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:
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

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

[Star] Bird believes a team of winners will fill seats

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Hicks
    Re: [Star] Bird believes a team of winners will fill seats

    Hopefully he saw the error of his ways.

    Leave a comment:

  • McKeyFan
    Re: [Star] Bird believes a team of winners will fill seats

    Originally posted by MagicRat View Post
    "We don't want a bunch of milk drinkers." - Larry Bird
    "Yes, we do." - Jim Morris

    Leave a comment:

  • BillS
    Re: [Star] Bird believes a team of winners will fill seats

    I'm thinking I need to explore some of the subterranean enclosures of the Fieldhouse and look for pods. That might explain this string of complimentary articles by Wells...

    Leave a comment:

  • Anthem
    Re: [Star] Bird believes a team of winners will fill seats

    Originally posted by Hicks View Post
    Morris said they plan to make the fieldhouse a fan-friendly venue by having high school and college bands play during games.
    I love this.

    Leave a comment:

  • MagicRat
    Re: [Star] Bird believes a team of winners will fill seats

    Originally posted by Hicks View Post
    "We want to make this the most wholesome, upbeat, positive experience you can have in town," he said. "We're trying to strengthen our partnerships."
    "We don't want a bunch of milk drinkers." - Larry Bird
    "Yes, we do." - Jim Morris

    Leave a comment:

  • RamBo_Lamar
    Re: [Star] Bird believes a team of winners will fill seats

    So far so good - keep up the great work TPTB!

    Leave a comment:

  • Speed
    Re: [Star] Bird believes a team of winners will fill seats

    So does that mean Shawne is gone too, most likely, as part of the same package?

    If I was a team that hadn't been recently burned by off court stuff or if I was a GM who had a fan base who was more tolerant of off court stuff. I think those two talent-wise are a great pick up. A starting caliber Point Guard and a viable first swing man off the bench. It only takes one teams GM to think that way.

    All Bird should be asking for is an expiring contract, even if it's a 2 year contract.

    I know, financial wise teams don't want JT, but like I said above, if you turn an expiring contract into two rotation players, it has a really good chance to make an impact.
    Last edited by Speed; 09-29-2008, 08:47 AM.

    Leave a comment:

  • Hicks
    started a topic [Star] Bird believes a team of winners will fill seats

    [Star] Bird believes a team of winners will fill seats

    Hey, Gnome; you're going to get one of your wishes coming true.

    By Mike Wells

    Larry Bird built a Hall of Fame career out of hard work and a nearly unmatched desire to win.

    Few things infuriate him more than players who don't share his dedication, unselfishness and professionalism.

    That's what made the past few seasons so difficult to stomach.

    The Indiana Pacers president often squirmed in his seat while watching a poor defensive team on the court and uttered words not meant for young children after some of the things his players did off the court.

    With victories and attendance declining, Bird knew almost everything had to change. No longer sharing the gavel with Donnie Walsh, he wasted little time dropping the hammer.

    Bird unloaded the final two years of Jermaine O'Neal's hefty contract and acquired seven players to go with the returning nucleus -- all in a 48-hour period in late June. He drafted two college upperclassmen in the first round whose work ethic already has been applauded. He chose not to re-sign David Harrison, told Jamaal Tinsley to stay home and said he's had "enough" of Shawne Williams' antics.

    He showed that "Ignite the passion. Restore the pride" is more than the team's new slogan.

    "All the off-the-court problems have been a disaster for us," Bird said last week. "It's unfortunate all this stuff has happened. It's something we said we were going to clean up and we're doing that."

    The Pacers, who open training camp Tuesday, hope the personnel changes and emphasis on high character will win games and fans.

    They know it will take time. The Pacers ranked last in attendance at 12,222 a game last season.

    "It's like a new start around here," Pacers co-owner Herb Simon said. "I feel Larry has kept us competitive by keeping our core players and going out and getting us good ones. I feel good about what has happened, but we have to show results on the court."

    Winning is the quickest way to improve attendance. The Pacers, though, are several players from contending again. They hope their style -- up-tempo with a lot of 3-point shooting -- and a likeable team will entice fans to return to the fieldhouse.

