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

Lockout News and Discussions thread

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

  • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

    Well, let's just hope they at least head back to the negotiating table before 5:00 tomorrow.

    Not sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk

    Comment


    • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

      You know your league is in bad shape when the union is attacking Michael Jordan.

      Comment


      • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

        How so? He's an owner now.

        Comment


        • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

          Originally posted by oxxo View Post
          How so? He's an owner now.

          I was mostly being facetious.

          Comment


          • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

            Originally posted by Day-V View Post
            Well, let's just hope they at least head back to the negotiating table before 5:00 tomorrow.

            Not sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk
            Negotiate what? The Owners have already made it perfectly clear that they will want 53/47 split, flex cap, rollbacks, and contract changes at the next meeting. Period. What the Players want at this point is completely irrelevant.


            Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

            Comment


            • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

              Originally posted by shags View Post
              Wonder what team wasn't represented?


              Adrian Wojnarowski:Boston was the only team not represented at meeting today.2 minutes ago
              Read more: http://hoopshype.com/twitter/media.html#ixzz1d9mGtwKb

              So big mouth KG coouldnt even drop by for a minute yet he is screaming about the CBA
              Sittin on top of the world!

              Comment


              • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                Negotiate what? The Owners have already made it perfectly clear that they will want 53/47 split, flex cap, rollbacks, and contract changes at the next meeting. Period. What the Players want at this point is completely irrelevant.
                No, they didn't. They never said anything about a 'next meeting'.

                They said that would be the case if a deal wasn't done by the end of WEDNESDAY.

                Comment


                • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                  Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                  Negotiate what? The Owners have already made it perfectly clear that they will want 53/47 split, flex cap, rollbacks, and contract changes at the next meeting. Period.
                  How many times during these talks have the owners said that they wouldn't even speak to the Union unless they would agree to 50/50 beforehand, and yet they would still meet even without that pre-requisite being met.

                  And besides, that 53/47 was meant for AFTER 5:00 PM tomorrow. Not necessarily before.


                  Not sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk
                  Last edited by Day-V; 11-08-2011, 05:50 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                    Originally posted by Day-V View Post
                    How many times during these talks have the owners said that they wouldn't even speak to the Union unless they would agree to 50/50 beforehand, and yet they would still meet even without that pre-requisite being met.

                    And besides, that 53/47 was meant for AFTER 5:00 PM tomorrow. Not necessarily before.
                    Honestly, it was probably just for show to see if the players would finally accept the 50/50 deal since the BRI conversation WILL come up at some point during the discussions. I was never really under impression that majority of the owners wanted 50/50 to begin with or it would BARELY pass consideration.

                    Not to be an *sshole, but I believe the Owners shouldn't even waste their time meeting with the players before Wednesday. If the players are not going to take the 50/50, then there's really nothing to talk about.


                    Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                    Comment


                    • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                      http://sheridanhoops.com/

                      Hubbard column: It’s not complicated – Michael is simply being Michael
                      9 Comments

                      ■By Jan Hubbard
                      ■November 08, 2011 at 4:16 PM



                      The sports world spent most of two decades witnessing the savage competitiveness that was Michael Jordan and, frankly, not only enjoyed it, but also idolized it. When he was a player and got that nasty, comic book-superhero look in his eyes while staring down a challenger, everyone – with the notable exception of opponents – loved it.

                      That includes, you’ve got to think, all current players.

                      For Jordan, games were combat, a test of wills, and he elevated them to levels that teetered between exhilarating and unhealthy. When Jordan became involved in a gambling controversy, it was his father who famously said his son did not have a gambling problem; he had a competition problem.

                      In 1992, a few of us got a glimpse of the raw Jordan – one that teammates saw daily and opponents saw nightly – while the Dream Team was in Monte Carlo preparing for the Barcelona Olympics. In a scrimmage that has become known as the greatest game never filmed, the Dream Team was divided into two squads – one led by Magic Johnson; the other by Jordan.

                      By the time the 10 or so media members who were covering the team got into the small arena, where the Dream Team had played a game in front of the royal family of Monte Carlo a couple of nights earlier, Jordan’s team had the lead and he was being quite vocal about it.

                      We learned later that Magic’s team had jumped out to a 14-2 lead and Magic and Charles Barkley began taunting Jordan. Ultimately, however, it wasn’t enough that Jordan answered by bringing his team back to victory; he was intent on loudly shoving the triumph through their ear drums.

                      Grabbing a can of Gatorade, he raised it over his head and repeated the famous line from his commercial at the time, “Sometimes I dream!” He made a victory lap around the floor. The rest of the players from both teams could only watch the performance.

                      By the time Jordan finally sat, most of the writers had surrounded Magic and Barkley to get statements from the losers and for a moment, I was alone with Jordan. At that point, he seemed to snap out of the competitive trance he was in and almost got a little sheepish.

                      “How’s your boy,” he said, referring to his good friend Barkley.

                      I answered that Barkley, another legendary competitor, was pretty embarrassed and irritated.

                      “He’ll get over it,” Jordan said.

                      At that point, I shook my head and fumbled for words to ask him why he was making such a spectacle. All I could come up with was, “I guess you just have to win.”

                      Without pausing, Jordan snapped back, “I try to make a habit out of it.”

                      That is merely one episode during of a career of fanatic competitiveness. The trait that is signature Jordan is something critics have forgotten during the last week when Jordan has been widely condemned for taking a hard-line position in collective bargaining talks with the players.

