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

Wells Blog - Kleiza mention

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

  • #91
    Re: Wells Blog - Kleiza mention

    Who is that in your avatar, by the way
    That is actually a current picture of myself

    Hope I didnt break any of your mirrors, lol

    by the way I had an epithany last night and I am actually warming up to Tyler H. I think he might actually suprise me

    now the question is do I have the rose colored glasses on, lol

    I watched some extensive clips on him last night and I loved his dunk over the 7 foot giant on kansas

    What I really loved more was his animal yell

    God I miss that passion
    Because the streets is a short stop
    Either youre slingin crack rock or you got a wicked jumpshot

    Notorious BIG - Brooklyn's Finest A.K.A. G.O.A.T.

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Wells Blog - Kleiza mention

      Peck,

      I appreciate the kind words my friend

      Much Respect
      Because the streets is a short stop
      Either youre slingin crack rock or you got a wicked jumpshot

      Notorious BIG - Brooklyn's Finest A.K.A. G.O.A.T.

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Wells Blog - Kleiza mention

        Originally posted by dcpacersfan View Post
        Sign me up for either one.
        what is fosters contract like? how much per year for how many more years?
        Denver Nuggets Talk

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Wells Blog - Kleiza mention

          To DC Fan,

          I also appreciate your words as well. Respect.

          I understand some people would feel the whole " Iam trolling because my firsts posts are vengefull, truth is I had to switch browsers to get on here (still have no clue why "Is there a systems admin in the house, lol)

          But partly is my fault too because I know from sales ...

          "It's 10% of what you say and 90% of how you say it.

          To any I rattled my fault, I guess the sales guy in me loves good old fashioned passionate debate

          Blessings to all
          Because the streets is a short stop
          Either youre slingin crack rock or you got a wicked jumpshot

          Notorious BIG - Brooklyn's Finest A.K.A. G.O.A.T.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Wells Blog - Kleiza mention

            Originally posted by Hicks View Post
            You recruit a guy like Jones by selling him on the idea that he's part of building something special. Doesn't mean it will work, but that's what you have to do.
            You recruit Jones by offering him more money than other teams (if you're willing to do that). That's the kind of thing that will make him feel special.

            He's a young guy who hasn't had a big pay day yet, so he's going to look for who's willing to pay.

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Wells Blog - Kleiza mention

              Am I the only one who really doesn't want to see the Pacers sign Kleiza?

              I like his game but as of right now I don't see a need for him. The Pacers are pretty set up front with Troy/Jeff/Roy/Tyler and hopefully Josh McRoberts. I know that Kleiza can play some 3 but I wouldn't want to see him play a lot there. I just don't think it's worth paying him a few million a year when the Pacers are already pretty set up front.

              If Jack is lost Carter would be a nice pickup for a year. He can run a team and defend pretty decent. The problem is the Pacers would be left with poor shooting at the point guard position.

              I've always like Dahntay Jones but I wouldn't overpay for him. I know he can defend really well but it's still not worth overpaying for. There are a decent amount of swingmen available in free agency that would be suitable for this year.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Wells Blog - Kleiza mention

                Originally posted by rommie View Post
                Am I the only one who really doesn't want to see the Pacers sign Kleiza?

                I like his game but as of right now I don't see a need for him. The Pacers are pretty set up front with Troy/Jeff/Roy/Tyler and hopefully Josh McRoberts. I know that Kleiza can play some 3 but I wouldn't want to see him play a lot there. I just don't think it's worth paying him a few million a year when the Pacers are already pretty set up front.

                If Jack is lost Carter would be a nice pickup for a year. He can run a team and defend pretty decent. The problem is the Pacers would be left with poor shooting at the point guard position.

                I've always like Dahntay Jones but I wouldn't overpay for him. I know he can defend really well but it's still not worth overpaying for. There are a decent amount of swingmen available in free agency that would be suitable for this year.
                Nope....I'm with you. I have no idea...given our current makeup why we'd be interested in Kleiza. Personally, I think any interest in Kleiza and Carter are "red herrings" for the Nuggets FO to spread out the attention that their FAs are getting and that Jones is the "real target".
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Wells Blog - Kleiza mention

                  Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                  Nope....I'm with you. I have no idea...given our current makeup why we'd be interested in Kleiza. Personally, I think any interest in Kleiza and Carter are "red herrings" for the Nuggets FO to spread out the attention that their FAs are getting and that Jones is the "real target".
                  lol...really?
                  Denver Nuggets Talk

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Wells Blog - Kleiza mention

                    Originally posted by NugzFan View Post
                    lol...really?
                    Yeah....really
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Wells Blog - Kleiza mention

                      NugzFan: What are the people in Denver saying about the order of priority for their FAs? I'm assuming it's Andersen, Jones, Kleiza, Carter in that order? In fact probably not even looking to bring back AC. But for Jones and Kleiza, were they good citizens/teammates that played hard every night or were there ever any issues with them in Denver?

