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

How about Iverson on a year deal?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Re: How about Iverson on a year deal?

    Originally posted by gopacers1179 View Post
    Im not saying he's a must have, but def worth consideration. I believe upside>downside adding him for a year.
    What is exactly the upsides?

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: How about Iverson on a year deal?

      day, give it up. Youve lurked here with your smartas comments for long enough. cmon kid

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: How about Iverson on a year deal?

        Originally posted by EmCeE View Post
        What is exactly the upsides?
        First off, Im almost 100% sure that this isnt the first "what if AI" thread.

        Lets face it, signing him on a 1 year deal is a freeroll. I believe we'd sell tickets and offer a team that if he plays team basketball could maybe be in 2nd round of the playoffs next year. If he doesnt workout, he's put on the shelf and ruin all his credibility to sign elsewhere for the rest of his life. Also, we'd have Lance, maybe AJ, Ford or trade and land maybe our future PG before trade deadline. Theres always an Earl Watson out there anyways.

        AI recently delivered a statement mentioning how his "family" problems are now solved and he's ready to finish on a good note. I sort of believe him because he must impress his next team or its over. Then after a year or whatever, let him go keep him of things did work.

        I know some could argue that AI isnt a team facilitator and could possibly hold back the growth of our young players but Granger is gonna get his shots no matter what. Rush will likely get wide open looks at times and boost his confidence. I also view our team as guys Iverson could maybe bring a little confidence to.

        I truly believe if someone reached out to him from our organization he see the Pacers as a wonderful start to maybe close the last 2-3 years of his career. We have great character guys around these days who could possibly get hot win 50 games in a near perfect world. Especially if LeBron abandons Cleveland.

        PG- AI --TJ/Lance/Price

        SG-Rush --Jones/Dunleavy

        SF- Granger --George/Dun

        PF- Murphy --Tyler/McBob

        C-Hibbert --Foster/Rolle


        Deep team if healthy and could make things interesting with a proper trade which is gonna happen, it has to. Of course consistence is the issue, but if this team got hot they can win in bunches.


        just imo

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: How about Iverson on a year deal?

          Originally posted by gopacers1179 View Post
          my op says it all. I really dont have anymore to add. Im not saying he's a must have, but def worth consideration. I believe upside>downside adding him for a year.

          Everyone has a right to disagree and I have no problem with someone not seeing eye to eye with me. But alot have disagreed and then insult me. I comeback and some random person just reads my comeback without seeing whole story. But Ive had a blast so far. I just imagine half these guys are the idiots whove been calling sports talk radio saying the dumb *** most guys do on there.

          Its not like someone said, no I wouldnt want Iverson here and I go nuts on them saying theyre wrong. Its been the exact opposite.
          I've read every one of your posts, in this thread, and in your first thread. I thought that was obvious, considering I even said others made comments that shouldn't have been made. All I was doing was giving you my opinion about the general tone of your posts. What I really don't understand is why this was made in response to someone asking you to sell them on Iverson. It would be best to just let it go. Again, I'm not trying to insult you or start anything. I'm just giving my opinion.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: How about Iverson on a year deal?

            OK, if he works out then we are left with a old Iverson that will never be resigned. We need players that can be here for the next 5-8 yrs. The only thing that makes sense for the team is the ticket sales, but outside of that this team has had enough negative attention, so the cons ultimately out weighs the pros. I don't think at this point of his career, his skills are still good enough to help us win.

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: How about Iverson on a year deal?

              Originally posted by EmCeE View Post
              The only thing that makes sense for the team is the ticket sales
              While I DO get that angle, I do. I still come back to this.......You know what else helps ticket sales? Winning.


              And I just don't see Iverson coming in here and helping us in that crucial aspect.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: How about Iverson on a year deal?

                Originally posted by Day-V View Post
                While I DO get that angle, I do. I still come back to this.......You know what else helps ticket sales? Winning.


                And I just don't see Iverson coming in here and helping us in that crucial aspect.
                My biggest issue with it is that Bird and Morway have worked so hard to clean up the Pacers' image problem, that signing a big name, short term player with baggage would be an expensive set back. Obviously, it would be great to have that kind of talent on the roster. I just don't think he's the kind of player you go after when you are in rebuilding mode after having your own image problems.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: How about Iverson on a year deal?

                  I totally agree with the last 2 by Day and Emcee posts regarding AI here in Indy. You could very well be right and the odds I must agree are better with your assessment over mine. I just wanna do it because I believe in this specific situation to play out well for all parties.

                  And TS, that quote you highlighted wasnt directed at anyone in particular, just stating that I noticed this pattern a bit. I was never referring to the member I was speaking to at the time. I went off base for a sec I guess.

                  another thing re Iverson. Its been years now since the Pacers have been in trouble. I think they have a clean slate again. Our problems are gone and you hear more about us building a white team more than anything these days
                  Last edited by gopacers1179; 07-07-2010, 01:16 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: How about Iverson on a year deal?

                    When it comes to Iverson, I will always attack him first on character. I've done that, so now let me offer an obvious reason why he is not a good fit for the Pacers.

                    Throughout his career, Iverson is a player who absolutely dominates the ball. That is counterproductive to developing our young players and it is in total disagreement with how JOB expects his players to play the game. His method of play is dependent on pushing the ball, which Iverson could do. Unfortunately, quickly moving the ball in the half-court is not something Iverson has ever been willing to do.

                    I believe that his being a major component of the team would yield signficantly more long-term damage than short-term good. And consequently, as long as JOB is coach, his acquisition would never happen.

                    Comment


                    • Re: How about Iverson on a year deal?

