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

THE TANK IS BACK.

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

  • #61
    Originally posted by BornReady View Post

    I guess my point is twofold. The first is, as you've alluded to, is my fear that the FO thinks we're a piece away from contending. The second is more reflective, where I think I was wrong in the valuation of Buddy Hield (as a player in a vacuum, rather than alongside Hali). I hope you're right about RC, and as much as I like him, I'm not sure I always agree with his allocation of minutes and the way he values players. But in all fairness, I don't know what to think, except that I'm a little disenchanted that we are evidently THIS dependent on Hali.
    I do agree on what you say about Carlisle. I don't always agree with his allocation of minutes either and I do hate that Goga, in particular, is in the doghouse. I believe that Goga does have the talent to be a good NBA player. That said, even though I disagree with some individual decisions, I do believe that he has a solid vision when it comes to team-building and I do trust in that vision.

    As for us being this dependent on Hali, it's not that surprising. He is our main ball-handler and the team doesn't have a ton of ball-handlers to begin with. We only have 3 main ball-handlers (Hali, Nembhard and TJM) and then we have Mathurin who is more of a secondary ball-handler at the moment. The rest of our team (Hield, Nesmith, Duarte, the bigs et cetera) just aren't ball-handlers and they shouldn't be relied on to create much on their own. So, the burden to create falls primarily on these four and with Hali out, that is obviously going to create problems. The first time that Hali missed games this season, Nembhard got the chance to run this team and he performed at a very high level for those two games. But now it looks like he has hit the rookie wall (which makes sense at this point of the season) so he hasn't been that efficient in that role lately. That leaves TJM as our main option at this role and is also why he has played so well the last couple of games. It is largely because he has to have an increased role now with Hali out and that has helped him elevate his play. Meanwhile, Mathurin has done a fine job on his own but he is more of a secondary ball-handler than a primary one and he cannot really be relied on when it comes to creating shots for others yet. Math is much better at creating for himself than he is at creating for others.

    I will say that this problem isn't unique either. Just look at Dallas. They are absolutely dreadful without Luka and that's not just because he's their best player and an elite player at that (obviously, that does play a big role). It is also because he is one of their only two ball-handlers, the other being Dinwiddie. The Clippers, on the other hand, do not absolutely suck without PG and Kawhi and that's because even when they don't play, they do have other ball-handlers like John Wall and Reggie Jackson. Yes, they are both old and past their prime but they can still bring the ball up and create shots. Dallas only has one guy outside of Luka that can do that and it's why they struggle so much without him.

    I got into a bit of a tangent here but, yeah, the ability to handle the ball is pretty damn important and when a team misses the guy on the team that is best at it, they are obviously going to struggle.
    Originally posted by IrishPacer
    Empty vessels make the most noise.

    Comment


    • #62
      My feelings on the Tank are fluid as I want to win but if Myles wants to much please just move him. And if that happens then Buddy should go to.
      {o,o}
      |)__)
      -"-"-

      Comment


      • #63
        Rooting for Hawks, Heat, Knicks tonight

        Things could look nice by the end of the night.
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • #64
          We gotta tank! We don’t necessarily need a top 2 pick either. But we need to keep Point God 2.0 off the court as long as possible. Offer him a bribe or something to stay hurt for rest of year

          Comment


          • #65
            Great night for the tank, Miami and Hawks won, Pacers are officially in 9th place
            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
              Call it whatever you want, if you hate tanking, call it long term strategy, but I'm so far off Buddy Hield island at this point, I'm drowning in the ocean. I just don't think the guy is a winning player for us ever at 30 years old, if he nets you a first round draft pick go for it. For everyone who says how could you do that Buddy and Tyrese are BFFs, stop going off just what you see on the court or in pressers. I go to a place after games that Pacers players come into frequently, Buddy always comes in solo or with his girl. Tyrese has come in with lots of different folks, his fam, his girl and several different players (after the Mem game he was there with Oshae and Nemby), but other than I think the first couple weeks they were here, I've never seen him with Buddy. If we were knocking on the conference finals this year, I'd say sure keep him around, but we ain't.

