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

    What is "room Teams" and what does the following line mean exactly? "Ability to stretch waived player’s salary frees up more money for teams to spend on FAs"

    Please help me on this.
    Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

    Comment


    • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
      They're not going to take this deal (which, to me, isn't nearly as awful as some of them are complaining that it is), but it sounds like they're going to tweak the deal and say, "We'll accept THIS deal, if you will..." as they hand it back to the owners.

      Then it will be up to the owners.
      I agree; that's exactly what the union will do.... finally.

      I only hope they are wise enough to identify the absolute minimum requirements they have over and above what the league has presented to them and to propose only those minor amendments.

      If the union revisions contain some wish list items as well, then it's over... the league might bot even respond.

      Comment


      • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

        So obviously they're are saying no to the deal or why try and counter
        Flipping idiots

        Comment


        • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

          Originally posted by Pacer Fan View Post
          What is "room Teams" and what does the following line mean exactly? "Ability to stretch waived player’s salary frees up more money for teams to spend on FAs"

          Please help me on this.
          The "room team" exception is for all teams below the salary cap that go to the cap or over it by signing players. For example, Miami could have used this instead of the minimum salary to sign another player last season.

          The "strech provision" allows a team to waive a player and stretch the amount it counts against the cap, essentially another version of the amnesty provision. For example, the Pistons could waive Jason Maxiell (owed $10 million over 2 years), and his salary would count $2 million for the next 5 years instead of $5 million over the next 2.

          Comment


          • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

            Originally posted by Pacer Fan View Post
            What is "room Teams" and what does the following line mean exactly? "Ability to stretch waived player’s salary frees up more money for teams to spend on FAs"

            Please help me on this.
            I think room teams are referring to teams under the cap, but less so than the worth of the MLE, which they will now be allowed to use.

            So if you're 1 mil under the cap, you can apparently use the 2.5m exception.

            I think.

            The latter is referring to this new rule where teams can (either every time or just once per year; I forget which) spread out the contract of a waived player. I believe it takes the length of the contract, doubles it, then adds an additional year.

            So take a player you waive with 2 years and ten million left on his deal. Two years doubles to four, plus one leaves you at five. Instead of that team having to pay five million per season for two seasons, they now only have to pay two million per season over five seasons. Hence, 'frees up more money for teams to spend'.

            Comment


            • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

              Originally posted by beast23 View Post
              I agree; that's exactly what the union will do.... finally.

              I only hope they are wise enough to identify the absolute minimum requirements they have over and above what the league has presented to them and to propose only those minor amendments.

              If the union revisions contain some wish list items as well, then it's over... the league might bot even respond.
              I think this is what happens too.

              I think an issue for the players was the MLE for taxpayers. I thought I heard that teams within $5 million of the luxury tax would only have access to the mini-MLE. I'm not sure if that made it in the revised proposal or not.

              Comment


              • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                So I guess that's it. If you want NBA ball any time soon, cross your fingers, hope, pray, whatever else, that the modifications proposed by the players are minimal and likewise that no matter what the league is open minded enough to at least consider it, because without those two things, we're sunk.

                Comment


                • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                  Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
                  Does anyone know what the term "room teams" means? Is this an additional exception for teams under the cap?
                  [*]More mid-levels than 2005 CBA: $5M for non-taxpayers, $3M for taxpayers, $2.5M for room teams
                  Teams that are under cap.

                  If you are under cap, all your unused exceptions are "added" to your salaries. Mid level, bi-annual, trade, etc.
                  So, a team may be slightly under cap and still have no room sign anyone (without using exceptions).

                  In our case, for example, we are at 37 mil for next season. Lets say the cap stays the same at 58 mil.
                  Lets say we sign sign David West for 10 mil. Foster for 3 mil. Dunleavy for 3 mil.
                  We are at 53 mil now.
                  We have a 5 mil unused mid level. It's "added" to the cap, and we are at 58 mil.
                  Done. No more room for free agents. How do we sign McBob? Do we waste the exception? Maybe say good bye to McBob and use that exception on Kirilenko or Dalembert smth?
                  But under the new rules, we would now have the new 2.5 mil exception that we can use in this case. So, we spend 2.5 mil on McBob. And still have our mid level.

