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

Odd thoughts post the draft of 2008

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

  • #31
    Re: Odd thoughts post the draft of 2008

    I just finished reading all of the threads and can only conclude that we just drafted some skinny kid out of UCLA instead of the local hero from IU.

    I haven't heard this much teeth gnashing since way bck then, so this draft/trade is obviously the right thing to have done.
    Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Odd thoughts post the draft of 2008

      I have to give Larry credit. He has started down the long, long road of getting me to be a Pacers fan again. I've always like Jack and think he can do well for the Pacers.

      Now before anyone thinks I've mellowed, I haven't. I still don't like Bird and don't see that changing no matter who he drafts or trades for.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Odd thoughts post the draft of 2008

        Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
        I just finished reading all of the threads and can only conclude that we just drafted some skinny kid out of UCLA instead of the local hero from IU.

        I haven't heard this much teeth gnashing since way bck then, so this draft/trade is obviously the right thing to have done.
        Let's hope so.
        Word on the street is he doesn't want your money, he only wants to please your ears...
        Bum in Berlin on Myspace

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Odd thoughts post the draft of 2008

          Originally posted by Mourning View Post
          2. Bayless better not become close to an all-star.
          Then you'll be very happy. Now that the storm has passed the pundits are now saying only the top two picks will reach status. Everyone else in this draft are/will be average.
          You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Odd thoughts post the draft of 2008

            Shade, I don't know how you can be so sure that Bayless is better than Rush. (maybe in college he was) But who knows about who will better in the NBA. The NBA is a different game so who really knows right now.

            I went back and watched the draft from the 11th pick through the time the trade was announced and I really liked what I heard about Rush. He's a legitimate shooting guard size - 6'6", great three point shooter, excellent defender. That all sounds very good to me. And I really like Jack

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Odd thoughts post the draft of 2008

              Originally posted by croz24 View Post
              IF bayless was selected #4, as was projected up until last week (just a few days ago really), does anybody actually think seattle would have traded #4 for the #13, jack, and mcbaby?

              it's funny because minny was even rumored to be drafting him for a while at #3.

              bayless was a top 5 talent in the draft who fell due to nba gms relying too much on workouts to determine who they should draft, as opposed to actual game tape. did we even bring bayless in for a workout?
              Bayless has been dropping pretty consistently for the past week which is what makes his scenario different from Granger's who saw some of his highest rankings a couple days before the draft.


              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Odd thoughts post the draft of 2008

                Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                more "pieces" for bayless? who are the "pieces" of which you speak? a backup in jarrett jack? a piece of trash in mcroberts? c'mon, we got NOTHING in return for bayless.

                nice post though peck.
                Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                let's see...

                jaron rush - highly touted college player turns out nba bust

                kareem rush - highly touted college player turns out nba bust

                brandon rush - highly touted college player turns out nba _____


                Enough with the belly aching about the trade, already. I will not let this thead be hijacked into a bit*h fest! There are many other threads that are more suitable to the whining.

                In this thread, It Stops Now!!!
                Last edited by Roaming Gnome; 06-27-2008, 01:47 PM.
                ...Still "flying casual"
                @roaminggnome74

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Odd thoughts post the draft of 2008

                  Ok. Sunshiners this thread has been cleared for ya'll.
                  2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                  2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                  2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Odd thoughts post the draft of 2008

                    Found this summary on Ike from a Portland site, um, I think it's Ike...


                    Ike Diogu 6’8” 255lb PF, 24 years old: Diogu is something of an underrated player as his stats have not been impressive in his first three years. He started out well in Golden State, shooting around 53%, scoring 7 points, and netting 3.5 rebounds in about 14 minutes per game. After he was traded to Indiana his production slimmed somewhat and his minutes decreased. He was injured last year and only played in 30 games. Diogu’s offensive game is pretty much limited to post and effort points. He can shoot a little face-up jumper but he doesn’t take it much. He’s a great rebounder, especially on the offensive end. He’s a super-high energy guy, so much so that he has to be reined in on defense so he won’t commit constant fouls. One of the big knocks on him is that he doesn’t know how to use his body effectively on either end of the court. He often substitutes fury when a little calculated leverage is all that’s needed. He also has trouble prosecuting offensive opportunities. He’s not going to be a big-minute guy if he sticks with the Blazers but he gives the team a dimensions (craziness, energy, offensive rebounding) that they currently lack.

