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:
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

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

What changes are you expecting?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • What changes are you expecting?

    Sorry if there is already a thread on this. I wasn't seeing one.

    As it stands...

    G Darren Collison
    G Paul George, Lance Stephenson
    F Danny Granger, Dahntay Jones
    F David West, Tyler Hansbrough, Jeff Pendergraph
    #26th Pick

    Free Agents
    Roy Hibbert
    George Hill
    Leandro Barbosa
    Lou Amundson
    A.J. Price
    Kyrylo Fesenko
    "I have never taken the high road, but I tell other people to ’cause then there’s more room for me on the low road."

  • #2
    Re: What changes are you expecting?

    The obvious would be re-signing Roy Hibbert and George Hill. The price tags on both of these guys is starting to worry me. We really have no choice but to re-sign Hibbert so hopefully he doesn't spurn us. There might be a team crazy enough to throw max money at him. I think we'd match but I'm not sure you want to be giving him max money. Then George Hill, what is his worth? 7 mil? If we end up paying closer to 10, I will be disappointed. With people looking to trade picks, would signing and trading him be an option if he does get something like 10 mil a year? I'd feel comfortable getting another point guard to go with Collison if that's his going rate and we could salvage some cheaper pieces in return. And I don't think Dahntay Jones will opt out. I think I would prefer it if he did but I don't see it happening.

    So what are some realistic moves you think are possible? Do you think the front office has it in them to make a big time deal? I know they're pretty loyal to the players but you have to cover every angle. If a crazy deal comes along, I'm willing to move anyone even if it's Granger or signing and trading Hibbert. There's a 99% chance nothing like that will happen but I'd like to see at least one big movie. Otherwise we'll just be returning the same roster with bigger paychecks and less depth. I'm fine with that because I think this team can get better but I could see us perma-stuck in the 2nd round/ecf for the foreseeable future.

    I'm one of the biggest Granger fans and oppose the idea of trading him but with teams like the Warriors and Raptors shopping the 7th/8th pick for a wing player, what if they put together a package for Granger built around the draft pick and absorbing some of Granger's salary? We already have cap room but that would give us more and we could go out and sign Gordon, Mayo or Beasley in his place. Sparing cap room to sign a younger player and getting a lotto pick? That wouldn't be too bad.

    Anyways... just curious what everyone thinks we'll do.
    "I have never taken the high road, but I tell other people to ’cause then there’s more room for me on the low road."


    • #3
      Re: What changes are you expecting?

      I really only expect 2 things...

      DC gets traded...

      Roy gets signed...
      Nothing in life worth having comes easy.


      • #4
        Re: What changes are you expecting?

        I am not expecting we acquire Beasley - that would shock and disappoint me


        • #5
          Re: What changes are you expecting?

          Either DC or GHill will move on. I think it depends on how much George demands in the market. If they resign George I expect them to try to move DC. I think Roy is the only other free agent that will return unless Lou is signed for a small contract.

          My big fear is that Roy gets some max offer and the Pacers decline to match... ala Brad Miller style.


          • #6
            Re: What changes are you expecting?

            i expect the Pacers to resign Roy and Hill. Total between $18M and $20M.

            I expect Lou and Leandro to play elsewhere next year. Lou will be replaced by another vet that does the same kind of things.

            The basic 8 man playoff rotation will be the same + Lance and Lou's replacement.

            The Pacers will give the kids a chance to grow up another year and DWest's knee to heal another year.


            • #7
              Re: What changes are you expecting?

              I expect both DC and Hill to b here next year.


              • #8
                Re: What changes are you expecting?

                I wonder if Lou will be back, I am guessing no, but he seemed like a fan favorite.

                I think that we will either sign a backup center, or try to offer Frensko a contract and see what he can actually do when he is healthy.

                I would not mind trying to grab Kyle O'Quinn, I definitely like this guy, especially if we can get him in the 2nd.

                Also if Bird is not back I could see DG getting traded....
                Why so SERIOUS


                • #9
                  Re: What changes are you expecting?

