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

We need to lock up Hansbrough this offseason

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

  • #76
    Re: We need to lock up Hansbrough this offseason

    Originally posted by BearBugs View Post
    Oh so your knowledge is better the longer you've been here? You don't even know how long i've been a fan.
    Why are you so defensive?


    Comment


    • #77
      Re: We need to lock up Hansbrough this offseason

      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
      Why are you so defensive?
      Because he got attacked in the very first reply of this thread.
      Originally posted by IrishPacer
      Empty vessels make the most noise.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: We need to lock up Hansbrough this offseason

        Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
        Because he got attacked in the very first reply of this thread.
        Probably because he worded his thread and poll, in a way, that is "nuts," and would make someone think he "needs his head examined."

        His follow-up replies didn't do much to dispel that notion.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: We need to lock up Hansbrough this offseason

          Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
          Because he got attacked in the very first reply of this thread.
          So he needed to keep it up for 3 pages?

          Anyway, the whole issue comes down to one of the poll options being "Yes, for whatever it takes"

          Seth and I have talked about this at length this season. The issue with Tyler around here from people who are bothered by his play has never really been Tyler's fault, it's always been the unreasonable expectations place on him by some. Whether it's Tyler needs at least 10 shots a game to find his rhythm and then he is a badass theory that was floated around either last year or the year before or any of the other things that people try and say to make him seem like he is some sort of irreplaceable starter. If you just view Tyler for what he is, a whirling dervish of destruction who can throw up 20 and 10 games occassionally in spurts, then yeah I'm all on board for that, but the fact is where the Pacers are sitting now (Needing to re-sign West, needing to re-sign Paul next summer, Lance's contract being up in the air) signing Tyler to a multiple year deal that jumps off at let's just say MLE money is a recipe for disaster. Especially when you might be able to lock up Pendergrap for 3 years at 7 million total or something like that.


          Comment


          • #80
            Re: We need to lock up Hansbrough this offseason

            Originally posted by able View Post
            as long as it isn't from the Pacers i'm ok with that, let him be someone else's problem contract
            I guess I'm not sure how that becomes a problem contract. Tyler does have something to add as a roleplayer, and he'll be making roleplayer money (granted, upper level roleplayer money) while still pretty early in his career. Barring a catastrophic injury or complete implosion of his game, which I think is no more likely for him than any other player in his situation, he'll be a positive piece in a trade rather than someone you would have to figure out how to get rid of.
            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


            • #81
              Re: We need to lock up Hansbrough this offseason

              Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
              Probably because he worded his thread and poll, in a way, that is "nuts," and would make someone think he "needs his head examined."

              His follow-up replies didn't do much to dispel that notion.
              A lot of people has posted several "nutty" things in this forum. Not a lot of people said that "they need their head examined".

              The only reason that BearHugs was attacked is because he is a newcomer. Come on, guys. This forum is better than that.
              Originally posted by IrishPacer
              Empty vessels make the most noise.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: We need to lock up Hansbrough this offseason

                Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                A lot of people has posted several "nutty" things in this forum. Not a lot of people said that "they need their head examined".

                The only reason that BearHugs was attacked is because he is a newcomer. Come on, guys. This forum is better than that.
                If those other "nutty" posters implied maxing out Tyler Hansbrough, I think a CAT scan is the least we can offer to help.

                Why do you always take it upon yourself to police this forum like it is yours?

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: We need to lock up Hansbrough this offseason

                  Originally posted by BillS View Post
                  I guess I'm not sure how that becomes a problem contract. Tyler does have something to add as a roleplayer, and he'll be making roleplayer money (granted, upper level roleplayer money) while still pretty early in his career. Barring a catastrophic injury or complete implosion of his game, which I think is no more likely for him than any other player in his situation, he'll be a positive piece in a trade rather than someone you would have to figure out how to get rid of.
                  The OP to my knowledge keeps bringing up the MLE as about where he would offer Tyler. That is a problem contract from Tyler's production. What does the MLE jump off at next year? 6.X million-ish? That's a lot of money for Tyler.

                  Someone said 2/6 for Tyler, I would be OK with that I think. Especially if you can put Lance on the bench and basically turn him and Tyler into a two man fast break team. Tyler is great in the open court. He has decent hands and is a good leaper with a running start. It is why he was so good at UNC.