                      Originally posted by tsm612 View Post
                      I've read every one of your posts, in this thread, and in your first thread. I thought that was obvious, considering I even said others made comments that shouldn't have been made. All I was doing was giving you my opinion about the general tone of your posts. What I really don't understand is why this was made in response to someone asking you to sell them on Iverson. It would be best to just let it go. Again, I'm not trying to insult you or start anything. I'm just giving my opinion.
                      tsm, I've agreed with everything you've said, and especially the bolded part. 1179 isn't going to have a sudden epiphany and agree with you, apologize, and forever change his posting ways. So, we'll have to just let it go, maybe use the ignore feature if it grates on you too much, and wait for him to get kicked off PD or until we all adjust to each other.

                      1179, I like the points you bring to the board, and it's obvious that you know what you're talking about. That said, those of us who don't always agree are not emo crybabies, and there is no place for name calling on this board. That's not complaining, that's simply PD rules. Often, your tone can be abrasive, but as I said, your basketball posts are solid and worth reading.

                      As far as Iverson goes, I'm going to pass on this deal. He'd sell tickets for the first month of the season. Just until everyone realizes that his tank is empty. That dude was an incredibly talented ball player who left everything on the court. But now, that's exactly the problem. Everything has been left on the court, and there's no more to bring. I would've actually gone for this a few years ago when we had a "sign AI" thread that discussed pairing him with JO. The argument then was too much "knucklehead" on one team. Now, I would argue that while AI has matured as a person and player, I believe, he still carries that reputation. TPTB have worked to clear the air and make a team of nice guys the fans can like. Adding AI to this team would be like the one bad apple that ruins the bunch, in the public eye.

                      Did I mention that AI is over the hill?

                      --pizza
                      It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

                      Comment


                      • Re: How about Iverson on a year deal?

                        very true beast. All you said was money. However, Granger is still gonna get 15-20 shots, Rush could land more open looks due to opposing teams D strategy. Hibbert could focus more on attacking the rim for offensive rebounds and then hopefully the rest can blend in. I dont see this team as of today either making the playoffs or bad enough to get a top 10 pick.

                        I do understand its not all about position at the end of the year with this team, its all about individual growth as a valuable member of a team. I feel this team could do something a little amazing if things played out well if Iverson played responsible basketball with us. Give him 24-28 mins a game and still work your youngen pg's on the roster.

                        Just a thought

                        Comment


                        • Re: How about Iverson on a year deal?

                          Originally posted by gopacers1179 View Post
                          yeh its all my fault my first post here was 4 paragraphs of truth in the Pacers organization. The first handful of replies went stupid insulting me on one sentence in 4 paragraphs. Im done with this bs. Im just gonna keep rolling my opinion and if some dont like, they know what they can kiss.

                          And TS, that wasnt a reaction to you personally. Theres just been people who've came along and pile on when they read one of my posts defending myself to people stupid criticism without reading the whole story. Most people have been confronting me initially and I respond with alot of sarcasm. EZ game
                          While I can understand where you are coming from man..

                          The best advice I can give you , if you should choose to take it my friend , is to just let it go ..

                          This is just the internet .. Where opinions are like a$$holes , everyone has one.. some stink a little more than others.. .

                          But in the end ... life is too short and there are much MUCH more important things to worry about...(oil disaster and etc.).... than mere petty words typed on an internet forum by someone you will probably NEVER meet in real life ......

                          Sometimes people p*$$ me off too ... on here and other forums as well..

                          Everyone has bad days and may type something out of anger or frustration... $h*t Happens...

                          Alot of the same people I have had disagreements/squabbles with in the past, end up being cool by me the next day ..

                          The bad thing about typing on the internet , is that it is hard/impossible to get across CONTEXT and facial expressions/intent of those posting ..

                          Just let it go , continue to do your thang , tomorrow is a new day ..

                          Peace
                          Kemo..



                          .
                          Last edited by Kemo; 07-07-2010, 01:30 AM.
                          "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

                          Comment


                          • Re: How about Iverson on a year deal?

                            Originally posted by pizza guy View Post
                            and wait for him to get kicked off PD or until we all adjust to each other.
                            --pizza
                            Im cool with your post. Ill adjust my views but Im gonna stay consistent on saying how I feel about the Pacers organization. Ill say the good was good and the bad was bad with the same style.

                            I dont know if you know this all the way, but theres been some way uncool responses from nowhere from people because they dont believe a view of mine. Ive also said some uncool stuff in return no doubt. Its a forum about the Pacers and they were my everything in the 90's and Im gonna have fun with this and sort of say what I want by staying inside the law as best as possible.

                            I do have a feeling tho tbh, you're right. Ill probably get banned here soon for pissing off a dozen or two folks. All in the game, Ill be ok lol. GL
                            Last edited by gopacers1179; 07-07-2010, 01:33 AM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: How about Iverson on a year deal?

                              Originally posted by gopacers1179 View Post
                              another thing re Iverson. Its been years now since the Pacers have been in trouble. I think they have a clean slate again. Our problems are gone and you hear more about us building a white team more than anything these days
                              True, but most casual fans think we still have "thugs". Though, I'm not sure if we should really care what they think. They don't care about the Pacers right now because they're still high on the Colts' success. I bet if the Pacers started winning again, they probably wouldn't care who was on the roster.

                              Comment


                              • Re: How about Iverson on a year deal?

                                Originally posted by tsm612 View Post
                                They don't care about the Pacers right now because they're still high on the Colts' success. I bet if the Pacers started winning again, they probably wouldn't care who was on the roster.
                                Im with this lol. I have family and extended family who was all about high fives and Pacers flags for their cars in the 90s and early 00's, now theyre all about Colts and pretending that the Pacers never mattered. It drives me insane and I tell them harshly. I love the Colts, but Pacers are my team forever. I even like football more than basketball. Just something about the Pacers that was so special 91-00.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X