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: Draft Talk

    Originally posted by Mal View Post
    It's not his only weaknesses as I understand it. He apparently also can't play good on-ball defense. He's a shotblocker, and I'm not even sure if he's much of a rebounder.
    Ya, I haven't heard anything about his on-ball defense being bad, but for 7'3 he doesn't get that many rebounds at 7 a game, which is solid, but not what you expect from your big center.. Again that stuff can all be taught to a guy. I recommend everyone go to Nbadraft.net and check everyone one.. They have full scouting reports, I posted two of the players reports above. Thabeet is the 7th best overall player in this drafts ranking.. But expected to go anywhere from 14-25
    Last edited by Ownagedood; 04-07-2008, 05:07 PM.

    Comment


    • Re: Draft Talk

      Originally posted by rexnom View Post
      Can we merge the two threads?
      Ya, that's cool.

      Lol, don't know what the other guy means by this isn't official..But ok..lol

      Comment


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

        Woo! Merging! Woo! Admins! Order is restored! Must conform! Resistance is futile!

        Comment


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

          Read my Pacers blog:
          8points9seconds.com

          Follow my twitter:

          @8pts9secs

          Comment


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

            Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
            Can it create its own slot?
            You Got The Tony!!!!!!

            Comment


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

              The latest NBAdraft.net mock has Augustin at #23 and CD-R at #18. They also have Rose at #1 now.

              What we should really do is try to get a couple more first-rounders and grab a PG, a C, and a SG (or PF).

              Btw, Thabeet is amazingly overrated on here. The guy has no offense, subpar man-to-man defense, and isn't even a great rebounder. He's an excellent shot-blocker, and a good help defender, and that's about it.

              Comment


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

                I'd like to see us take a high-reward type like Westbrook or Thabeet with our own lottery pick, then try and acquire a second 1st (early 20ish) and use it on a "safer" pick like Augustin, Lawson, or even Hansborough.

                Comment


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

                  Seems like the 'CDR love' is getting a bit carried away. He's a nice
                  player (probably a tweener in the NBA), but he's not gonna have
                  the luxury of a defensive stiff like Josh Shipp guarding most of the
                  time every night. It was pretty obvious that abusing that mismatch
                  was a big part of Calipari's game plan.

                  Comment


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

                    What would the Pacers be like if Foster could score 15-20 points a game and hit his free
                    throws and outlet pass? Playing along side JO of course.
                    {o,o}
                    |)__)
                    -"-"-

                    Comment


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

                      Originally posted by owl View Post
                      What would the Pacers be like if Foster could score 15-20 points a game and hit his free
                      throws and outlet pass? Playing along side JO of course.
                      That is basically Tyler Hansborough if that's who u were getting at..

                      Comment


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

                        Originally posted by Kofi View Post
                        I'd like to see us take a high-reward type like Westbrook or Thabeet with our own lottery pick, then try and acquire a second 1st (early 20ish) and use it on a "safer" pick like Augustin, Lawson, or even Hansborough.
                        Assuming that we would be able to acquire a 2nd 1st round pick, I would think of doing the reverse....get the "safepick" with the 1st pick...and if we are able to acquire a 2nd 1st rounder....then gamble there.

                        With our severe lack of talent.....I would much rather take the "safepick" then take the gamble on a player that is raw with potential with our 1st pick. I feel that we HAVE to get a player that will "more then likely" pan out then one that "could" turn into something ( either a Dud or a future All-Star ). The cheapest way to add talent to our roster this year is through the draft.....I really don't think that this is the time to gamble UNLESS a no-brainer falls to us like Granger did. But looking at who will likely come out in the Draft.....looking past the top 5 lottery picks....it's a big gamble as to who will pan out and who won't since there are so many "players with potential" that are raw as there are players that may have as high of a ceiling but a more defined and mature game.

                        Besides....I don't want to gamble when it comes to Bird....I just don't think that he has the "eye" to judge talent very well.
                        Last edited by CableKC; 04-07-2008, 08:21 PM.
                        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 Ownagedood View Post
                          That is basically Tyler Hansborough if that's who u were getting at..
                          If he could play center then you would be correct. I think for Tyler he is either a small
                          pf or larger sf.

                          I was thinking of K Love. He could play center although he is an ideal power forward . I am torn between selecting Love vs Thabeet. I suppose it would depend on their health and their attitude.
                          {o,o}
                          |)__)
                          -"-"-

                          Comment


                          • Re: Draft Talk

                            Originally posted by Mal View Post
                            It's not his only weaknesses as I understand it. He apparently also can't play good on-ball defense. He's a shotblocker, and I'm not even sure if he's much of a rebounder.
                            He's not. He's a frustrating player. I want the Pacers to have the best guy, I don't care who it is. I had no opinion on HT when I started watching UConn. But his inability to affect games outside of shotblocking was just as consistant as his ability to block shots at will. No boards, no scoring other than dump off dunks, questionable one on one defense.