                  Overall, these are important anti-super-team rules.
                  Without these rules, for example, Knicks could give away all their role players for free, collect a ton of exceptions, have enough cap room for CP3, and then use all the exceptions on role players. They could get to 90 mil in one summer.

                  So, these rules are necessary. But the 2.5 mil "room" exception is pretty cool. It makes rebuilding a little quicker for teams like us. But it still prevents super teams going from under cap to luxury tax in one year.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                    I have one more question regarding the "stretch provision". If a team waives said player, does the team actually pay the full contract or less of a new contract with another team like a buy out? Or, Just don't pay anything and it just goes against the cap? Or what else may it be?

                    Thanks guys for helping me understand this.
                    Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

                    Comment


                    • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                      Question guys confused a bit so are the only voting on the deal that they tweak and not the revised one

                      Comment


                      • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                        Originally posted by granger4mvp View Post
                        Question guys confused a bit so are the only voting on the deal that they tweak and not the revised one
                        If they were smart, they would see if the proposal as is could be voted in. If not, they would make whatever minor tweaks are necessary in order to result in a yea vote.

                        Then they would present the tweaked proposal to the league with the statement that it had been passed, knowing and already agreeing among their membership that the unaltered proposal would have to be their fallback plan if the league did not accept their changes.

                        Unfortunately, I don't think the union is that savvy. And, quite frankly, I am positive that they could never do anything like that on the QT to attempt to get a revised plan approved while having backup approval in their pockets for the unrevised plan.

                        To answer your question, who the hell knows what this union is going to do? Certainly not their own members.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                          Thanks man just hope I guess

                          Comment


                          • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                            Originally posted by granger4mvp View Post
                            Question guys confused a bit so are the only voting on the deal that they tweak and not the revised one
                            On Saturday night, Billy Hunter notified Sam Amick that he will submit the NBA's revised proposal -- with amendments presumably recommended by the union's executive committee -- for a vote by the 30 player representatives on Monday.
                            "We will vote on the NBA's proposal. The proposal will be presented with some proposed amendments," Hunter told Amick via text message.
                            If approved by vote, the union would essentially be sending back a counter-offer that, if accepted by the NBA, would lead to a final agreement between the two sides. A full vote of the NBPA membership for ratification would follow.
                            Amick also reports that there were indications Saturday night that the union is leaning toward disclaiming interest, effectively removing itself as the representative of the players. It is not clear how this potential intent would coexist with the pending vote.
                            It could be that Hunter intends to communicate to the league that without adoption of the union's amendments, the league's latest proposal could not be agreed to. In that event, the union would need to step aside and make way for the players to file suit against the owners for antitrust violations.
                            David Stern maintains that the owners have no more room to negotiate on their proposal. But it is not known whether the league would in fact give consideration to the players' requested amendments in order to finalize a new collective bargaining agreement.


                            Read more: http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap...#ixzz1dby7elmX
                            Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                              Pretty smart PR move by the union, putting the pressure back on the league.

                              Potentially devastating move in every other way, however.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                                Originally posted by Shade View Post
                                Pretty smart PR move by the union, putting the pressure back on the league.

                                Potentially devastating move in every other way, however.
                                I agree.

                                The only danger is how many players will actually show up Monday. The union should have sent out something to every voting member telling them to come to New York Monday IF AT ALL POSSIBLE. And the NBPA executive committee should have been working all weekend on the counter-proposal. That way they can ensure that, when they send there "amendments" to the league, that they can guarantee passing of that proposal. Put the pressure on the league.

                                For all I know, they may have done that. But I doubt it. I think someone would have heard about it right now.

                                I could definitely see only 50 to 60 players showing up Monday. If I were a union member, with this much uncertainty, I'd make d*mn sure I was there Monday to see the proposal myself.
                                Last edited by shags; 11-13-2011, 02:10 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X