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

Odd Thoughts: Road Warriors [The Front Page]

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

  • #31
    Re: Odd Thoughts: Road Warriors [The Front Page]

    Originally posted by RoboHicks View Post
    Oh what a rush!

    +10000 on this thread for including an Old-School Picture of Hawk and Animal AKA the NWA "Road Warriors".

    We need MR to photocopy a picture of Hibbert's head onto Hawk's body and McBob's head onto Animal's body.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Odd Thoughts: Road Warriors [The Front Page]

      I threw this in last night's game thread:



      Close enough?
      PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Odd Thoughts: Road Warriors [The Front Page]

        Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
        If the Pacers want him, they should do something relatively soon. He can be had on the cheap, (I'm guessing 4-6 million a year) because he wants to stay at home, but if we wait some team will inevitably offer him more money than he can afford to turn down.

        His value will just keep going up the more exposure he gets.


        4-6 million per year is cheap for McRoberts?

        That is MLE type money. He's been good, don't get me wrong. He affects the games with limited numbers about as much as you can. But that type of money would be fiscally irresponsible for Josh. I would be shocked if he got offers anywhere near that type of money on the open market.

        With the new CBA coming and the lockout and all that...I don't want to give anyone extensions until we see how things are going to shake out. I suspect that is exactly what the Pacers are doing. Half the team, the coaching staff, and the front office are all playing out the ends of their contracts. I sincerely doubt we are going to see any players get extended before we see what happens with the contracts of TPTB.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Odd Thoughts: Road Warriors [The Front Page]

          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
          The Pacers had an 18 points lead at one time and of course Jim brought his all star team of TJ,Posey,Solo,Dun and that lead when all the way to 9 or 8 I can't remember, that in my book is trying to lose, not only that but again he was letting DC and TJ guard a bigger guy in TE and as expected he was killing them and for some reason he was letting Cousins to get on fire and never call a play downlow to see if Demarcus " the foul magnet" could get a foul and be send to the bench.

          Regarding Danny's comments about Jim, what else do you expect him to say? He didn't trash him in three horrible years, he is not going to do it now.
          What do you want us to do not play a point guard? Udrik lit us up as well. PG defense is our most glaring weakness right now.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Odd Thoughts: Road Warriors [The Front Page]

            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
            The Pacers had an 18 points lead at one time and of course Jim brought his all star team of TJ,Posey,Solo,Dun and that lead when all the way to 9 or 8 I can't remember, that in my book is trying to lose, not only that but again he was letting DC and TJ guard a bigger guy in TE and as expected he was killing them and for some reason he was letting Cousins to get on fire and never call a play downlow to see if Demarcus " the foul magnet" could get a foul and be send to the bench.

            Regarding Danny's comments about Jim, what else do you expect him to say? He didn't trash him in three horrible years, he is not going to do it now.
            The irrational hate in this post is absolutely ridiculous, that sardonic "all star" team as you call it was our bench at the time. Common sense says that once you build an 18 point lead the oppurtunity presents itself to rest some guys. We have a game the next day, a harder one at that, what do you want jim to do? Run the lineup into the ground pointlessly when we're sitting on an 18 point lead?

            I have no problem with valid critcism of Jim but come on you are REALLY grasping for straws with posts like these man.

            The only real complaint here was the TE thing, which in the first half was somewhat headscratching, but the defense did adjust and Evans had an awful, awful second half.

            Also he didn't "let" cousins get on fire, Roy just simply was unable at the time to guard him, and if you'll remember correctly we DID call a play down low that DID get cousins his fifth foul.

            I'm sure you know all this though, you watched the game, it just seems like you are constantly looking for ways to put down Jim, including but not limited to

            1. Ever playing the bench

            2. Any opposing player having any success against any player JOB decides to play

            3. Dunleavey ever getting playing time, even if he is hitting shots

            4. Ever playing veteran players, even when they perform and win us big games (TJ vs. Los Angeles)

            5. Any time any player misses a Rotation

            6. Taking 3 pointers

            7. Any random circumstance, even if clearly out of the coaches hands.

            8. Existing

            You sometimes come up valid criticisms and you can be a good poster most of the time, but when your posts just denigrate into "hate" posts like these it makes it seem like your anti JOB bias is too much to overcome int he name of objectivity, and I don't think that is your intent.
            Last edited by daschysta; 12-01-2010, 04:22 PM.
            Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Odd Thoughts: Road Warriors [The Front Page]

              People need to read the previous posts before answering to my posts, for your information I'm not the one that started the whole JOB thing on this thread.
              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Odd Thoughts: Road Warriors [The Front Page]

                Originally posted by RoboHicks View Post
                But one thing and one person who may be being overlooked here is someone who was often maligned early in the season.

                Solomon Jones was benched for two games versus the Clippers and the Magic but since his return to the regular rotation he has provided the Pacers with solid relief for Roy for when he is on the floor.

                Since returning to the lineup Solomon has averaged 7 points and 5 rebounds per outing and while this next statistic can be debated in value and how it should be used it is certainly worth noting that Solomon has had the following +/- in each game.

                Versus Miami his +/- was + 21

                Versus Cleveland his +/- was + 1

                Versus Oklahoma City his +/- was + 11

                Versus Los Angeles his +/- was – 3

                Versus Sacramento his +/- was + 4

                Again you can argue the value of that particular statistic but if you watch the games you can see that when Roy has gone to the bench we have not had the dramatic drop off in talent level that we had been experiencing earlier in the season.

