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

Danny Granger could lead this team

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

  • #16
    Re: Danny Granger could lead this team

    It's hard to make any judgments on Shawne, because 1/3 of the time he stands behind the arc and throws up threes, and he isn't a great 3-point shooter...

    He's enjoying a nice hot streak right now, but I can't imagine that's the limit of what Bird expected out of him when he drafted him.
    Last edited by Kstat; 11-12-2007, 03:04 PM.

    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Danny Granger could lead this team

      Originally posted by Indy View Post
      My biggest fear about hiring JOB is that he turns Danny into Fatoine Part Deuce.
      You're scared of Granger turning into a 3 time all-star? That's what he was under JOB. Antoine Walker during his prime was a very good player and the 2nd best player on JOB's Boston team that made the ECFs.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Danny Granger could lead this team

        I am obviously a huge Granger fan, but Williams appears to have even better natural gifts.

        First, he has a smoother jumpshot and can get it off more quickly. That much is obvious. Second, he is longer. As he develops and gets stronger, that will help him around the basket.

        The rest is subjective. I think the game has slowed down for Williams at a younger age. He seems to have better natural instincts....to the point he acts without thinking...LOL.

        I also think that once Williams matures and gets a little stronger, he will be more effective at rebounding the ball...not just due to his length. He seems to have quick instincts around the bucket to go with the length.

        But so much of this depends on how hard they work and how they go about developing themselves. It really could go either way. Granger has the level head. Not so sure about Shawne.
        Lance is finally home. Whether he becomes our starting PG or he's 6th man, he's getting big minutes and he's here to stay. #llortontnia

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Danny Granger could lead this team

          Originally posted by Evan_The_Dude View Post
          in Shawne's game, I see Rashard Lewis. The way their numbers line up are very similar too, of course Lewis was a better free-throw shooter at this stage than Shawne is (though Shawne doesn't have many attempts), and Shawne has a better three-point percentage at this stage than Lewis did.
          I agree with this comparison to an extent. They're both tall SF's with great shooting strokes and a knack for scoring. I think that Shawne has a significantly bigger frame that Lewis though. Shawne's listed at 225 on the roster page, but he looks bigger than that to me. He's got the potential to be a better rebounder and defender than Lewis. He's been good when he's played this year, even though we're 0-3 in games with him. He'll start to see more minutes as long as he keeps it up.
          "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

          - Salman Rushdie

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Danny Granger could lead this team

            Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
            ...but I also know he's never scored 20 points in an NBA game.
            Basically I don't think you make your point with this statement.

            Pre-season games are NBA games too. In his last two pre-season games he scored 22 points against Chicago, and 26 against Minnesota.

            Now if you want to say he hasn't ever scored 20 points in a game that counted in the standings, that's different, but he has scored 19 in a game that counted in the standings. That was against New Jersey last year.

            I do agree that the expectations are high for him . . . but he has looked good.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Danny Granger could lead this team

              Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
              Am I the only one still perplexed by the level of expectations already assigned to Shawne Williams?

              I mean, I know he's really athletic with some clear talent, a few refined skills and that he won't be 22 for a few more months...but I also know he's never scored 20 points in an NBA game.

              I like the kid, too, but after all the Harrington and Bender hype that basically amounted to a bonafide nothing (throw in Jamaal too if you want), you'd think us Pacer folk would be weary of crowning new kings so prematurely.
              I don't think anyone is crowning him a king, so much as saying that he has a nice package of skills, and has a bright future.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Danny Granger could lead this team

                Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                Pre-season games are NBA games too.
                Agree to disagree.

                Originally posted by johnnybegood View Post
                I don't think anyone is crowning him a king, so much as saying that he has a nice package of skills, and has a bright future.
                Well, Hicks said he thinks Shawne will be our #1 option within two years.

                Not trying to pick on you, buddy, but that's what I meant be "crowning" the kid. And I've seen many other posts on here basically saying that we'd be fine if we traded JO because we have Shawne Williams.

