.

                                Who are some other players we could move the pick for? I have been trying to think of the possible opitions because I can see us doing that if the right deal is there of course.

                                Some recent examples of trading picks for players include the Grizzles trading Shane Battier for the draft rights to Rudy Gay and last year the Bobcats trading the draft rights to Brandin Wright for Jason Richardson. The Pacers pick is a little lower than what RG and Wright were picked at.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X