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

NBA Random Thoughts 2008-2009

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

  • Re: NBA Random Thoughts 2008-2009

    Originally posted by Quis View Post
    I'm ready to induct Rodney Stuckey into the 13/5/3 Hall of Fame. I believe there's a spot open right next to Travis Best.
    Another mediocre 26-point night for a totally average PG for the world's most irrelevant 21-11 team on a totally overrated 7-game winning streak!

    Oh, and the Stuckey is an overhyped 17-3 as a Starter, and he averages a ho-hum 17 and 6.
    Last edited by Kstat; 01-05-2009, 02:30 AM.

    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

    Comment


    • Re: NBA Random Thoughts 2008-2009

      Originally posted by Kstat View Post
      Another mediocre 26-point night for a totally average PG for the world's most irrelevant 21-11 team on a totally overrated 7-game winning streak!

      Oh, and the Stuckey is an overhyped 17-3 as a Starter, and he averages a ho-hum 17 and 6.
      Just out of curiosity, is Stuckey starting and AI at the 2 what turned the Pistons around? What's been working for them of late? I haven't really been paying as much attention as I usually do.

      Comment


      • Re: NBA Random Thoughts 2008-2009

        Not playing Prince at the 4 is what is working for them.

        Stuckey has been great and AI has been unreservedly sacrificing his career of higher point production to play a more team oriented role. He's chosen his spots well and taken control when the team needs him to rather than dominating the ball. When his shot isn't falling he's creating for others rather than sinking the team by shooting without regard.

        That's all true, but getting away from that ridiculous lineup of 1 PG, 2 SGs, a SF, and Sheed has allowed them to play defense again and they are winning these games with defense.

        Comment


        • Re: NBA Random Thoughts 2008-2009

          Originally posted by rexnom View Post
          Just out of curiosity, is Stuckey starting and AI at the 2 what turned the Pistons around? What's been working for them of late? I haven't really been paying as much attention as I usually do.
          They went back to Piston basketball. Scoring is down, defense and rebounding are up.

          No real magical recipe. They just went back to what worked at the beginning.

          It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

          Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
          Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
          NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

          Comment


          • Re: NBA Random Thoughts 2008-2009

            Originally posted by Quis View Post
            He was horrible in last year's playoffs, so until he proves he's more than a 12/5/3 guy on a mediocre team, I shall remain a skeptic.
            Monta Ellis and Andre Iguodala did poorly in their first playoff experiences as well, so surely they're worthy of skepticism too?

            Comment


            • Re: NBA Random Thoughts 2008-2009

              So what is the starting 5 of Detroit right now?

              Comment


              • Re: NBA Random Thoughts 2008-2009

                Originally posted by Fool View Post
                Not playing Prince at the 4 is what is working for them.
                and my fantasy team too.

                Comment


                • Re: NBA Random Thoughts 2008-2009

                  Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                  So what is the starting 5 of Detroit right now?
                  Stuckey, Iverson, Tayshaun, Amir and Sheed.

                  No word yet on who is going to come off the bench when Rip comes back, but it'll be either him or Iverson in the Manu role of scoring 16-18ppg off the bench.

                  Right now at least, Iverson is taking Amir Johnson's game up a notch. His ability to get in the lane is making Amir Johnson the player he was supposed to be when the season started. I don't think they'd want to mess with that.

                  It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                  Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                  Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                  NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                  Comment


                  • Re: NBA Random Thoughts 2008-2009

                    Any 2nd year NBA PG who's averaging 13-5 and shows himself capable of running a winning team is well on his way to a very nice career at the least and very possibly a bucket of all-star games.

                    PG's generally take a while to figure things out. Stuckey's well ahead of schedule.
                    The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                    Comment


                    • Re: NBA Random Thoughts 2008-2009

                      Another good column from Sam Smith. If you want the full column click on the link.


                      Sam Smith: As trade deadline nears, so does the Bulls’ great debate

                      http://www.nba.com/bulls/news/smith_090105.html


                      The 2010 strategy is de rigueur these days with the New York Knicks the most prominent example. It's a chance to add stars, and if there's one constant in the NBA, it's that success comes only once you have multiple stars. Which is why the Cleveland Cavaliers probably are not quite there yet. The downside of that is what if it doesn't work? The Bulls know about that since they built their entire post-Michael Jordan strategy on free agency in 2000, when the class was the best to date, featuring Tim Duncan, Grant Hill, Eddie Jones and Tracy McGrady.