                Like I said, I like the kid, too. He should be pretty good. And I know he's young, but I'm going to need to see some actual extended on-court production (which he hasn't shown in either the NBA or NCAA) before I even slot him into an NBA starting lineup.

                I just wonder where such lofty expectations come from is all. I guess it's every team is required to have an Andray Blatche, Amir Johnson, Robert Swift or Gerald Green. And I guess Shawne is ours to some people.

                No biggie...it's just confusing to me.
                Last edited by JayRedd; 11-13-2007, 02:58 PM.
                Read my Pacers blog:
                8points9seconds.com

                Follow my twitter:

                @8pts9secs

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Danny Granger could lead this team

                  Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                  Agree to disagree.



                  Well, Hicks said he thinks Shawne will be our #1 option within two years.

                  Not trying to pick on you, buddy, but that's what I meant be "crowning" the kid. And I've seen many other posts on here basically saying that we'd be fine if we traded JO because we have Shawne Williams.

                  Like I said, I like the kid, too. He should be pretty good. And I know he's young, but I'm going to need to see some actual extended on-court production (which he hasn't shown in either the NBA or NCAA) before I even slot him into an NBA starting lineup.

                  I just wonder where such lofty expectations come from is all. I guess it's every team is required to have an Andray Blatche, Amir Johnson, Robert Swift or Gerald Green. And I guess Shawne is ours to some people.

                  No biggie...it's just confusing to me.
                  I agree, and Im also shocked how many people are so willing to trade Granger as well. The guy is pretty damn talented on the court and probably most important to the Pacer brass, is that he's top notch off the court. He's making a gradual progression in his PPG and is a solid rebounder and defender.

                  Shawne looks decent in limited minutes, but give him 35-40 minutes against starting level players and then we'll see how good he really is. Danny is already playing at that minute range, while usually 1 on 1 guarding a teams top perimiter scorer.
                  "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

                  ----------------- Reggie Miller

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Danny Granger could lead this team

                    The Granger Factor

                    In our 6 wins, Granger has scored 20 or more in all but one....and in that one he had 19. All were above his season average.

                    I think we are also seeing more consistency. He has scored in double figures every single game this year.
                    Last edited by BlueNGold; 11-25-2007, 01:01 AM.
                    Lance is finally home. Whether he becomes our starting PG or he's 6th man, he's getting big minutes and he's here to stay. #llortontnia

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Danny Granger could lead this team

                      Originally posted by Evan_The_Dude View Post
                      Danny as a leader? After he improves his inside game maybe. Jacking up three's isn't working well for him.
                      I think Danny read what I said. I'm thinking he's out to prove himself and prove everybody wrong. He's been showing more testicular fortitude than I thought he was capable of showing. I still think Shawne has the higher ceiling because of all the natural talent he has, but Danny is bringing his game to a new level.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Danny Granger could lead this team

                        Originally posted by Evan_The_Dude View Post
                        I think Danny read what I said. I'm thinking he's out to prove himself and prove everybody wrong. He's been showing more testicular fortitude than I thought he was capable of showing. I still think Shawne has the higher ceiling because of all the natural talent he has, but Danny is bringing his game to a new level.
                        Granger did not shoot a single 3ptr in the Dallas game and got to the line often....and scored 25pts. I think he's much more effective and will be more consistent that way. I would prefer to see Williams out there launching the 3, because he's even more accurate.

                        Well, it is good to see Granger do well. He has moved his game up a solid level and a half IMO.
                        Lance is finally home. Whether he becomes our starting PG or he's 6th man, he's getting big minutes and he's here to stay. #llortontnia

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Danny Granger could lead this team

                          I have no problem with those setting high expectations for Williams as
                          I've been telling people his upside exceedes Granger's since early last
                          season.

                          But that said, I hope that the Pacers '#1 option' in 2-3 years is the
                          SG we aquire (wether a veteran or via the draft) by eventually trading
                          J.O.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Danny Granger could lead this team

                            leader of this team? FEISTY! he sets the tone and tells people what to do - and he does it rather well

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X