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

Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

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

  • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

    I'm a total homer, but I hope we draft Brackins in the second round.

    He'd be an upgrade to Tyler, were Tyler to ever be healthy again. I don't even think that's THAT big a homer statement.

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

      Brackins is too buttery soft for the NBA. I'd only consider him if he's available with Dallas' second round pick.

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
        The first time Ed Davis meets the average NBA PF he might break right in half.

        YAY, Bender at PF circa 1999. Awesome choice Ed, way to ride the wave of that NIT run.


        He doesn't eat up boards when he sees guys like: Booker, Lawal, Favors, Pittman, Cousins, Patterson, Sanders, Brackins, Ndiaye, Udoh, or Monroe. But other than all those guys he's ready to dominate as a rebounding ace.

        Imagine Durant with no shooting ability or handles.

        If some team can put him on a weight program and wait 2 years on him, then MAYBE. That's a huge investment for a maybe.


        However this is great for the Pacers. Maybe if we get lucky teams will talk themselves into how athletic Davis and Whiteside look going up against vicious cones and chairs and push some other player down to them.

        1) Davis didn't play in the NIT, the last post season game he played in was the Natty where he went for 11/8 in 15 minutes. Besides, I thought you didn't care about post season play and team success when evaluating talent. Anyone watching ball this year knows Davis was not the problem, but get your digs in.

        2) He played Patterson/Cousins, Favors, Pittman, and Booker, and outrebounded all of them except Booker. This is a complete nonstarter and calls your reasonableness into question.

        How can you know this? This is what bugs me most of all with Davis. Everyone admits he's got no strength or weight, but they look at his length and hops and just figure he'll put on weight, bulk up and become this great player. What if the bulking up process impacts some of the stuff you currently like, such as hops or quickness?
        3) When I said a legit inside player I simply meant that he plays in the paint, rather than hangs out at the perimeter. I don't know anything, its a draft. The most informed or enthusiastic opinion can easily fail to work out.

        I think Davis has a good chance to be a quality defensive oriented 4/5. He has a lot of upside and a lot of question marks. That being said, he's on discount right now given his injury and season. He was top 6 last draft, and would have gone higher if he had stayed. Because of that, any team picking around 10+ should look at the kid long and hard.

        He isn't a game changer and I'm not claiming anything of the sort. Like everyone else in the draft he has a list of pros and a list of cons. But he has produced against top talent and on the biggest stage.

        I also think he'll get a closer look from Bird given his pedigree and all that stuff which matters to him.

        I also find it amusing that you are so vigorous and condescending in how you assess this kid, and others from his program. Carolina kids seem to attract an animus from you that other prospects fail to.

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

          Frankly there are a number of good pf's available at 10 but is an average pf what this team needs? I am not adverse to taking some risk with this pick. I am still very interested in
          seeing what Whiteside is all about. Moderate risk/high reward type player. TPTB have
          to evaluate him for desire. He has the tools to play center or maybe PF alongside Hibbert.
          {o,o}
          |)__)
          -"-"-

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

            Originally posted by owl View Post
            Frankly there are a number of good pf's available at 10 but is an average pf what this team needs? I am not adverse to taking some risk with this pick. I am still very interested in
            seeing what Whiteside is all about. Moderate risk/high reward type player. TPTB have
            to evaluate him for desire. He has the tools to play center or maybe PF alongside Hibbert.

            Whiteside is one of the players if Bird drafts him I'll be marching on Conseco with pitchfork, tar, and feathers.

            The Pacers can't afford a project with this pick, nor someone who showed is backside in the NIT. Thanks but no thanks!

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

              Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
              Whiteside is one of the players if Bird drafts him I'll be marching on Conseco with pitchfork, tar, and feathers.

              The Pacers can't afford a project with this pick, nor someone who showed is backside in the NIT. Thanks but no thanks!
              Seconded! He's completely and utterly not what we are looking for, not too mention he's way too risky a pick aswell and I have a lot of doubts about his potential.
              2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

              2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

              2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                What if we traded Brandon Rush to San Antonio for the #21 pick in the draft?