              Myles....again I think if you don't know you can lock him at the number you want, then you need to move him as well. Don't be silly with assets. Picks matter, even if they don't matter this year they can matter in deals in the future whereas your window to get value out of Myles or Buddy could shut much sooner.

              This reminds me so much of the year Vic got hurt and just luckily it appears Tyrese's injury isn't career altering, but it does appear it is very likely season altering, by the time he's back we could be 5-6 games under .500 and what do we have to show for Myles and Buddy then? We can hang a loyalty banner or something and it won't matter if Turner's number is too high, and someone will overpay him, it shouldn't be us.

              Does this initiate "tanking"? Maybe, but look it's like I said about Hali's injury this is not about this season or our desire to taste the playoffs again, this is about setting ourselves up for a potential decade + of prosperity and a real shot at the whole dang thing. Don't be short sighted.
              There is a reason the Kings wanted to get rid of Buddy Hield. A significant part of the Sabo/Hali deal, people are overlooking, is moving Buddy from the team.
              I'm really sorry because of my english (which is my 3-4 language) and I really appreciate Your patience. I hope this board will make me better

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by DeS View Post

                There is a reason the Kings wanted to get rid of Buddy Hield. A significant part of the Sabo/Hali deal, people are overlooking, is moving Buddy from the team.
                I'm generally pro-Buddy and he's definitely proven to be more valuable for us than he was with the Kings IMO, but this is true. Buddy was thrown in to sweeten the deal for them, not for us.

                That being said, it's all about what we can get in return. If we really are talking unprotected firsts from middling, cusp-of-the-playoffs teams, then sure. But we shouldn't feel the need to make a move "just cuz". Keeping Buddy does have a value in its own right.

                And yeah, maybe he ain't so flash without Haliburton. But Haliburton isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Last night's most crucial game was the Hornet's win over the Rockets. They're now two games ahead in the dub column

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                    Last night's most crucial game was the Hornet's win over the Rockets. They're now two games ahead in the dub column
                    I am not up to speed on the significance of Houston losing. How could this help the Pacers?
                    {o,o}
                    |)__)
                    -"-"-

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by owl View Post

                      I am not up to speed on the significance of Houston losing. How could this help the Pacers?
                      Originally posted by owl View Post

                      I am not up to speed on the significance of Houston losing. How could this help the Pacers?
                      If Houston finishes bottom 2 (29th or 30th) we get their 2nd round pick (31st or 32nd), giving us 4 picks instead of 3. So basically, we can get a free highly valuable pick if they suck.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Chicago just won their game against Detroit they are getting close to passing by Pacers


                        Rooting for Toronto later today we need them to get it together asap.
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Damn Toronto always letting us down
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            I think that what we're looking for are how the Teams that are ( A ) not in the the top 5in their Conference win their games or ( B ) in the bottom 6 of the League are doing:

                            On 1/19, the Pacers have 23 wins.

                            For Tonight's games:

                            The GOOD

                            Bulls beat the Pistons

                            - Bulls now have 21 wins.
                            - Pistons are locked into the bottom 6, so it doesn't matter that they lost ( as long as they don't knock the Rockets out of the 3rd worst record in the League ).


                            Suns beat the Nets

                            - Suns now have 22 wins.

                            Not GOOD or BAD

                            Raptors lost to TWolves

                            - Twolves now have 23 wins but Raptors still have 20 wins

                            The BAD

                            Warriors lost to Celtics

                            - Warriors stuck at 22 wins

                            Blazers lose to Sixers

                            - Blazers stuck at 21 wins

                            So tonight was both a "Good and Bad" night for the Pacers "tanking" efforts. Some Teams below us won games but below us lost games as well
                            Last edited by CableKC; 01-20-2023, 12:45 AM.
                            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Teams we are rooting for tonight:

                              Denver, Atlanta and Miami
                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Is there any chance Toronto and Chicago can both improve enough for us to move out of the play in spot? I feel like the answer is no and we are destined for the play in spot which is literally the worst possible most Pacers thing to do ever.
                                *removed* Just keep politics and religion completely out of it, please.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X