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

Can we cut J.O some slack after watching Duncan struggle

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

  • #16
    Re: Can we cut J.O some slack after watching Duncan struggle

    define "great".

    Regards,

    Mourning
    2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Can we cut J.O some slack after watching Duncan struggle

      Originally posted by Hicks
      So if JO's not one of the greats, what then?
      ... a continuing process of maturity.

      -------

      One of Dirty Harry's famous lines was "A man's got to know his limitations."

      I firmly believe that. And, perhaps we should re-word it to "A coach has got to know his players' limitations."

      One of the problems that I've had with JO's play has been his shot selection. I posted during the playoffs about his complete lack of success in shooting the fadeaway-turnaround jumper outside 6-8 feet. When he shot it from about 12 feet or more, his accuracy was atrocious.

      BUT, I don't know whether it was by JO's decision that the shot was taken, or by offensive design. All I know is that when JO gets face up jumpers up to 18 feet, he shoots very accurately.

      However, I will admit that his shot may have been affected by his shoulder injury. But when a player shoots right at 25% on his turnaround and over 60% facing the basket (on the 3 games we actually kept track of), then I think both the player and the coach should take notice.

      So, since Rick could be to blame, JO gets a reprieve from me on that one. [But I sure hope his shot mix is changed next year accordingly.]

      Jermaine doesn't get a reprieve from me regarding rebounding. No one can throw his RB total in my face for any one particular game, even if Jermaine happened to have hauled in 20, when JO also refuses to block out, resulting in extra rebounds and easy put backs for our opponents.

      It's obvious that Jermaine has put in some very hard work to improve his FT percentage. But that one resulted in a benefit to himself... more points. Now I'd like to see him do something for the team... learn to block out.

      If these two things (shot selection and blocking out) about Jermaine's game were changed, I'd be one hell of a happy camper. Matter of fact, I'd even drink the Kool-aid.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Can we cut J.O some slack after watching Duncan struggle

        Originally posted by Mourning
        define "great".

        Regards,

        Mourning
        That's like saying, define "beauty." It means different things to different people. It's difficult to articulate, but you know it when you see it.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Can we cut J.O some slack after watching Duncan struggle

          Originally posted by Harmonica
          I honestly don't know. I imagine that some doubt about him has creeped into DW & LB's minds and they'll do what's needed if it comes to that.
          Jermaine should not be traded simply because he's not "one of the greats". He might be overpaid, but then so are others like him.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Can we cut J.O some slack after watching Duncan struggle

            Yeah I guess then Kevin Garnet is not great either

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Can we cut J.O some slack after watching Duncan struggle

              Originally posted by beast23
              It's obvious that Jermaine has put in some very hard work to improve his FT percentage. But that one resulted in a benefit to himself... more points. Now I'd like to see him do something for the team... learn to block out.
              I'm not sure if I completely by into, for today's game, but I still find this very interesting. My dad has been reading a testimonial by Wooden and, obviously, he ties his religion into basketball so it's also explains his coaching philosophies. Anyways, in it he tells how that early in his coaching career he used to teach boxing out, but always seemed to be outrebounded, he then says that he started teaching his players not to box out but swarm the ball. He then states that they started outrebounding their opponents night-in and night-out.

              I just thought was very interesting, coming from a coach who says his first practice every year was devoted on teaching his players how to put on their socks.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Can we cut J.O some slack after watching Duncan struggle

                Originally posted by Harmonica
                That's like saying, define "beauty." It means different things to different people. It's difficult to articulate, but you know it when you see it.
                Great, like in the history of the NBA, or of the current league?

                If you're saying that he isn't even considered a great player in today's league, then you're crazier than I thought.

                This is a player that finished 3rd in mvp voting just over a year ago. There's very, very few players that are above him. He's definately in the top 20 best players, and I consider all them great players by today's standards.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Can we cut J.O some slack after watching Duncan struggle

                  Originally posted by Since86
                  Great, like in the history of the NBA, or of the current league?

                  If you're saying that he isn't even considered a great player in today's league, then you're crazier than I thought.

                  This is a player that finished 3rd in mvp voting just over a year ago. There's very, very few players that are above him. He's definately in the top 20 best players, and I consider all them great players by today's standards.
                  Reading his posts the past few weeks I just belive he likes to say crazy stuff just to start arguments with people.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Can we cut J.O some slack after watching Duncan struggle

                    Originally posted by Harmonica
                    That's like saying, define "beauty." It means different things to different people. It's difficult to articulate, but you know it when you see it.
                    Ah, ok, but then it comes down to perception, right? I mean "knowing it when your seeying it" can be quite subjective/opiniated.

                    Regards,

                    Mourning
                    2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                    2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                    2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Can we cut J.O some slack after watching Duncan struggle

                      Originally posted by Mourning
                      Ah, ok, but then it comes down to perception, right? I mean "knowing it when your seeying it" can be quite subjective/opiniated.

                      Regards,

                      Mourning
                      Absolutely. I mean, I think there are players we can all agree are great, and others where it's open for debate.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Can we cut J.O some slack after watching Duncan struggle

                        I think the argument that JO was banged up against the Pissed-On's both of the last two years is true, but when is he NOT going to be banged up after a preseason, 82 games in the regular season, and either a first-round, or first- and second-round series already played?