                    Diogu is in his third year, and thus is due a qualifying offer or restricted free agency next season just as Jarrett Jack was. If we retain him through the summer of 2009 he will either cost $3.95 million for the qualifying offer, $8.7 million in a cap hold, or whatever we can renegotiate his contract for. This is actually slightly more than Jack would have cost.
                    Last edited by Speed; 06-27-2008, 09:20 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Odd thoughts post the draft of 2008

                      When I got home from the draft last night & logged in to see if there were any surprises during the last half of the 2nd round, then headed off to bed.

                      I must have gotten up sometime during the night & had a drink of kool-aide because I'm seeing things slightly different this morning.

                      As soon as Charlotte picked Augustine at 9 that left is either Lopez or Bayless. I was completely surprised at one of them would be on the board at 11. All reports I had seen had pointed to Jersey wanting to go big at 10, makes sence since they just brought in Devin Harris in the middle of last season to be their point guard of the future.

                      That left Bayless, another gift, falling into our laps at 11. The basketball gods were now looking down on us with pity instead of using us as their cosmic haggey sack.

                      Then came the trade annoucement.

                      Peck was right, the air was sucked out of the fieldhouse. Bird was on the road to redemption & then did this!

                      First of all I've made it clear that I thought Bird was gunning for Rush all along. Especially after the TJ Ford trade I thought Rush made the most sence.

                      Heres where the kool-aide must have kicked in.

                      If you had told me 24 hours ago that we would come out of this draft with Brandon Rush & Roy Hibbert & would have been very very happy.

                      I also looked at it this way too. We traded Ike Diogu, a player that was not in O'Brien's plans, for Jarrett Jack, a guy that should now be nick named Magic Man because he made an entire point guard disappear!

                      Peck once again was right.

                      In just under 48 hours we moved the unmoveable contract for a starting point guard, starting & backup centers and a little much needed depth at power forward.

                      Added a true shooting guard with range & depth at point. Making Tinsley & Harrison only very bad memeories.

                      Add in the cap savings & PR benefits & this did indeed turn out to be the fresh start we've been looking for for far too long.
                      Last edited by Jose Slaughter; 06-27-2008, 10:32 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Odd thoughts post the draft of 2008

                        Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                        let's see...

                        jaron rush - highly touted college player turns out nba bust

                        kareem rush - highly touted college player turns out nba bust

                        brandon rush - highly touted college player turns out nba _____
                        Third times the charm?

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Odd thoughts post the draft of 2008

                          Update: in spite of my efforts, still no takers for Foster - I asked a few local rec teams at the Y... they say that they alreay have sideshow Bob come out once in a while... and Foster could not carry his jock... I disagreed and think that would be a wonderful career change for him.
                          Heywoode says... work hard man.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Odd thoughts post the draft of 2008

                            Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                            let's see...

                            jaron rush - highly touted college player turns out nba bust

                            kareem rush - highly touted college player turns out nba bust

                            brandon rush - highly touted college player turns out nba _____
                            Perhaps Brandon learned that the matador defense his big brothers played wasn't going to cut it.

                            Have you watched him play at both ends of the court? He's not the same player as his big brothers.

                            If you would have told me after the Final Four that he was the player the Pacers would get - I'd have been thrilled. I haven't had private workouts for these guys, and I don't get entralled with measurements like vertical jump and wingspan. This guy is a player.

                            He's got something else other than defense that we haven't seen from Jaron/ Kareem - he plays better in big games and big moments.
                            Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                            Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                            Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                            Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                            And life itself, rushing over me
                            Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                            Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Odd thoughts post the draft of 2008

                              THE NEW JERSEY NETS HAVE NINE (THAT'S 9) PLAYERS OVER 6'10"!

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Odd thoughts post the draft of 2008

                                I've had time to relax on this. I think I'm ok with it. I don't want to be hung over missed opportunities. I'm going to be excited for our team, and I'm really excited about our backcourt. If we can shore up the PF position, then I think we're in business.
                                Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X