                            HT would be great coming weakside to help Love on defense. Love would stay on the ground, force his man to commit to a shot or try to work around him and that extra time would allow Thabeet to blow the guy's shot up. Meanwhile Love would slip off, block out Thabeet's guy and get the rebound if the shot actually got off. Then he'd outlet it to Westbrook for a dunk at the other end without a single dribble.

                            My first impression with Thabeet stayed about the same all year. Physically his strength and how he moves reminds me of Tony Davis. But he doesn't have that mid jumper and doesn't appear to be on the verge of it either.

                            You could see how he could become a pretty nice player, but he wouldn't be the first to become nothing in the end. He is the definition of swinging for the fences in the draft. I don't think this Pacers team has shown the maturity to warrant chasing a project like that.



                            You want to know how some picks end up as busts? Late season big games that skew a player into the hot property. CDR has been nice, but not great. Suddenly he slots above Augustin? Let's see CDR beat Rose and then we can talk.

                            Hey, I'm not just trashing other people's guys. Rush just had a monster game and now someone will chase him up into the top 15. IMO that's a big mistake. His faults and limits have been in play all year long. You shouldn't just toss them aside because he lit up NC in a Kansas rout.


                            I mean Gordon vs Westbrook. EJ struggled to be a PG, he looked more combo guard and had TO troubles. But he still looked more natural and strong pulling up off his dribble for a deep jumper and showed good strength in traffic at times.

                            And Mayo is another. Out early he's out of the spotlight and slipping you assume, but why? These games should mark some SLIGHT changes in how a player slots, but not a massive rise or fall. And yet at least with the pundits it's happening.


                            I guess the good news is that a defensive ace like Weaver might push into round 2 along with guys like Lee if you still need offense. The Pacers may yet get 2 or hopefully 3 guys that can all have some level of impact on the roster next year.

                            But then I remember that Bird is the GM...well, until he hires a GM so he doesn't have to deal with this stuff. ugh

                            Comment


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

                              Originally posted by AesopRockOn View Post
                              I'd say that he does. He held Curry to 9-25 or something. I think when he gets fully into shape, he'll find consistency everywhere because he has a nice J.

                              Anybody thinking Mayo could drop to where we could get him; maybe out of the top five?
                              Exactly. Curry was the perfect test. He was getting Robinson the first half due to speed, but his ability to shoot over him forced Kansas to sic the big dog on him. The first 2 plays Curry burned him by dragging him through screens, but typical of Rush he saw this and that was the end of that. From then on he did a nice job of staying fairly close. Not perfect, Curry faked him onto the floor at the end of the game, but that was about as quick and savvy a shooter as you will find.

                              I could see him working the SF in some situations, but his jumper and quickness is enough to work the SG. He's definitely much more capable of defending the SG than Dunleavy is.

                              However as I've said all along, I like him as a BENCH guy. He's not the #11 pick, he's the 25th pick and end up being a nice #7 SG guy. I think he appears much more rounded than his brother.

                              But then that could be awkward if you don't retain K Rush and then draft B Rush to basically fill the same role.

                              Comment


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

                                Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                                I would much rather take the "safepick" then take the gamble on a player that is raw with potential with our 1st pick. I feel that we HAVE to get a player that will "more then likely" pan out then one that "could" turn into something ( either a Dud or a future All-Star ). The cheapest way to add talent to our roster this year is through the draft.....I really don't think that this is the time to gamble UNLESS a no-brainer falls to us like Granger did. But looking at who will likely come out in the Draft.....looking past the top 5 lottery picks....it's a big gamble as to who will pan out and who won't since there are so many "players with potential" that are raw as there are players that may have as high of a ceiling but a more defined and mature game.

                                Besides....I don't want to gamble when it comes to Bird....I just don't think that he has the "eye" to judge talent very well.
                                Who do you see that being in the 10 - 12 spots (the Pacers likely picks)

                                The only "safe" pick I see in the Pacers range appears to be Love. IMO the problem is that he has a relatively low ceiling. He's also doesn't fill a current need and likely won't fill one for the future when you consider the number of players on the roster than can play the 4. All of the C and PG at the 10 - 12 spots are going to be gambles. I don't see how they can afford to play it safe with Love. They need players to build around. They don't need to add to their collection of average NBA players.
                                Last edited by rm1369; 04-07-2008, 10:26 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X