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

INDYSTAR- McGrady not likely headed to Pacers

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

  • #31
    Re: Hoopsdynasty ... Who knows.

    "The Pacers are willing to trade up Al Harrington, Johnathon Bender, Ron Artest, and might have to throw in Fred Jones to Orlando for Tracy McGrady, Andrew DeClerq, and future considerations. The Magic have been pondering about this deal, but it may backfire and end up having a log jam at the Small Forward position."

    *shrug*

    "Believe it or not, the Golden State Warriors are the leading candidate for the McGrady sweepstakes, according to an Orlando Magic official. The Warriors are offering Jason Richardson, Mike Dunleavy Jr., Clifford Robinson, and their #11 overall pick to Orlando for Tracy McGrady, and the #37 overall pick(via Pho)."

    lol... I still think we'll snatch them

    "According to sources, a deal involving McGrady is supposed to be made on draft night, June 24th."
    Why don't we just trade Al/ Jon/ Ron/ Fred for J-Rich, Dunelavey, Uncle Cliff and the #11. Screw McGrady.

    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


    • #32
      Re: INDYSTAR- McGrady not likely headed to Pacers

      1. Conrad Brunner is also with the Pacers, why doesn't the media just interview him. Or David Benner or any of the other front office types?

      [color=darkred:a9b947fae8]Because they are in the Marketing arm of Pacer's Sports and Entertainment. Conrad Brunner is Director/Internet Marketing, David Brenner, is Director/Public Information. What does it tell you that in his column of May 17th, Conrad Brunner writes I quote, [/color]

      http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/question_040517.html[color=green:a9b947fae8]
      Only three players will be free agents this summer – Kenny Anderson, Jamison Brewer and James Jones – which means the nucleus of the team can be kept intact. Anthony Johnson has an option to become a free agent, but it doesn't’t seem likely he’ll exercise it, given his prominent place in the rotation.[/color]

      [color=darkred:a9b947fae8]Then in a column wrote on June 15th, titled Off Season Primer he writes, [/color]

      http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/offse...imer_2004.html[color=green:a9b947fae8] I quote, Brewer is a restricted free agent. Johnson has an option to become an unrestricted free agent this summer. Croshere and Pollard are veterans with relatively large contracts. Though those deterrents don’t rule out any of those four, they do reduce the likelihood of their selection. That leaves Brezec and Jones, two young players with relatively small contracts, as the strongest candidates to become Bobcats. [/color]

      [color=darkred:a9b947fae8]In the first column he writes that Brewer and James Jones are both free agents along with Anderson, and Johnson is a restricted free agent. In the second he writes that Brewer is restricted along with Johnson. And he indicates that JJ is still under contract. Why does he get things wrong? Because he's in marketing, not in basketball operations, thus he doesn't know what's going on unless basketball operations tells him. Brunner's Question of the day column gives this information. Brunner’s opinions are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of Pacers players, coaches or management.

      Note too, Brunner says this in the June 15th column,[/color] [color=green:a9b947fae8]Franchise President Larry Bird has watched and learned through one full season and now has a much better handle on the makeup of his players. This offseason represents his first real chance to put his stamp on the roster, and it seems likely he’ll seize the moment. [/color]


      3. No, the press knows that Donnie is the Chief Executive Officer & as such the final decisions are his & his alone.

      [color=darkred:a9b947fae8]If this is true why does Pacer.com say this is Bird's first chance to put his stamp on the roster?[/color]


      4. I'd like to find the transcript of Birds intro to relook & see what it was that was said for sure. But let's be honest here Bird was brought in for the same reason he was brought in the last time. Ticket sales. Yes, it is hoped that he will eventually replace Donnie but IMO, he has a large window to learn in. Until Donnie Walsh leaves the Pacers he will still have a say in who is a Pacer.

      [color=darkred:a9b947fae8]Peck I give the URL the last time this subject came up. You took part in the discussion so I guess you missed it. Here it is again, http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/bird_030711.html

      The pertinent data is this, This is a quote from Walsh on Bird, “It basically means he will become responsible for the day-to-day operations of Pacers basketball,” Walsh said. “What that includes is pretty much everything – administration, coaching, players, scouting, training, video and whatever else has the tag basketball on it. …[/color]


      5. Yes, ultimately the Simons are the powerbrokers. They have chosen to give the power to Donnie Walsh. In turn Donnie has stated he is giving it to Bird. But actions & words are not matching here.

      [color=darkred:a9b947fae8]I disagree. What you are seeing is nothing more than collaboration.[/color]


      I do think it's a collaboration, but right now I think that Larry is following Donnie's lead at the moment. [color=darkred:a9b947fae8]Since this is Larry's first time doing this I agree.[/color] However I do think that Larry is having a huge input. [color=darkred:a9b947fae8]I agree, he's going to be the one making the picks, etc.[/color] Thus, why after a 61 win season we are hearing about moves. This is NOT a typical Walsh off-season so far. But I still see way to much of Walsh's hands on this to say that this is Birds team yet.

      [color=darkred:a9b947fae8]As Brunner said, "This is Larry's first change to put his stamp on the roster." What you are seeing is Walsh showing Larry the ropes. He does not have to show Larry how to evaluate players.

