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

We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

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

  • #76
    Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

    Maybe "win now" is too strong of a statement, but I really think we are closer to "get some veteran help and start winning consistently in the playoffs" than "get rid of your best player so that a rookie at the 15th pick in a weak draft can play get some minutes." Most of us want to build on our playoff showing. Maybe even get into the 2nd round. You know, pick the fruits of our 3 year growing plan. If we keep trading our assets to get younger and younger, we will never reach the promise land, unless we really luck out on a Durant or LeBron in the draft. I am sorry, but I cannot understand why some people want to go backwards after all the turmoil we have had to deal with the last few years. I guess some people didn't have to suffer through many years of mediocrity in the 80's, while watching fading-in-and-out WTTV-4 with foil wrapped around your antenna. And then FINALLY making the playoffs. And then after several years of 1st round exits, finally getting into the 2nd round....when we got veteran Byron Scott. To me, "win now" means start getting veterans that can help you win in the playoffs. Getting even younger now means being perpetually lottery-bound. I believe we were already the 2nd youngest team this year. I know that there are exceptions, so don't hit me with OK City.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

      Originally posted by PacerHound View Post
      Maybe some of you guys would enjoy life more if you quit worrying so much about being a top 3 or 4 contender. It is great to have goals and work toward them and see some success as you are making progress and getting better but winning a championship is not everything. Some of the major league baseball teams have not won the World Series for decades yet fans are still able to go out and enjoy the games.

      I don't think the Pacers will ever win a championship but if people can enjoy watching the Cubs play we ought to be be able to enjoy watching the Pacers play as long as they put a hard working crew out there who it is obvious are giving it there all. They did that when they played Chicago and I enjoyed it thoroughly even tho we lost.

      If a guy can never enjoy it, whatever it is in life, unless he is #1 he is going to have a pretty miserable life.
      So you think fans come out to see their team lose? and shouldn't contending for a championship be every teams goal?

      We enjoy the wins, and losses really suck, especially when we think we could have won... we will always be Pacer fans and support or team but we would also like to contend; people pay a lot of money when the job market is down to come out and watch a game. When your team is losing and you have other places that you could use your money you put off going to Pacers game off.

      Just look at the Colts, same town, winning team, Stadium is packed... those same people that go to those games are the same people that used to go to the Pacers games when they were winning, but people pay for entertainment and satisfaction.

      Reason for bringing up money is that everything is a financial right now, I can be a Pacers fan at home or at Conseco, and I believe that that is the difference with winning and losing... where would people rather see the game when money is short.

      As far as contending, that will entice more people to come out to games which will also make the owners happy, which will also make their pockets happy, which will also make the fans happy since the team won't have to be sold because of loss of profits.
      Why so SERIOUS

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

        Originally posted by Really? View Post
        To add to what PacerFreaks said, when teams trade away veterans they usually want young players who have a lot of potential because they are typically in a rebuilding process. Pretty much all the guys in the Melo trade were young Chandler was 23, Mosgrov was 24 without a whole year of experience, Dinillo was 22, Anthony Randolph was 21, Felton the oldest at 26.

        Kawhi is only 19 years old with good defense, and potential to increase his offensive game, he contributes to a team without the ball in his hands and that is key in the NBA.

        The centerpiece of all these trades for a top players is a young guy with potential, along with draft picks... Hibbert 24 is good and okay potential, Collison 23 is young but seems to have leveled of(hope I am wrong), Tyler 25.. I don't think so... I feel all would be good assets in a trade but do to Kawhi's age, potential and skillset I believe he can turn into a bigger asset than any of them, especially if he shows well in his first year.
        Leonard has value right now because he is an unknown, period. The moment training camp arrives and the first few pre-season games his value with either go up or down depending on his play.

        Are you really going to tell me that an undersized power forward who does not have the shooting skills to be a really good three in this league is going to have more value to G.M.'s than a 7'2" center who has a documented outstanding work ethic & solid fundemental skills all because he is 5 years younger? Most centers, not the superstar centers but regular centers, don't even come into their own until their late 20's.

        Sorry but I just am not going to believe that.

        I'll also say that I don't even believe that he has more value right now than D.C. or Tyler but I don't think it's worth arguing the point over them, but I am not going to give you Hibbert.

        Right now his value plus other garbage picks equaled George Hill, I'm not sure how you think he could be the centerpiece of a trade to bring in (fill in the blank) superstar.


        Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

          Peck the reason I even started this thread was because I was upset with Bird and don't think he really has a plan to make us competitive against the Heat. After looking at our roster I can see that I wasn't giving him enough credit. We do have a pretty good core already. I guess I am caught in the I want my cake and eat it too phase. I want us to get a superstar or two but I don't want to give up ANY of our young core to get it. That is why I think if we were able to draft maybe a few players this year and next with lots of potential we could maybe use THEM as trade bate and not give up any of our core.

          I think that was exactly how I was thinking about everything. However, we just don't know what rules we will be working with once the CBA has been agreed upon. I think if we get the hard cap that the Pacers are in wonderful position to get a superstar or two! You can't go buy our cap numbers now and say because we have X number of dollars committed we will have this much cap space because if not immediately then all active contracts will be phased down. It will almost be like all the players will have to take say a 20% pay cut over 3 years and then those are the numbers you would have to work with. That is why the Players don't want a hard cap. However, that is what would bring every team on even playing grounds.

