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

2012 NBA draft prospects thread

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

  • Re: 2012 NBA draft prospects thread

    Originally posted by cdash View Post
    I have zero interest in moving up. There will be some talented players available when we draft. Stay there and draft smart.
    If Terrence Ross is could be had if the Pacers moved up then I am all in. The guy is exactly what the Pacers need from a sg.

    Comment


    • Re: 2012 NBA draft prospects thread

      Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
      If the Pacers decide to move up they should use Tyler not Collison as trade bait. I am not sure either though gets you into the mid to late lottery though.
      I don't think Tyler has enough trade value to move us up significantly. My guess is that teams view him as nothing more than a dime-a-dozen backup; the kind of player you can pick up cheaply in free agency. I think Collison's far more valued, based on his play in the past and how excellent he was in the playoffs. I think there are teams out there who still view him as s starting point guard.

      Collison & #26 to Portland for #11 looks reasonable to me. Portland needs a good, young point guard who can help them stay competitive and rebuild on the fly. Collison could fill that role perfectly.

      Comment


      • Re: 2012 NBA draft prospects thread

        Cavs have 4 picks.

        I wonder if they'd sell one of their early 2nd round picks. Or maybe Tyler for their late 1st.

        I just want the Pacers to get another pick. Loads of talent this year.
        First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

        Comment


        • Re: 2012 NBA draft prospects thread

          Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
          I don't think Tyler has enough trade value to move us up significantly. My guess is that teams view him as nothing more than a dime-a-dozen backup; the kind of player you can pick up cheaply in free agency. I think Collison's far more valued, based on his play in the past and how excellent he was in the playoffs. I think there are teams out there who still view him as s starting point guard.

          Collison & #26 to Portland for #11 looks reasonable to me. Portland needs a good, young point guard who can help them stay competitive and rebuild on the fly. Collison could fill that role perfectly.
          I don't think DC's trade value is as high as you believe it is, Portland my be needy of a PG, but I think they would be more interested in grabbing Lillard than getting Collision and the 26th Pick, I think the most Collison could move us up would be about 5 picks possibly.

          But yeah I think he has more trade value than Tyler.
          Why so SERIOUS

          Comment


          • Re: 2012 NBA draft prospects thread

            Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
            If Terrence Ross is could be had if the Pacers moved up then I am all in. The guy is exactly what the Pacers need from a sg.
            I like Ross, not sure how much we would have to move up or what the cost would be, the only problem with moving up for Ross is that our 2 guard position is not our biggest concern right now, and moving up to grab a 2 when I feel we have other needs and players should be there for us to grab, might be a little too costly for our team.

            But a bad future line up of Hill/Ross/George/X/Hibbert might be pretty exciting. I know most people probably still are not interested, but do you think there would be any chance of a Danny for Favors trade, thinking more about the Jazz being willing more than the Pacers?
            Why so SERIOUS

            Comment


            • Re: 2012 NBA draft prospects thread

              Originally posted by Really? View Post
              I like Ross, not sure how much we would have to move up or what the cost would be, the only problem with moving up for Ross is that our 2 guard position is not our biggest concern right now, and moving up to grab a 2 when I feel we have other needs and players should be there for us to grab, might be a little too costly for our team.

              But a bad future line up of Hill/Ross/George/X/Hibbert might be pretty exciting. I know most people probably still are not interested, but do you think there would be any chance of a Danny for Favors trade, thinking more about the Jazz being willing more than the Pacers?
              I think Milsap will be on the way out instead of Favors so no.. I doubt the Jazz do a deal for Granger.

              The good thing is that once West contract is up then the team can make a run at Milsap if they want.

              Comment


              • Re: 2012 NBA draft prospects thread

                Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                I think Milsap will be on the way out instead of Favors so no.. I doubt the Jazz do a deal for Granger.

                The good thing is that once West contract is up then the team can make a run at Milsap if they want.
                Yeah I think we missed our opportunity, I am pretty sure that is not the direction the Pacers wanted to go "trade Danny, get Favors" but I thought that could have turned out really good for us in the future, back when he was with the Nets. I believe he will be a allstar caliber PF pretty soon, also I doubt we will ever trade Danny, I jut do not see it happening.