                  I don't think is a forgone conclusion Lou will be gone, he shouldn't be expensive to keep, but I do think keeping him will be considered more of a back-up option.


                  • #10
                    Re: What changes are you expecting?

                    DC gets traded with the 26 to move up probably for Tyler Zeller/Kendall Marshall
                    Roy resigned
                    Hill resigned
                    Lou and Barbosa gone

                    What I would like to happen:
                    DC traded straight up for a pick - late teens/early 20's
                    Hans traded for a pick - mid-late 20s
                    Roy resigned
                    Hill resigned (If under $7m/yr)
                    Pacers sign Dragic (only cause Nash and DWill are not coming here)
                    Pacers select Royce White, Doron Lamb and one of Arnette Moultrie/Fab Melo/Quincy Miller
                    Sign Kenyon Martin
                    First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.


                    • #11
                      Re: What changes are you expecting?

                      What I want to happen use the cap space we have to sign either nash or williams and hopefully hibbert gives us some sort of hometown discount use the draft pick you have to get some backup center since this draft is loaded with bigs. I honestly fear over the next few years being the atlanta hawks just good enough to make a run in the playoffs but not good enough to really compete for a championship. I really could care less if we pull of some sort of deal to get us into the lottery unless it's some sort of no-brainer type trade that allows us to get there.


                      • #12
                        Re: What changes are you expecting?

                        I expect us to match any offer for Roy unless a team goes max, even then I wouldn't be surprised if we matched it.

                        I don't think Hill and DC will be our pg tandem, whether that means us signing a pg and moving Hill to the backup sg or one of them goes elsewhere. I don't think Barbosa will be retained, if Lance has a good summer he could take Barbosa's role. Could also see us going after another player like Barbosa if they are available, a guy like Jamal Crawford if he doesn't stay in Portland or something.

                        I think and hope we will draft Royce White if we keep our pick. If we can manage to move into the lottery I hope we can get our hands on Perry Jones III, although I think it's unlikely we make that kind of move. If we do make any moves in the draft I'm guessing it will be for another veteran guy like last year's George Hill trade.


                        • #13
                          Re: What changes are you expecting?

                          I think we'll want to keep the starters together, so that means re-signing Hibbert and probably Hill, and not trading Granger.

                          I hope we get another David West-type FA, preferably a starting PG, which would make Hill the 6th man.

                          I think we'll shop Collison and Hansbrough and possibly the pick too in a package that either looks to make our bench better, or cheaper. You hope for both better and cheaper of course, but it doesn't usually work out that way. The "cheaper" part is important because 1) Collison and Hans are both in the last years of their rookie deals; and 2) We're about to lock in some long term contracts, starting with Hibbert, with hopefully a starting PG from FA, and Hill. So we'll need to save money on the bench, and that means Collison and Hans are likely casualties next year anyway if we don't move them.

                          I don't think Barbosa will be back, simply because he'll get better offers than what we should be willing to pay. Amundson is a possibility to return, I'm thinking he's a candidate for our $2.5m room exception. But again if he gets offered more, then he's out too. Price might return if Collison does get moved.


                          • #14
                            Re: What changes are you expecting?

                            Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                            . . . I don't think Barbosa will be back, simply because he'll get better offers than what we should be willing to pay. Amundson is a possibility to return, I'm thinking he's a candidate for our $2.5m room exception. But again if he gets offered more, then he's out too. Price might return if Collison does get moved.
                            Will the Pacers have a 'room' exception? Shouldn't they get the 'non-taxpayer' MLE? since the Pacers will not be going over the luxury tax level, much less the apron.


                            • #15
                              Re: What changes are you expecting?

                              Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
                              Will the Pacers have a 'room' exception? Shouldn't they get the 'non-taxpayer' MLE? since the Pacers will not be going over the luxury tax level, much less the apron.
                              Well, we're expecting to have cap space, so normally that means no MLE. Or to be more technically exact, we'll waive our non-taxpayer MLE in order to make full use of cap space. Exceptions take up cap space until waived, except for the room exception.

                              edit: check out Larry Coon's Q26