          So just maybe we will be able to get our two superstar players with our cap space next year not NOT have to make any trades to do it. I am not at all saying it would happen but could you imagine Chris Paul and Dwight Howard on our current team WITHOUT losing any player from our core? I think the Pacers have more riding on the CBA than just about any other team in the league.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

            Originally posted by PacerHound View Post
            Maybe some of you guys would enjoy life more if you quit worrying so much about being a top 3 or 4 contender. It is great to have goals and work toward them and see some success as you are making progress and getting better but winning a championship is not everything. Some of the major league baseball teams have not won the World Series for decades yet fans are still able to go out and enjoy the games.

            I don't think the Pacers will ever win a championship but if people can enjoy watching the Cubs play we ought to be be able to enjoy watching the Pacers play as long as they put a hard working crew out there who it is obvious are giving it there all. They did that when they played Chicago and I enjoyed it thoroughly even tho we lost.

            If a guy can never enjoy it, whatever it is in life, unless he is #1 he is going to have a pretty miserable life.
            I'm sorry man but this seems to me like a losers attitude.
            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

              A good question is, with all the youth we already have on our roster, do we need more rookies on the team? (Keep in mind, Stanko would be a rookie if he came over)

              A case could be made for teams having stacked youth in the past to their detriment.
              "man, PG has been really good."

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

                By the way I don't understand all this complaining about us not keeping Kawhi, I'm pretty sure that is who SA wanted, I don't think the Pacers wanted him and if they had kept the pick, it looks to me like they would have drafted somebody else, maybe one of the euro guys and I know how many people here like those euro guys...
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

                  Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                  I'm sorry man but this seems to me like a losers attitude.
                  Do you think you're a loser when the Pacers lose, and a winner when the Pacers win?

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

                    Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                    Do you think you're a loser when the Pacers lose, and a winner when the Pacers win?
                    No really, but I think that making excuses not to be a winning team is a losers attitude, if I wanted to root for a team that never had a chance to win a championship I'll be rooting for Minnesotta or The Bobcats.
                    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

                      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                      No really, but I think that making excuses not to be a winning team is a losers attitude, if I wanted to root for a team that never had a chance to win a championship I'll be rooting for Minnesotta or The Bobcats.
                      I feel the same way. Seeing that we're a growing team, we can't regress next year and at least have to be more competitive in the playoffs in terms of wins and losses. I will be disappointed if we're not in the conference finals in the next 3-4 years and disappointed later if we don't win a championship a few years after that. Otherwise, what's the point? Becoming the next iteration of the Atlanta Hawks would get old after a couple of years.

                      The 90's were great and I remember them fondly, sure. But is there still a tinge of disappointment because we never won it all? Absolutely.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

                        There is middle ground people.

                        It doesn't have to be suck or championship. There is the building phase.

                        To me we are in the building towards something phase.

                        Does there come a point in time that just making the playoffs is not good enough? Yes, for me anyway I felt that way back in the 90's.

                        But right now we are not there yet.

                        Look I know some will disagree but getting to mediocre is an improvement from my perspective. Even making the playoffs we were a losing team.

                        So I want to see us progress and yes at some point in time I will agree that we need to move in a direction to try and win it all.

                        But unless we have superstars falling in our lapse I don't see that happening this next season.


                        Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

                          Originally posted by Ozwalt72 View Post
                          A good question is, with all the youth we already have on our roster, do we need more rookies on the team? (Keep in mind, Stanko would be a rookie if he came over)

                          A case could be made for teams having stacked youth in the past to their detriment.
                          I agree with this. My concern is the quality of the young guys we have. I feel like we are building our walls on a weak foundation.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

                            Originally posted by Peck View Post
                            There is middle ground people.

                            It doesn't have to be suck or championship. There is the building phase.

                            To me we are in the building towards something phase.

                            Does there come a point in time that just making the playoffs is not good enough? Yes, for me anyway I felt that way back in the 90's.

                            But right now we are not there yet.

                            Look I know some will disagree but getting to mediocre is an improvement from my perspective. Even making the playoffs we were a losing team.

                            So I want to see us progress and yes at some point in time I will agree that we need to move in a direction to try and win it all.

                            But unless we have superstars falling in our lapse I don't see that happening this next season.

                            Agree with this sentiment somewhat.

                            However a roster like OKC or the Clippers getting to the playoffs is one thing. Stacking our roster with young role players just doesn't seem like a recipe for long term success?

                            How much growth are we going to see from our "young core"?

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

                              Originally posted by aaronb View Post
                              Agree with this sentiment somewhat.

                              However a roster like OKC or the Clippers getting to the playoffs is one thing. Stacking our roster with young role players just doesn't seem like a recipe for long term success?

                              How much growth are we going to see from our "young core"?
                              I don't believe in our foundation but I think that we have enough money to buy it.
                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: We don't have enough talent on our roster to be in win now mode!

                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                I don't believe in our foundation but I think that we have enough money to buy it.
                                Not this year though.
                                "man, PG has been really good."

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X