                        I have serious doubts that this team can survive long enough to make a title run....It seems we have a team made of glass sometimes.

                        Also, you don't cut slack to someone with a max contract....You just don't do it.



                        RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Can we cut J.O some slack after watching Duncan struggle

                          Ehmm.... excuse me, we aren't talking about beying just a tiny bit injured here, we are talking about someone who came back early from a pretty serious injury. I don't think we should be pissing on that, sorry, just my opinion, max. contract or not. Actually I think because he has a max. contract we as a team might be MORE cautious ... we don't want to get something structurally "broke" in his body, do we?

                          Regards,

                          Mourning
                          2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                          2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                          2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Can we cut J.O some slack after watching Duncan struggle

                            if u do not have 5 players on the court that are all offensive threats, the pistons will expose u....they are all outstanding defenders....they have no individual weakness on defense....which really makes it quite simple then.....if u have an offensive weakness, they will be able to offer help at all times by shading away from that offensive weakness...

                            the spurs have offensive weaknesses in the front court....therefore its easy for them to have one of the other guys to help on tim...or jo...or whoever...

                            only when u have 5 guys that can score, remember game 4 of the ECFs, will they be in a bit of trouble....then they cant help....because if they do u can then make them pay....and thats what the pacers did in game 4 of the ECF and what every team that beats them does....

                            you have 5 guys who can score....and if u have enuff solid defenders to contain the 4 good offensive players they have....u will win....

                            and yes...i would tell u that if the pacers had brad miller they would present more problems for the pistons than u could ever imagine....and if david harrison becomes that offensive threat that he can be, they will again have huge problems....they would rarely beat the pacers....

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Can we cut J.O some slack after watching Duncan struggle

                              My problems with JO do not rest on the series with the Pistons. My problem with JO lies with the fact he is a max $ player and IMHO this season exposed him as having lots of work to do. He is not a player making the team better. In fact, many times the team was better without him.

                              He could get there but there is plenty of room for doubt. We need to quit talking about JO being close (or better) than Duncan. He's far from it.

                              Actually, Beast23's thoughts were similar to what I'd say in a lot of ways.

                              --

                              If the blackhole offense is not JO's idea and JO is performing how Rick wants him to then I'll be glad to give Carlisle a ride to the airport. But I have a hard time seeing Carlisle as that stupid... I think we have a player who is more focused on his own scoring and 'meism' over the good of the team. He may usually talk a good game but once he hits the court he plays a different way.

                              DK mentioned wanting to see JO pass out of the doubleteams better but then added the Pacers didn't have anyone hitting their shots anyway so the point becomes moot... I have to disagree. IMHO it would balance the Pacers offensive attack better AND unbalance the opposing defense. Therefore, we should get better looks at outside shots in the flow of the game.

                              And it keeps the defense honest. That is not something they (defenses) needed to worry about much last season. Just play physical with JO and he'd quickly forget the team game and revert to a player whose idea of a good game is how many he scores and his idea of defense is collecting blocked shots. All the while he'd argue with refs and forget about the game at hand. No blocking out. Whining. Forced shots. ...etc...

                              Heretical statement ahead:
                              IOW, JO can be more poser than player.

                              -Bball
                              Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                              ------

                              "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                              -John Wooden

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Can we cut J.O some slack after watching Duncan struggle

                                Originally posted by Bball
                                My problems with JO do not rest on the series with the Pistons. My problem with JO lies with the fact he is a max $ player and IMHO this season exposed him as having lots of work to do. He is not a player making the team better. In fact, many times the team was better without him.

                                He could get there but there is plenty of room for doubt. We need to quit talking about JO being close (or better) than Duncan. He's far from it.

                                Actually, Beast23's thoughts were similar to what I'd say in a lot of ways.

                                --

                                If the blackhole offense is not JO's idea and JO is performing how Rick wants him to then I'll be glad to give Carlisle a ride to the airport. But I have a hard time seeing Carlisle as that stupid... I think we have a player who is more focused on his own scoring and 'meism' over the good of the team. He may usually talk a good game but once he hits the court he plays a different way.

                                DK mentioned wanting to see JO pass out of the doubleteams better but then added the Pacers didn't have anyone hitting their shots anyway so the point becomes moot... I have to disagree. IMHO it would balance the Pacers offensive attack better AND unbalance the opposing defense. Therefore, we should get better looks at outside shots in the flow of the game.

                                And it keeps the defense honest. That is not something they (defenses) needed to worry about much last season. Just play physical with JO and he'd quickly forget the team game and revert to a player whose idea of a good game is how many he scores and his idea of defense is collecting blocked shots. All the while he'd argue with refs and forget about the game at hand. No blocking out. Whining. Forced shots. ...etc...

                                Heretical statement ahead:
                                IOW, JO can be more poser than player.

                                -Bball
                                i dunno....thru the course of last season and the playoffs when JO was playing we seemed to get a LOT of good looks...i dont think the quality of shots was the problem...it was the inability to hit those shots that was the real problem.....

                                teams will not change their strategy of doubling the post player because other players are getting good looks....some teams wont even change that strategy when u do hit some of those open looks-they prefer to pick their poison and see jo as a more serious threat than open looks...

                                the key is the same in either case....u must be able to make a team pay....and u really only do that if u consistently hit open shots....till we do that jo as well as the offense will never be as productive as it could be....

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X