                      Comment


                      • Re: Wells Blog - Kleiza mention

                        Nope....I'm with you. I have no idea...given our current makeup why we'd be interested in Kleiza.

                        I have a theory

                        not going there wont take the bait, lol
                        Because the streets is a short stop
                        Either youre slingin crack rock or you got a wicked jumpshot

                        Notorious BIG - Brooklyn's Finest A.K.A. G.O.A.T.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Wells Blog - Kleiza mention

                          Originally posted by PugdOut View Post
                          Really?

                          So the Saranus signing, the drafting of two foriegn players who will probably never play for the Pacers, the trade of Artest for a broken down Peja, the hiring of the wonderful Jom O'Brien.

                          The wonderfully competitive team he has assembeled, but wait its

                          Gortat and Kliza to the rescue?

                          By the way petty insults dont bother me, nor do petty people.

                          But hey keep those rosed colored glasses on as the Pacers miss the playoffs again next year

                          Real Pacer fans should be upset right now, and God forbid I have a difference of opinon the the mighty Duke Dynamite.

                          Just like the people who last year were posting predictions of the PAcers record before the season.

                          Statements like 45-50 wins, but I digress Dunleavy was injured so thats the excuse

                          You can be just as loyal a fan and not like the way the franchise is heading

                          The problem here it seems as SOME fans accept mediocrity as long as the players coaches are former legends living off past accomplishmnets or good ol chior boys

                          sorry I dont view the current state of the Pacers as you do

                          It doesnt make me any less of a fan, and I will put my knowledge on NBA and the PAcers in general against anyone

                          Thanks for your time

                          Yes the drain is clogged, need a good septic guy in Indy to clean the mess up
                          Peck pretty much summed it up, so I don't have to acknowledge your twisted outlook and world perspective. Pass on that.

                          Questioning and insulting me then trying to butter me up in the end really doesn't make up for anything, it just makes everything you say even less credible so thanks for playing. I have no reason to be upset or mad at the franchise. We have a fantasic core of players to build around.

                          The debate of who is a "real" fan or who isn't is probably one of the weakest arguements I've ever been a part of. You either like the team or you don't. Whether you are a casual fan, or you pay attention to every single stat...whatever. A fan is a fan.

                          Look, I am not accepting mediocrity, I am accepting growth above mediocrity. Like I said, you've got to be patient. It doesn't happen overnight in most cases, especially a market like ours. Even I know and can accept that. Either you are in denial or someone has really hurt you in the past.

                          This false blame you are putting on Larry Bird just absolutely makes so sense. I would merit your opinion if it actually held any water. You seem to pull whatever you think you can find out of thin air to justify your hatred towards Bird to everyone. It's not working because everyone here knows what has been going on for years, there is no question about that.
                          Last edited by duke dynamite; 07-02-2009, 10:07 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Wells Blog - Kleiza mention

                            Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                            I like seeing Blalock and Byars playing on the team. Blalock was the 60th player drafted in 2006 by Detroit. I liked him in that draft as 2nd round pick.

                            IIRC, Byars was in that draft that year as well, but wasn't drafted.

                            Byars is a great scorer from Vanderbilt in the SEC. He was one of the top scorers in the country his senior year. Plays small forward in NBA.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Wells Blog - Kleiza mention

                              I'll never forget Byars lighting up the Vols. That guy can really shoot but that is pretty much it.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Wells Blog - Kleiza mention

                                There is NO bigger anti-Bird poster than me. I read PugdOut's posts, and reads like posts I have posted in the past. Now, having said that let me say, since Bird has taken over the after the 07-08 season, I can't say Bird has screwed up. Yep, I said it. Bird didn't draft players last year I wanted, but they haven't turned out busts either. I wasn't crazy about his drafting of Tyler Hansbrough this year either. BUT Bird hasn't done anything for me to critisize him for either, so I have to give him credit for his non-failures. Believe me when it happens I'll be on him like stink on s***, but he's currently doing ok. What I like is he has a plan and is working the plan to achieve a goal. Sorry, but if Walsh had a plan it was never obvious to what it was. Bird has been up front about having a 3 year plan, and is working that plan. Gotta give him credit for doing it. I still don't think he's the sharpest knife in the drawer, but he's making headway to bringing the Pacers back. I'm pleased with the progress I see, but like all fans just wish it was a little quicker. If he could just trade Tinsley, but that maybe just asking for too much. If he can't, I'm confident it isn't his fault from lack of trying.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X