                #10 - Greg Monroe PF Georgetown
                #21 - Eric Bledso PG Kentucky
                #40 - Jordan Crawford SG Xavier or Dominique Ferguson SG South Florida
                #56 - Jerome Jordan C Tulsa (7 ft, defensive specialist)

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                  Originally posted by Wanna be GM View Post
                  What if we traded Brandon Rush to San Antonio for the #21 pick in the draft?

                  #10 - Greg Monroe PF Georgetown
                  #21 - Eric Bledso PG Kentucky
                  #40 - Jordan Crawford SG Xavier or Dominique Ferguson SG South Florida
                  #56 - Jerome Jordan C Tulsa (7 ft, defensive specialist)
                  Well, I don't think there's a snowballs chance in hell that Bledsoe falls to #21. I don't think people around here would be happy dealing Rush for pick #21. Dominque Ferguson is a high school senior and has committed to play for Isiah Thomas at Florida International, not South Florida. Perhaps you mean Dominique Jones?

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                    Originally posted by cdash View Post
                    I don't think people around here would be happy dealing Rush for pick #21.
                    Count me in on that group of people. You might not be superbly enthousiastic with Rush so far, but I don't see anyone who we could get with a 21st pick that would be better then Rush, except if you take HUGE risks.
                    2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                    2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                    2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                      We almost turned Rush and TJ Ford into Raymond Felton, so how is that better than Taking a flyer on a 1st round draft pick? We need youth that can contribute both offensively and defensively, CONSISTENTLY. There needs to be another scoring threat besides Danny, and no Murph does not count becasuse you know he is a trade piece, I just don't see Rush developing that way, at best a 2nd unit 2 guard.

                      We need Joe Johnson not Bruce Bowen.....

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                        Originally posted by Wanna be GM View Post
                        We almost turned Rush and TJ Ford into Raymond Felton, so how is that better than Taking a flyer on a 1st round draft pick? We need youth that can contribute both offensively and defensively, CONSISTENTLY. There needs to be another scoring threat besides Danny, and no Murph does not count becasuse you know he is a trade piece, I just don't see Rush developing that way, at best a 2nd unit 2 guard.

                        We need Joe Johnson not Bruce Bowen.....
                        The deal that almost went down was for Augustin and Henderson, not Felton. The Felton idea was something some poster suggested as an alternative to the other deal, and was not actually in the cards IIRC.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                          Nbadraft.net has Hayward going 14th now.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                            Originally posted by Speed View Post

                            Nbadraft.net has Hayward going 14th now.


                            Keep dropping big fella and push someone up to #10 for the Pacers.

                            They have the Pacers taking Vasquez at #40 and Butler at #57.

                            Stanley Robinson dropped to #29 with Bledsoe at #28. Anderson took a drop to #20.

                            This will all change when workouts begin.
                            Last edited by Justin Tyme; 04-14-2010, 06:48 AM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                              Originally posted by Wanna be GM View Post
                              We almost turned Rush and TJ Ford into Raymond Felton, so how is that better than Taking a flyer on a 1st round draft pick? We need youth that can contribute both offensively and defensively, CONSISTENTLY. There needs to be another scoring threat besides Danny, and no Murph does not count becasuse you know he is a trade piece, I just don't see Rush developing that way, at best a 2nd unit 2 guard.

                              We need Joe Johnson not Bruce Bowen.....
                              And we are going to get a Joe Johnson with #21? Perimeter defence is also something you can't really go without IMO BTW and it's something Rush is providing. I'm not his biggest fan, but I do think there's still progress in him and I think consistency is something that needs to develop in some players aswell, Rush might very well be that sort of player.

                              IF we throw Rush out there then I would rather use him as a chip to move up in the draft to get someone of significant more talent then we are going to get with this screwed up #10 pick of ours and someone we want, rather then trying to get an extra late firstrounder who, quite likely, won't be as good as Rush is.

                              Btw. I'm liking Vesely more and more as our pick this year. Yeah, I know he's a SF aswell, but in today's NBA positions are interchangeable.
                              2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                              2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                              2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                                Originally posted by Mourning View Post


                                Btw. I'm liking Vesely more and more as our pick this year. Yeah, I know he's a SF aswell, but in today's NBA positions are interchangeable.

                                He dropped out of the lottery to #15 in NBAdraft newest mock

                                If Bird picks any of the players NBAdraft has listed 11-14, Simon needs to give Bird his walking papers ASAP.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X