                      Some have wondered loudly and harshly; how is that possible? Here is a guy who was the ultimate player. Here is a guy who once told Washington owner Abe Pollin during negotiations to sell his team if he could not afford labor costs. And now Jordan is leading a group to force players to accept less money?

                      The answer to that riddle is not complicated.

                      Jordan is no longer a player.

                      He is an owner.

                      He has changed teams.

                      He plays for the other side.

                      And he is trying to win.

                      It is no different than Jordan joining the Wizards late in his playing career. He had won six titles with the Bulls. Was he supposed to not try hard when Washington played Chicago?

                      Make no mistake that Jordan approved the NBA identifying him as leader of the hard-line owners last week. The message was very clear to the players. It was the same message he repeatedly sent to the Knicks, Pistons, Celtics, Lakers, Blazers, Jazz, Suns and every other team when he was a player. It was the same message he sent to his buddies Magic and Charles in Monte Carlo.

                      I want to crush you.

                      Does that make him a phony or a sellout because of his current stance? I’ve got a question for Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce, LeBron James, Dwyane Wade and all others offended by Jordan’s presence on his current team of owners:

                      If you eventually purchase a team, is it your goal to increase labor costs? Or will you try to make your franchise as profitable as possible?

                      There is, of course, a flip side for Jordan. Players who are currently in their 20s have idolized him since they left diapers. There has been no greater honor for many of them than to be asked by Michael Jordan to wear the Jordan Brand of athletic wear.

                      There will be a fallout. Some have already talked about refusing to wear Jordan apparel.

                      And Jordan took some shots from union head Billy Hunter on Tuesday with Hunter saying Jordan should practice what he once preached to Pollin — if he can’t afford the Bobcats, sell. “He should take his own advice,” Hunter said.

                      Jordan, however, has undoubtedly come to terms with the potential repercussions. But he has made the determination that for his Charlotte franchise to be successful on the court and profitable off of it in a small market, the hard line is the correct line.

                      And besides, this is about winning.

                      I’m not sure what players or members of the media expected when NBA owners and the players association squared off against each other. But if they expected Jordan to suit up for the opposition, they didn’t pay attention to his career.

                      If there is a need to attach negative labels to Jordan and call him names, I’m sure it results in a big shrug from him. Say what you want, agree or disagree, but I think Jordan was being consistent. When he was a player, he tried to crush the owners. As an owner, he now wants to crush the players.

                      That’s vintage Jordan. That’s Michael being Michael.
                      Sittin on top of the world!

                      Comment


                      • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                        http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.c...medium=twitter

                        NBA players taking tactic out of John F. Kennedy’s arsenal

                        Kurt Helin

                        Nov 8, 2011, 5:50 PM EST


                        Time for a little history: During the Cuban missile crisis, Russia and the United States were working on a back-channels deal that was essentially the Russians take their missiles out of Cuba and the United States would end its blockade and not invade the island nation. Then as that deal got close a letter from Russian premier Nikita Khrushchev was published in the American press saying that part of the deal had to be the USA pulling its missiles out of Turkey (less than 200 miles from Russia).

                        President John F. Kennedy’s response? He ignored that added demand. He telegraphed Khrushchev and said the United States would end the blockade and not invade the island if the missiles were removed, otherwise it was war. Khrushchev took the offer.

                        That is essentially the tactic the NBA players union has taken in dealing with an ultimatum from David Stern (something pointed out by our own Matt Moore). It’s a classic negotiating strategy. Union president Derek Fisher said his side stands ready to keep negotiating from where the talks are now, close to a deal. Basically he said, “We’re not playing your game of deadlines and rollbacks.” The union will ignore that.

                        “Our options are to keep doing what we are doing,” union executive director Billy Hunter said, adding the union would keep negotiating off what the union has proposed, not whatever the league puts on the table.

                        Union leaders suggested they would be willing to give the owners the split of BRI they want if the owners would give up a series of system issues. If the sides keep talking.

                        This puts Stern on the spot because now, to save face and meet the demand of his hardliners, he has to roll back the offer (unless there are ongoing negotiations tomorrow, as the players said they would try to set up). But the deal is close to where the two sides are now. If Stern and the owners really stick to what is reportedly in the new offer — salary rollbacks, a hard salary cap, a smaller percentage of revenue to the players and more — you can forget about basketball this season at all.

                        It’s a huge threat by Stern and the owners.

                        One the players have chosen to just ignore. It worked for JFK.
                        Sittin on top of the world!

                        Comment


                        • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                          Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                          Not to be an *sshole, but I believe the Owners shouldn't even waste their time meeting with the players before Wednesday. If the players are not going to take the 50/50, then there's really nothing to talk about.
                          I think from what I've read, the players ARE willing to take 50/50, if they can get a few things on the system side of the negotiations.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                            I wouldn't mess with MJ if I was the union, he is going to crush them....


                            Send from my iPhone ........
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                              WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski
                              NBPA, NBA discussed setting up session but Hunter decided against it prior to meeting with player reps, sources say. Expect one Wednesday.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                                I suppose a bunch of teams that at least make money while only being good once per couple of decades is better than nothing. But damn I was hoping for something other than

                                LA
                                Miami
                                LA
                                (someone else)
                                Boston
                                Miami
                                LA
                                (someone else)

                                as the championships for the next CBA period.
                                BillS

                                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...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X