    "It has been challenging," Pacers Sports and Entertainment president Jim Morris said. "I think people in Indiana love the Pacers. They have a respect and affection for the 42 years of history. I think some of our fans have been disappointed the last few years. If we have a team that plays hard and gives it everything they have, they will respect and support this franchise."

    Led by Morris and an increased marketing budget, the Pacers put on a full-court press this summer.

    They purchased ads in local publications, including The Star, that focused on getting to know their players and officials. They bought space in Sports Illustrated and rented billboards around the city.

    They held their first draft-night party at the fieldhouse, which drew about 4,300 fans. Bird invited about 800 season-ticket holders to his 350-acre estate. Simon and Morris held similar events at their homes. The Pacers are expanding their reach by playing preseason games at the Pepsi Coliseum and in Fort Wayne.

    Morris said they plan to make the fieldhouse a fan-friendly venue by having high school and college bands play during games.

    "We want to make this the most wholesome, upbeat, positive experience you can have in town," he said. "We're trying to strengthen our partnerships."

    Morris said the team didn't lose any corporate sponsors and added several new ones.

    The Pacers did not raise ticket prices, and they offer about 8,600 single-game tickets for $25 or less, more than any other team in the Central Division. Detroit, for example, has about 3,000 tickets at that price.

    Still, the Pacers' season-ticket sales are down compared with this point last year. Some fans are taking a wait-and-see approach. The Tinsley saga isn't helping.

    "I've talked to a lot of people and a lot of people are on the fence," Bird said. "They know we have to do some things to get this in the right direction."

    How successful they'll be is unknown, but early signs of how they're being perceived have been positive.

    "I believe the Pacers are taking the necessary steps to make the franchise respectable again," said former season-ticket holder Brett Parker of Indianapolis. "They've been in a bit of an identity crisis ever since the brawl in Detroit and Reggie (Miller's) retirement."


    Key questions

    1. Are the Pacers good enough to make the playoffs?
    The Pacers improved, but so did several other Eastern Conference teams. Seventh or eighth seed is probably their most realistic hope. Even then, it's going to take a vastly improved defense, some scoring in the post and steady point guard play from T.J. Ford and Jarrett Jack to return to the postseason for the first time since 2006.

    2. Will they be better defensively?
    They have to be after last season's debacle, right? The Pacers held opponents to a respectable 45 percent shooting last season, but just four teams allowed more points than their 105. Shaky perimeter defense allowed teams to basically conduct layup drills on them, prompting coach Jim O'Brien to refer to their defense as "horrible" during the summer. O'Brien tweaked his defensive system, and they're counting on Ford and Jack to supply ball pressure on the perimeter and 7-2 rookie Roy Hibbert to at least be an intimidating factor in the paint. They also need Danny Granger to re-commit himself.

    3. Who is their go-to player?
    Reggie Miller is still gone, and the Pacers are still looking for someone to replace him. Granger and Mike Dunleavy will get plenty of opportunities, but Granger had a tendency to settle for jump shots last season and Dunleavy has a difficult time creating his shot. O'Brien can put the ball in Ford's hands and have him penetrate to shoot or kick it out to an open teammate on the perimeter.

    4. Will Granger's contract situation affect his play?
    The Pacers would like to sign Granger to an extension, but can wait until next summer before giving him a new contract. It might drag on, but neither Granger nor the Pacers can afford for the swingman to get caught up in individual statistics, especially since they have a new motto of "Team Ego."

    5. Who will score in the post?
    Team president Larry Bird's inability to acquire the low-post scoring power forward he wanted leaves the Pacers scrambling for a big man they can dump the ball to for easy points. Bird acknowledged they need a scoring threat down low to win a championship, and they don't have that. Rasho Nesterovic and Troy Murphy, who both like to score from the perimeter, are their two best options at the moment.

    6. Will the Jamaal Tinsley saga be a distraction?
    The Pacers say no, but it might take giving up one of their core to trade Tinsley. Shawne Williams might be the one. He's talented, young and affordable. He's also had off-the-court issues, so moving him along with Tinsley would appease many fans.


    At least the sponsors are picking up some slack.