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

Indiana’s Pritchard Explains Offseason Moves

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

  • #16
    Re: Indiana’s Pritchard Explains Offseason Moves

    Originally posted by TOP View Post
    This is our GM? Now I'm worried.

    I liked our off-season moves other than the possibility of Stephenson playing SG because that's a disaster waiting to happen in my opinion.

    Did Pritchard even watch the playoffs though? Miami beat us 4-2 and Boston 4-3. We had been up 2-1 on Miami but Boston had been up 3-2. I knew our record against the Heat during the regular season was 1-3 so at best, we matched the Celtics 3 wins in the playoffs against Miami. Then I looked at Boston and Miami during the regular season and Celtics beat them 3-1. I was willing to overlook that he "thought" the Pacers won more games against them, even though anybody who watched the playoffs knows they didn't. Did he not watch them?

    Then he talks about Mahinimi and says he's 27 years old. Did the Pacers find out he was lying about his age and ESPN missed it? ESPN lists him as 25 years old.

    Maybe I'm harping on small things but I actually stopped reading the article because he was wrong twice 1/4 of the way through what was quoted. If he's making these inaccurate comments about his own team, I question if he even watches NBA games. I knew he was wrong about those things off the top of my head, so why was he wrong? As far as I'm concerned, he should know every single detail about the Pacers over the past year and it's like he doesn't know the simplest of facts about this team.

    I had started trusting the front office after the moves they made following drafting Plumlee and trading Collison but now I'm starting to wonder again.
    Seriously? These simple trivia is pointless to him. I care more if he knows who to get, who fits well, how we played certain teams, salaries, signings etc. I don't care if he knows who had the most wins against the Heat or exactly how old a player is.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Indiana’s Pritchard Explains Offseason Moves

      The thing that I was most excited about coming into the offseason was to see how our starting 5 progressed as a whole during offseason workouts... still is. Can't say I'm not curious to see how the bench plays out though

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Indiana’s Pritchard Explains Offseason Moves

        I wish he would have explained the thought process behind sending Collison to Dallas.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Indiana’s Pritchard Explains Offseason Moves

          Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
          I wish he would have explained the thought process behind sending Collison to Dallas.
          Seems pretty clear to me.

          Current payroll: $65.2m
          Luxury tax: $70.3m

          Current payroll + DC ($2.3m) + Dahntay ($2.9m) = $70.4m

          It was a salary dump for financial reasons, plain and simple. Could we have gotten a better deal while still not getting any salary back? Apparently not.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Indiana’s Pritchard Explains Offseason Moves

            Originally posted by TOP View Post
            This is our GM? Now I'm worried.

            Then he talks about Mahinimi and says he's 27 years old. Did the Pacers find out he was lying about his age and ESPN missed it? ESPN lists him as 25 years old.

            Maybe I'm harping on small things but I actually stopped reading the article because he was wrong twice 1/4 of the way through what was quoted. If he's making these inaccurate comments about his own team, I question if he even watches NBA games. I knew he was wrong about those things off the top of my head, so why was he wrong? As far as I'm concerned, he should know every single detail about the Pacers over the past year and it's like he doesn't know the simplest of facts about this team.

            I had started trusting the front office after the moves they made following drafting Plumlee and trading Collison but now I'm starting to wonder again.
            If you listen to the interview you'll hear Kevin say "26" not "27" for Ian's age. The writer transcribed it wrong. I bet Kevin knows what a stickler you are for details. If he said 25 then you would have complained that he didn't know Ian was almost 26. And saying 25 and 9 months would sound stupid. So instead he rounded up and said 26, trying to be as accurate as possible without boring the less anal fans with triviality. That's probably what happened.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Indiana’s Pritchard Explains Offseason Moves

              Originally posted by wintermute View Post
              Seems pretty clear to me.

              Current payroll: $65.2m
              Luxury tax: $70.3m

              Current payroll + DC ($2.3m) + Dahntay ($2.9m) = $70.4m

              It was a salary dump for financial reasons, plain and simple. Could we have gotten a better deal while still not getting any salary back? Apparently not.
              Sorry, it doesn't make a ton of sense to me. You don't just dump a valuable asset for salary alone. I would have liked to have seen him address it.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Indiana’s Pritchard Explains Offseason Moves

                Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
                Sorry, it doesn't make a ton of sense to me. You don't just dump a valuable asset for salary alone. I would have liked to have seen him address it.
                He sees Augustin as an upgrade and Collison doesn't necessarily have much value around the league. No one wants to pay Dahntay $3 mil, so we had to give DC to Dallas to take him. Dallas wouldn't have done the sign and trade for just Dahntay.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Indiana’s Pritchard Explains Offseason Moves

                  Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
                  Sorry, it doesn't make a ton of sense to me. You don't just dump a valuable asset for salary alone. I would have liked to have seen him address it.
                  When he was interviewed during the Blazer SL game the other night. He said there are times when you have to do what is best for the player. He said it was mainly because DC2 did everything asked of him when he was here and he wanted to start. He said he realized the value wasn't what it could of been but they wanted to help DC get to start. I don't agree with this logic at all don't sell low I'm sure money was the main reason but he doesn't really want to call out ownership.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Indiana’s Pritchard Explains Offseason Moves

                    Originally posted by iogyhufi View Post
                    I agree. Sparhawk, you say you like the moves, but you aren't confident in them because Pritchard is explaining them? Doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.
                    If you've read some of my other posts, you'd understand.