                      The Bulls lost out on all, ended up with Ron Mercer and Brad Miller and draft picks, and started over again in 2001 in drafting Tyson Chandler and Eddy Curry, when they realized they still didn't have a star. You know, fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice….

                      The Bulls seem better positioned now that it appears they do have a future star in No. 1 overall draft pick Derrick Rose. But having someone like Rose, do you build with him now with some well placed trades and not risk waiting until 2010 and maybe being shut out? Or give up one season with the chance to get a true star like Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh or Amare Stoudemire, and suddenly be a serious championship contender with enough decent pieces that will have been cultivated by then? Of course, you could do all the right things and it still may not work. It's why the sports business is easier to second guess than manage.
                      -------------------------------

                      "Do all the right things and it still might not work!"

                      Wow, is that really true? From reading this forum and others you would think a lot of posters have all the answers, "fire him, trade him, do this, do that."

                      The truth is you have to be lucky as well as doing all the right things. Besides those two factors the timing has to be right, meaning it all has to come together at the right time. Kind of like picking the right sample out of a boiling pot at the right time.
                      Last edited by Will Galen; 01-06-2009, 11:36 AM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: NBA Random Thoughts 2008-2009

                        Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                        "Do all the right things and it still might not work!"

                        Wow, is that really true? From reading this forum and others you would think a lot of posters have all the answers, "fire him, trade him, do this, do that."

                        The truth is you have to be lucky as well as doing all the right things. Besides those two factors the timing has to be right, meaning it all has to come together at the right time. Kind of like picking the right sample out of a boiling pot at the right time.
                        I'm sure I've been guilty of this, too, but the beauty of second guessing is that you can confidently claim that whatever wasn't tried is what most certainly would've worked without relatively little fear of ever having to be proven right or wrong.

                        Comment


                        • Re: NBA Random Thoughts 2008-2009

                          Originally posted by count55 View Post
                          I'm sure I've been guilty of this, too, but the beauty of second guessing is that you can confidently claim that whatever wasn't tried is what most certainly would've worked without relatively little fear of ever having to be proven right or wrong.
                          Ah ha! What you haven't considered is some posters keeping score.



                          You are right 69.778% of the time.

                          Comment


                          • Re: NBA Random Thoughts 2008-2009

                            Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                            You are right 69.778% of the time.
                            I would be shocked if it was this high. I consider these opinions closer to shooting threes than shooting FT's. Anything above 35% is respectable, 40+ being a stud.

                            So, if you're thinking three's or even FG/Winning %...Thanks, I'm flattered.

                            If you're thinking FT's, then yo mama wears army boots.

                            Comment


                            • Re: NBA Random Thoughts 2008-2009

                              If some major trade isn't going to happen in the next couple of weeks, I'm gonna be surprised.....it looks like there are several "minor" trades involving "end of the bench" guys for $$$ and/or Draft picks that appear ( at least on the surface ) to be "Salary Cap or roster" clearing moves that happened today:

                              Raptors trade Hassan Adams for $$$ and a future conditional 2nd round pick then waive him a few hours later

                              http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slu...v=ap&type=lgns

                              Via Yahoo Sports ( no Author listed on the webpage )
                              Grizzlies waive Darius Miles

                              http://www.nba.com/2009/news/01/07/0....html?rss=true

                              By Memphis, Tenn (AP)
                              From NBA.com

                              Grizzlies acquire Shaun Livingston for a 2012 Conditional 2nd round pick then waive him

                              http://www.sportsnetwork.com/merge/t...spx?id=4201960

                              By Sports Network ( Memphis )
                              From the Sports Network Webpage
                              Nuggets trade Atkins+Protected 1st round pick to the Thunder for Johan Petro+2009 2nd round pick

                              http://www.nba.com/2009/news/01/07/t....ap/index.html

                              By Chris Thomasson
                              From www.RockyMountainnews.com
                              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                              Comment


                              • Re: NBA Random Thoughts 2008-2009

                                Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                                If some major trade isn't going to happen in the next couple of weeks, I'm gonna be surprised.....it looks like there are several "minor" trades involving "end of the bench" guys for $$$ and/or Draft picks that appear ( at least on the surface ) to be "Salary Cap or roster" clearing moves that happened today:
                                All 3 of those were moves to get under the luxury tax by the Raptors, Heat, and Nuggets, first and foremost. I like the move by the Nuggets, though, to get another big man. Plus it was smart to swap their first rounder for OKC's second. It's been a good season for the Nuggets front office.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X