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:
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

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

Pacers '10 draft... how do we feel now?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Pacers '10 draft... how do we feel now?

    After the draft, and especially after watching the Orlando summer league, I was over the moon about the Pacers' current rookie class. I saw a bright future for the team, and that's the first time I've felt that way in years.

    Fast-forward a few months and we have Stephenson who is likely going to be suiting up for the Rikers Island Penitentiary intramural squad in the near future, and Rolle who has been cut. So basically we're left with Paul George (who I do still have high hopes for).

    In July I would have given Bird an "A" for this year's draft. Now, however, I would probably downgrade that to a "B-" or a "C+".


  • #2
    Re: Pacers '10 draft... how do we feel now?

    Er... sorry, this thread was double posted... can an admin delete this one please?


    • #3
      Re: Pacers '10 draft... how do we feel now?

      Originally posted by bphil
      After the draft, and especially after watching the Orlando summer league, I was over the moon about the Pacers' current rookie class. I saw a bright future for the team, and that's the first time I had felt that way in years.

      Fast-forward a few months and we have Stephenson who is likely going to be suiting up for the Rikers Island Penitentiary intramural squad in the near future, and Rolle who has been cut. So basically we're left with Paul George (who I do still have high hopes for).

      In July I would have given Bird an "A" for this year's draft. Now, however, I would probably downgrade that to a "B-" or a "C+".

      I liked Magnum (mainly his personality), but I understand why he was cut.

      I don't like Lance's alleged actions, at all. However, even though I probably shouldn't, I will still cheer for him b/c he's wearing a Pacers uniform. I think it's become a moral issue for each individual on the Lance situation.

      I am very excited to see PG play.

      No disrespect, but I think we should wait until we've actually played some games to judge the rookies.
      Passion. Pride. Patience. Pacers


      • #4
        Re: Pacers '10 draft... how do we feel now?

        I would still give them an A

        They took chances for the first time in Birds tenure, and didnt go for the safe , warm and cuddly pick

        No matter hwo it turns out I give them an A
        Sittin on top of the world!


        • #5
          Re: Pacers '10 draft... how do we feel now?

          A lot better quite frankly. Much of my initial Paul George skepticism has turned to hope. Stephenson is what I thought he was. A project who probably won't turn out to be anything. I always knew Magnum's only prayer at a roster spot was a trade. George has me excited.
          "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

          -Lance Stephenson


          • #6
            Re: Pacers '10 draft... how do we feel now?

            C+? Because they cut a 2nd round guy and don't know the status of the other one?

            Man, you grade harsh.

            I could understand the criteria for an A being that your first round pick is a potential starter or sixth man and your second round pick makes the rotation. But to drop it to C if your first round pick meets that expectation but your second round picks do not is rough.

            I'd consider "C (average)" to be that your first round pick is a potential rotation player in the future and your second round pick gets cut or sent to Europe. Seems we're well into "B" range even with the current situation.

            A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
            Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...


            • #7
              Re: Pacers '10 draft... how do we feel now?

              Absolutely, lets wait a few months, after we get some time to see their performances in the regular season... But for sake of argument, I would still go with an A... I dont think that it would have mattered who we drafted instead of Rolle, that was going to be the one cut... As for the Lance issue... Until there is a verdict one way or the other, according to the law of this great country, he is innocent... Like it or not...
              Abba Zaba, your my only friend.


              • #8
                Re: Pacers '10 draft... how do we feel now?

                We got the only player left I was interested in in the first round.. so in my books I like the first round. The only players I really like are Wall, Cousins, George, Turner, and Hayward.

                Magnum just isn't all that and Lance has all the talent and if he is able to stick around -I am not implying in any way whatsoever that I believe he is innocent or that he should be freed so he should play for us or that the charges should be dropped or Jasmine is not the victim or any of that at all- than I still think that this draft has been an A- B+ in my book.

                Paul George is going to be a monster.


                • #9
                  Re: Pacers '10 draft... how do we feel now?

                  got exactly who i wanted at pick #10 in round 1. VERY disappointed we were not able to land jarvis varnado in round 2. just don't understand the logic behind trading for a nobody who couldn't even make 1st team all-wac, yet we couldn't find a deal for the national defensive player of the year, 3 time sec defensive player of the year, ncaa all time shot blocking leader, and 1st team all sec player jarvis varnado? i would hate to see varnado turn into another antonio davis, which he very well could.