                    -Hate the Plumlee pick. As I'm sure there were a lot of fans that felt the same.
                    -Gave DC away for nothing. Just a dumb move. Small market teams shouldn't be giving away assets. DC is a fringe starter, excellent backup. You can't tell me that's not worth something.
                    -Hill is way overpaid. Should have let the market dictate his salary just like Hibbs. I just don't see how a small combo guard would have gotten $8M from another team.
                    -Pacers blew through the offseason in like 4 days. If they'd had asked Hibbs/Hill to hold off signing till after the amnesty period, I can only imagine that the Pacers could have Scola or Brand, which would have been a huuuuuuuuge upgrade.
                    -While I'm glad the Pacers got Augustin, this is a latteral move IMO. What makes it a bad move is that he costs more than DC and we don't get his bird rights.

                    -I like the Ian signing. I'm not complaining at $4M cause that doesn't seem much for a backup.
                    -Like the Green signing.

                    Sure the bench is better. The overall long term costs could really hurt the Pacers though by over paying for Hill and the cost of Hibbert (though I think it was the right move to match, it's still a lot of money). All we heard from management is how they'll finally have money this offseason to go after free agents. In the end, they used most of it to just resign their own guys. So much for that.

                    So of course Pritchard has to spin it and sell it to the fans, cause many are upset. Other teams didn't have the kind of money the Pacers have and yet they were still able to get better. That's why I'm not very confident at the moment.

                    However, though I've been upset by the moves, I'm ready for the season to start and to root for these guys.
                    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


                    • #25
                      Re: Indiana’s Pritchard Explains Offseason Moves

                      Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                      Seems pretty clear to me.

                      Current payroll: $65.2m
                      Luxury tax: $70.3m

                      Current payroll + DC ($2.3m) + Dahntay ($2.9m) = $70.4m

                      It was a salary dump for financial reasons, plain and simple. Could we have gotten a better deal while still not getting any salary back? Apparently not.
                      I would at least like to know why they didn't try to get a pick for DC or if they did. He's a fringe starter, but a very excellent backup. You don't just give that away.
                      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


                      • #26
                        Re: Indiana’s Pritchard Explains Offseason Moves

                        Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
                        If you've read some of my other posts, you'd understand.

                        -Hate the Plumlee pick. As I'm sure there were a lot of fans that felt the same.
                        -Gave DC away for nothing. Just a dumb move. Small market teams shouldn't be giving away assets. DC is a fringe starter, excellent backup. You can't tell me that's not worth something.
                        -Hill is way overpaid. Should have let the market dictate his salary just like Hibbs. I just don't see how a small combo guard would have gotten $8M from another team.
                        -Pacers blew through the offseason in like 4 days. If they'd had asked Hibbs/Hill to hold off signing till after the amnesty period, I can only imagine that the Pacers could have Scola or Brand, which would have been a huuuuuuuuge upgrade.
                        -While I'm glad the Pacers got Augustin, this is a latteral move IMO. What makes it a bad move is that he costs more than DC and we don't get his bird rights.

                        -I like the Ian signing. I'm not complaining at $4M cause that doesn't seem much for a backup.
                        -Like the Green signing.

                        Sure the bench is better. The overall long term costs could really hurt the Pacers though by over paying for Hill and the cost of Hibbert (though I think it was the right move to match, it's still a lot of money). All we heard from management is how they'll finally have money this offseason to go after free agents. In the end, they used most of it to just resign their own guys. So much for that.

                        So of course Pritchard has to spin it and sell it to the fans, cause many are upset. Other teams didn't have the kind of money the Pacers have and yet they were still able to get better. That's why I'm not very confident at the moment.

                        However, though I've been upset by the moves, I'm ready for the season to start and to root for these guys.
                        Fair enough. I agree with most of your sentiments but I would like to hope Pritchard and Walsh have an idea of what they're doing.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Indiana’s Pritchard Explains Offseason Moves

                          Originally posted by iogyhufi View Post
                          Fair enough. I agree with most of your sentiments but I would like to hope Pritchard and Walsh have an idea of what they're doing.
                          Yeah, I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt. I don't like some of the moves, but I do admit that the team is better. Looking forward to the season to start and see what these guys can do.
                          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


                          • #28
                            Re: Indiana’s Pritchard Explains Offseason Moves

                            Isn't it a tad ironic that we have Gerald Green now who was picked #18, right behind Danny and who some here wanted instead of Granger? Aren't we all glad we had DG all this time?

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Indiana’s Pritchard Explains Offseason Moves

                              Originally posted by MyFavMartin View Post
                              Isn't it a tad ironic that we have Gerald Green now who was picked #18, right behind Danny and who some here wanted instead of Granger? Aren't we all glad we had DG all this time?
                              Won't Green be coming off the bench? If you think DG is the starter of the two, then yes, I am glad we had DG at 17 instead of drafting a bench guy at 17.
                              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


                              • #30
                                Re: Indiana’s Pritchard Explains Offseason Moves

                                Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
                                I would at least like to know why they didn't try to get a pick for DC or if they did. He's a fringe starter, but a very excellent backup. You don't just give that away.
                                It was the price of dumping D-Jones contract. These kind of moves happen all the time for all the teams in the league.

                                I could care less that we didn't pick up a second round pick in the Collison deal. We turned around and signed a better player to fill the same position, we also added a legitimate backup center (previously we had no size when Hibbert was off the floor) and signed a better/younger player to replace D-Jones. In order to make all these signings we had to dump some salary, which puts you at the mercy of those who are willing to absorb salary. Teams do not line up around the block to pick up your dead weight contracts.

                                It was a big net gain, the specifics of the Collison deal are irrelevant. Teams willing to offer more for him probably weren't willing to take on Jones contract. The financials matter in these situations whether you like it or not.
                                "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                                - ilive4sports

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X