                Solomon has joined in with every other member of the Pacers and taken real pride in defending the paint and has been far more physical both on defense and in going after rebounds than we have seen previously in his time with the club.

                Obviously not the most glamorous of players and I’m not trying to over state his value to the current winning ways but I do believe his contributions to the club are very real and at this time very beneficial. I still shudder when I think about Roy rolling an ankle or getting in foul trouble early in a game but for the minutes he has played recently Solomon has given the Pacers good relief for Roy’s down time.
                Yeah I've been very pleased with Solo.

                As for Dunleavy... It's funny how even on an off shooting night we were still a +22 with him in the game... Imagine if more of those open looks would have gone in! (I'll also add your caveat about the plus/minus).

                I liked O'Brien's quote after the game:

                “This has been three years of hard work,” coach Jim O’Brien said. “This (turnaround) didn’t just all of a sudden happen.”

                I think this is important to remember--that the last few years weren't a waste, but they were fertilizer. Without adversity there is no growth. In the long run I think many of these players will have benefited from having a coach early on who frequently made things very uncomfortable for them.

                This article by Brunner also talks about the value of continuity:

                http://www.foxsportsmidwest.com/11/3...94&feedID=3905

                Excerpt:

                "I think it's a matter of having a nucleus together for a couple of years," said Coach Jim O'Brien. "Brandon and Roy played a lot for the last two years, they were force-fed minutes their rookie year, they've been playing with Danny for awhile. Josh (McRoberts) has been part of this for awhile. T.J. (Ford)'s been part of it for awhile, Michael and Jeff. When you have guys together for a little bit of time, they start having an understanding of what it's all about. I don't think that can be overlooked.

                "If you look at the challenges that teams in the league that have new guys together – even Miami that has great guys together – it still takes some time to gel. Two years ago we had seven new players, last year we had six new players. We had new players this year (but) other than Darren they were guys that are forming kind of a rotation and they know each other. I think that's a very, very key ingredient."

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Odd Thoughts: Road Warriors [The Front Page]

                  Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                  +10000 on this thread for including an Old-School Picture of Hawk and Animal AKA the NWA "Road Warriors".

                  We need MR to photocopy a picture of Hibbert's head onto Hawk's body and McBob's head onto Animal's body.
                  Well I misread you and thought you meant Mcroberts and Hansbrough at first, but I figured it was still worth posting.

                  "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                  - ilive4sports

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Odd Thoughts: Road Warriors [The Front Page]

                    Originally posted by cdash View Post


                    4-6 million per year is cheap for McRoberts?

                    That is MLE type money. He's been good, don't get me wrong. He affects the games with limited numbers about as much as you can. But that type of money would be fiscally irresponsible for Josh. I would be shocked if he got offers anywhere near that type of money on the open market.

                    With the new CBA coming and the lockout and all that...I don't want to give anyone extensions until we see how things are going to shake out. I suspect that is exactly what the Pacers are doing. Half the team, the coaching staff, and the front office are all playing out the ends of their contracts. I sincerely doubt we are going to see any players get extended before we see what happens with the contracts of TPTB.
                    $4 million per year would be pretty cheap for him. $6 million per year would be more on the high side. I was just saying that's the range that the Pacers would have to be in, in order to even have a chance to sign him now.

                    Look how much comparable big guys around the league earn. I will try to find the most comparable player on each team, some of them will not have a good comparison to make, but I will try to anyway. I will not use any players on a rookie contract, as those figures will not apply in this case. Salaries come courtesy of ShamSports:

                    ATL Josh Smith, $12+ million per year
                    BOS Glen Davis, $3 million
                    CHA Tyrus Thomas, $8 million per year
                    CHI Joakim Noah, $12 million per year
                    CLE Anderson Varejao, $8+ million per year
                    DAL Brendan Haywood, $9+ million per year
                    DEN Chris Andersen, $5 million per year
                    DET Jason Maxiell, $5 million per year
                    GSW David Lee, $13+ million per year
                    HOU Luis Scola, $8+ million per year
                    LAC Chris Kamen, $12 million per year
                    LAL Lamar Odom, $8+ million per year
                    MEM Zach Randolph, $18 million per year
                    MIA Udonis Haslem, $5 million per year
                    MIL Drew Gooden, $6+ million per year
                    MIN Darko Milicic, $5 million per year
                    NJN Troy Murphy, $12 million per year
                    NOH Emeka Okafor, $13 million per year
                    NYK Eddy Curry, $11+ million per year
                    OKC Nick Collison, $6+ million per year
                    ORL Marcin Gortat, $7+ million per year
                    PHI Elton Brand, $17+ million per year
                    PHO Channing Frye, $6 million per year
                    POR Marcus Camby, $11 million per year
                    SAC Samuel Dalembert, $13+ million per year
                    SAS Matt Bonner, $3+ million per year
                    TOR Andrea Bargnani, $10 million per year
                    UTH Paul Milsap, $8+ million per year
                    WAS Andray Blatche, $7+ million per year

                    Those players all make an average of $8+ million per year. Josh isn't as good as a lot of them, but he's better than some of them as well. Looking at those numbers, I don't think him getting the full MLE is outrageous.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Odd Thoughts: Road Warriors [The Front Page]

                      4mil should be enough to keep Mcbob, more than that and they should let him go.
                      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Odd Thoughts: Road Warriors [The Front Page]

                        Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                        To beat Grace to the punch, if Jimmy wins COY that just means he'll be fired within two years.
                        I say let's be the first team to fire the coach the SAME year he gets Coach of the Year.

                        I know I'd never look back.
                        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X