      Larry fired Isiah. Larry hired Carlisle. Larry hired scouts. Unless Walsh fires him Larry will be making the picks and trades too.[/color]

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: INDYSTAR- McGrady not likely headed to Pacers

        Peck I give the URL the last time this subject came up. You took part in the discussion so I guess you missed it. Here it is again, http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/bird_030711.html

        The pertinent data is this, This is a quote from Walsh on Bird, “It basically means he will become responsible for the day-to-day operations of Pacers basketball,” Walsh said. “What that includes is pretty much everything – administration, coaching, players, scouting, training, video and whatever else has the tag basketball on it. …

        In a successful buisness you don't bring in a guy to run the operation with a little something I like to call, training.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: INDYSTAR- McGrady not likely headed to Pacers

          Will, you're a grown man. Haven't you learned by now, don't believe everything you read. Peck's largely right.

          My last comment on the subject:

          When Donnie began talking to Larry about coming on board to replace him, Donnie was seriously considering leaving the team altogether. After 25 years in the NBA, he simply wanted to spend more time with his family. A contract was put in front of him in the spring of 2003, which prompted him to contact Larry. As a courtesy to the Simons, Donnie wanted help find his replacement.

          When Donnie's granddaughter died in June of last year, he still hadn't signed the contract. But that expediated his desire to leave and hire Bird, which happened in very quick fashion 2 weeks later. But see, the Simons didn't want Donnie to leave, so they made him an offer he couldn't refuse: They'd allow him to hire Bird so he could pull back more. Essentially, Will, they allowed Donnie to hire Bird so Donnie would stay because they didn't want to lose him. They did whatever was necessary to keep him.

          Now, the next question is, has Donnie pulled backed? No, he hasn't. In fact, if anything, he's been working more since Bird's arrival. His choice, of course.

          The point is, what you read and what is reality are two different things. Donnie would not have hired Larry if he didn't respect him, and Larry wouldn't have taken the job if he didn't respect Donnie and he didn't see an eventual upside to the job. Right now, the black and white way in which you imagine the division of their responsibilities just doesn't exist. These are two men who see eye-to-eye on a lot of things regarding how the organization should be run. They share the same sensibilities. And if that didn't exist, these two men wouldn't be working together.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: INDYSTAR- McGrady not likely headed to Pacers


            In a successful buisness you don't bring in a guy to run the operation with a little something I like to call, training.
            Jose, where have I said different?

            Now answer this question. What traning does Bird need in evaluating players?

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: INDYSTAR- McGrady not likely headed to Pacers


              In a successful buisness you don't bring in a guy to run the operation with a little something I like to call, training.
              Jose, where have I said different?

              Now answer this question. What traning does Bird need in evaluating players?
              Bob Whitsett is one hell of an evaluator. Can't build a team though. I'd assume Bird needs lots of training, since he's never built a team before.
              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


              • #37
                Re: INDYSTAR- McGrady not likely headed to Pacers

                Will, you're a grown man. Haven't you learned by now, don't believe everything you read. Peck's largely right.

                My last comment on the subject:

                When Donnie began talking to Larry about coming on board to replace him, Donnie was seriously considering leaving the team altogether. After 25 years in the NBA, he simply wanted to spend more time with his family. A contract was put in front of him in the spring of 2003, which prompted him to contact Larry. As a courtesy to the Simons, Donnie wanted help find his replacement.

                When Donnie's granddaughter died in June of last year, he still hadn't signed the contract. But that expediated his desire to leave and hire Bird, which happened in very quick fashion 2 weeks later. But see, the Simons didn't want Donnie to leave, so they made him an offer he couldn't refuse: They'd allow him to hire Bird so he could pull back more. Essentially, Will, they allowed Donnie to hire Bird so Donnie would stay because they didn't want to lose him. They did whatever was necessary to keep him.

                Now, the next question is, has Donnie pulled backed? No, he hasn't. In fact, if anything, he's been working more since Bird's arrival. His choice, of course.

                The point is, what you read and what is reality are two different things. Donnie would not have hired Larry if he didn't respect him, and Larry wouldn't have taken the job if he didn't respect Donnie and he didn't see an eventual upside to the job. Right now, the black and white way in which you imagine the division of their responsibilities just doesn't exist. These are two men who see eye-to-eye on a lot of things regarding how the organization should be run. They share the same sensibilities. And if that didn't exist, these two men wouldn't be working together.
                I glad this is your last comment on the subject, because you don't seem to be comprhending what I'm saying.

                That post you just wrote? It's just a rehash of a couple other posts you wrote. I agreed with them too!

                It's kind of redunit to keep writing something to explain your side when that someone agrees with you and has took pains to explain the only place he doesn't agree with you.

                We disagree on who's call it is if Walsh and Bird disagree. And they have disagreed before!

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: INDYSTAR- McGrady not likely headed to Pacers

                  See Conrad Brunner's latest article.

                  http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=4488

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: INDYSTAR- McGrady not likely headed to Pacers

                    See Conrad Brunner's latest article.

                    http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=4488
                    Yeah, so? I take everything I read regarding the Pacers with a grain of salt.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: INDYSTAR- McGrady not likely headed to Pacers

                      See Conrad Brunner's latest article.

                      http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=4488
                      Yeah, so? I take everything I read regarding the Pacers with a grain of salt.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: INDYSTAR- McGrady not likely headed to Pacers

                        See Conrad Brunner's latest article.

                        http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=4488
                        Yeah, so? I take everything I read regarding the Pacers with a grain of salt.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X