                Also in the summer of 2013 it will be interesting to see what happens, I think we will have close to 40 million tied up in Danny, PG, Roy, and Hill.
                Why so SERIOUS

                Comment


                • Re: 2012 NBA draft prospects thread

                  Also there are some decent youtube videos that I saw that talk about various aspects of players games, many of whoe will be around when we are selecting. http://www.youtube.com/user/swishscout,

                  Oh and, I never really considered myself much of a Draymond Green fan, but he will probably be a really good player off the bench wherever he goes, he is a depth guy and I hope we do not take him because we need more of a potential guy that can eventually be a starter.
                  Why so SERIOUS

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2012 NBA draft prospects thread

                    Originally posted by cdash View Post
                    I have zero interest in moving up. There will be some talented players available when we draft. Stay there and draft smart.
                    Agreed.

                    Wouldn't mind getting an extra pick though. This is looking like a deep draft, not so much at the top but there certainly looks to be solid players still available in the late first/early second. I have a feeling we're going to need more cheap contributors in future years.

                    Btw, cdash, remember this conversation?

                    Originally posted by cdash View Post
                    All he can do is pass. He doesn't seem to be too interested in playing defense, he's not particularly quick, so he isn't beating people off the dribble, he doesn't shoot it very well...he's a passing savant. That's about it. I wouldn't take him in the top 25 picks.
                    Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                    Lucky we're picking 26th then
                    Originally posted by cdash View Post
                    26th, eh? You are much more optimistic than I am about this team!
                    It was tongue-in-cheek, but well what do you know

                    And it looks like Marshall is going to be out of our range anyway.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2012 NBA draft prospects thread

                      Would not mind drafting Tyshawn and trading DC for a early 2nd and taking a guy like Kevin Jones or Ezeli
                      Why so SERIOUS

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2012 NBA draft prospects thread

                        Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                        Agreed.

                        Wouldn't mind getting an extra pick though. This is looking like a deep draft, not so much at the top but there certainly looks to be solid players still available in the late first/early second. I have a feeling we're going to need more cheap contributors in future years.

                        Btw, cdash, remember this conversation?







                        It was tongue-in-cheek, but well what do you know

                        And it looks like Marshall is going to be out of our range anyway.
                        I'm still surprised that we are picking so low

                        By the way, all that stuff about Marshall was before I completely did a 180 on him later in the thread. Marshall is my favorite point guard for this team. He won't be available when we pick, but I wouldn't hesitate to pick him anywhere from the late lottery on.

                        Comment


                        • I would almost bet money on Brooklyn winning the lottery tonight. I just have that feeling that Davis will be a Net.


                          Sent from #PacerNation using Tapatalk
                          Senior at the University of Louisville.
                          Greenfield ---> The Ville

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2012 NBA draft prospects thread

                            Originally posted by cdash View Post
                            I'm still surprised that we are picking so low

                            By the way, all that stuff about Marshall was before I completely did a 180 on him later in the thread. Marshall is my favorite point guard for this team. He won't be available when we pick, but I wouldn't hesitate to pick him anywhere from the late lottery on.
                            Lillard is the playmaker we need gets his own shot. Also makes his teammates better and has a terrific work ethic. If Machado fixes his just driving left flaw I think he would be perfect. He has everything Marshall has in terms of passing and court awareness plus he defends and CAN CREATE HIS OWN SHOT and can shoot.

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2012 NBA draft prospects thread

                              Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                              Lillard is the playmaker we need gets his own shot. Also makes his teammates better and has a terrific work ethic. If Machado fixes his just driving left flaw I think he would be perfect. He has everything Marshall has in terms of passing and court awareness plus he defends and CAN CREATE HIS OWN SHOT and can shoot.
                              I'll defer to your opinion, but the knocks on Machado seem to be that he isn't a great athlete, doesn't have great size/wingspan, and is a poor defender (which could all be related of course). What's your take on that?

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2012 NBA draft prospects thread

                                Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                                Lillard is the playmaker we need gets his own shot. Also makes his teammates better and has a terrific work ethic. If Machado fixes his just driving left flaw I think he would be perfect. He has everything Marshall has in terms of passing and court awareness plus he defends and CAN CREATE HIS OWN SHOT and can shoot.
                                Yeah Lillard would be perfect, but he will most likely be a top 10 selection, don't think we will be making the trade for him seeing our current situation.

                                Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                                I'll defer to your opinion, but the knocks on Machado seem to be that he isn't a great athlete, doesn't have great size/wingspan, and is a poor defender (which could all be related of course). What's your take on that?
                                Sounds about right to me, I would not say poor defender but below average.
                                Why so SERIOUS

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X