                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: We need to lock up Hansbrough this offseason

                    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                    So he needed to keep it up for 3 pages?
                    You sign up in a forum. And in the first thread that you open the first reply is "you need to get your head examinated". I wouldn't blame you if you kept it up for 3 pages. At some point you have to let it go but a forum should be better than attacking someone just because he is a newcomer.
                    Originally posted by IrishPacer
                    Empty vessels make the most noise.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: We need to lock up Hansbrough this offseason

                      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                      The OP to my knowledge keeps bringing up the MLE as about where he would offer Tyler. That is a problem contract from Tyler's production. What does the MLE jump off at next year? 6.X million-ish? That's a lot of money for Tyler.
                      I was going with my figure for a good raise, which for me is no more than $5M. I think MLE is a bit much, but then again I think if he can figure out how to apply what he's been doing as a starter to coming off the bench I think he'd definitely draw MLE from someone - and, considering skill inflation, I still don't think they'd have a problem contract as such.
                      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


                      • #86
                        Re: We need to lock up Hansbrough this offseason

                        Originally posted by BillS View Post
                        I was going with my figure for a good raise, which for me is no more than $5M. I think MLE is a bit much, but then again I think if he can figure out how to apply what he's been doing as a starter to coming off the bench I think he'd definitely draw MLE from someone - and, considering skill inflation, I still don't think they'd have a problem contract as such.
                        Bill, I will be completely shocked if someone offers Tyler their MLE this offseason.

                        Tyler's skills are not exactly unique, you can find an over competitive, slightly destructive 6'9" dude who can run the court in every single draft. In this new NBA, guys like Tyler are going to see their value go down IMO, not up.


                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: We need to lock up Hansbrough this offseason

                          Bills so what you are saying is he should get Hill money ????

                          not in a hundred years

                          he is not worth more than 3 mio, but his QO is already insane

                          if he demands more than 3 we can not afford him, simple as that.
                          So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                          If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                          Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: We need to lock up Hansbrough this offseason

                            Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                            If those other "nutty" posters implied maxing out Tyler Hansbrough, I think a CAT scan is the least we can offer to help.

                            Why do you always take it upon yourself to police this forum like it is yours?
                            I'm not a mod. I don't police the forum. It isn't my job.

                            The only thing that I take upon myself is to present what has exactly happened. Some people were annoyed by BearBags as they felt that his tone was disrespectful. All I did was to remind people that he wasn't the one that started it.
                            Originally posted by IrishPacer
                            Empty vessels make the most noise.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: We need to lock up Hansbrough this offseason

                              Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                              Bill, I will be completely shocked if someone offers Tyler their MLE this offseason.

                              Tyler's skills are not exactly unique, you can find an over competitive, slightly destructive 6'9" dude who can run the court in every single draft. In this new NBA, guys like Tyler are going to see their value go down IMO, not up.

                              "you can find an over competitive, slightly destructive 6'9" dude who can run the court in every single draft."

                              I am not so sure about that. Tyler is unique. Is he unique enough to pay 6 mil to? Probably not especially if we keep West. If West leaves then yes I think 6 for Tyler and 3 for Pendergraph are the way to go.
                              {o,o}
                              |)__)
                              -"-"-

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: We need to lock up Hansbrough this offseason

                                Tyler is a good back up PF. I would like to see the Pacers keep him but I think he will leave for 2 reasons. First, someone will offer him $5-6 million per year. The Pacers should not match that. More importantly, I think someone will give him the chance to start. Tyler can be an adequate starting PF but unless you have a ton of talent around him, your team will be battling for the 8th playoff spot at best.

                                I REALLY like the idea of bringing back Jarrett Jack. He can back up Hill plus get some minutes at SG. He should be able to get 25+ minutes per game and give us some offense off the bench.

                                The Pacers top priority should be to resign West, then get Jack. As far as a back up PF, we will have draft picks plus there are some low cost free agents that would be okay for a year or two. Pendergraph, McRoberts or Amundson would be okay as back ups. If West is out for any extended period of time, we could be in trouble, that's a gamble we may have to make if we want to pursue Jack. And don't forget Murphy is available. We also could make a trade. We have draft picks plus if we do sign Jack, we could move OJ or Lance.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X