                  • #10
                    Re: Pacers '10 draft... how do we feel now?

                    I'd give them an A.

                    Second round picks are longshots, and while they can make your draft if you hit a homerun, I don't think it's fair to act like missing on a 2nd rounder (or two) can break your draft in the least.

                    I was happy with George the day we got him, he was exactly who I wanted. First time in my life a team I cheered for picked the guy I wanted. He's done nothing to disappoint, and I think he's better than I expected off the bat. He deserves to be in the rotation starting his rookie year. I didn't think there was anyway that would happen.


                    • #11
                      Re: Pacers '10 draft... how do we feel now?

                      Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                      I would still give them an A

                      They took chances for the first time in Birds tenure, and didnt go for the safe , warm and cuddly pick

                      No matter hwo it turns out I give them an A
                      That's a little odd I would say. So if Paul and Lance both turn out to be terrible this season, you would still give the Pacers an A grade for the draft?


                      • #12
                        Re: Pacers '10 draft... how do we feel now?

                        PG24's floor was high, but his ceiling is higher. He's already shown the floor.

                        I can't tell what's gonna happen with Lance. After a ruling, we'll find out.

                        Magnum got cut and my feelings aren't hurt.

                        I'd still give the draft at least a A-. Ask this question in two years and the answer will probably change.


                        • #13
                          Re: Pacers '10 draft... how do we feel now?

                          I'd have preferred Gani Lawal and Hamady Ndiaye in the 2nd round. I like PG at #10 pick and rumors were that NO would have taken him at #11. It's too bad that we didn't leverage that to address our roster spaces issues, but I trust that TPTB liked what they saw in individual workouts with PG to justify the pick.

                          There were guys that I did like available later in the first round: Ed Davis, Patrick Patterson, and Eric Bledsoe. I trust TPTB tried to make a move, didn't get offers they liked, and went with the solid pick of PG at #10. I'm sure lots of teams knew we wanted to move back but didn't see the cost of moving up to #10 worth it.

                          Time will tell. It's hard to judge this early.

                          I'm glad we've not suffered a set back like the Raptors or GS did with their pick. I'm also very happy that Tyler is back.

                          Davis is raw and a couple years away and PP I don't see as much better than Tyler/McBob.


                          • #14
                            Re: Pacers '10 draft... how do we feel now?

                            Lance Stephenson won't be going anywhere, he wont be going to jail or prison. He is a very unique talent and I was thrilled we were able to get him in the 2nd round. I think he is worth the risk 110%. Coming out of highschool he was the 3rd overall ranked player in the country. He had offers from Kansas, USC, Memphis, Maryland, eventually playing at Cinci. He has flaws, he is immature but still very young, he might be a head case, he is a me first selfish type player, and has a reputation for not getting along with or listening to his coaches, some called him un-coachable. The ball is in Lance's court now, what he decides to do with his talent and with his life is all up to him. He has potential to be a star in this league, I hope he proves his doubters wrong and becomes the player I can see him being. Can he do it? Of course. Will he grow up and put his past behind him? We will soon find out. I will root for him, support him to the fullest, and wish him the best. If he doesn't work out, it was worth a shot. If he becomes all he can be, watch out.


                            • #15
                              Re: Pacers '10 draft... how do we feel now?

                              Quite frankly, I didnt expect Rolle to make the team.

                              George is going to be a project. Dont expect him to step in right away and start contributing. He'll have a few games here and there where he shows a glimpes of star potential, but I dont think he'll be consistent in his rookie season. Give him 3 or 4 years and I wouldnt be surprised if he was a regular in the All Star game.

                              Lance is still a very good pick for the 2nd round. We all know the kid can ball, but his off-court issues are questionable, but this isnt/wasnt a shock to anyone, including upper management. Bird knew exactly what he was going to get himself into when he drafted Lance. Some of these guys in into the league and mature as their career progresses and a clear example of that is Artest and Stephen Jackson. Both were lunatics in Indy, while they were young, but both have now matured and are having successful careers.

                              Give Lance sometime. Hopefully he'll realize how serious these immature incidents can impact his life.
                              "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.