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

Tbird Topics: Defending Jim O'Brien, comparing us to San Antonio pre dynasty, and draft strategy with the summer of 2011 in mind

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

  • #16
    Re: Tbird Topics: Defending Jim O'Brien, comparing us to San Antonio pre dynasty, and draft strategy with the summer of 2011 in mind

    Welcome to the board, Elcharanguista!
    ...Still "flying casual"
    @roaminggnome74

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Tbird Topics: Defending Jim O'Brien, comparing us to San Antonio pre dynasty, and draft strategy with the summer of 2011 in mind

      Al Horford in 2011.

      I would throw big money at him. He is your Player "X". Plays PF/C great shot blocker and rebounder. Smart player. Athletic. Plays the pick and roll well. Can move over to center, but does better at PF. He would be a monster next to Hibbert.

      As for the PG position. We need to be praying that the Nets win the lottery if we don't. The Nets need PF help and hopefully a package for Hansborough or #10 and an expiring possibly would get it done. Devin Harris, Brandon Rush, Danny Granger, Al Horford, Roy Hibbert sounds appealing to me. Price, DJones, Hansborough, and McRoberts can be the future of our bench. Maybe that is too wild to be prophetic.
      "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Tbird Topics: Defending Jim O'Brien, comparing us to San Antonio pre dynasty, and draft strategy with the summer of 2011 in mind

        Originally posted by pacergod2 View Post
        Al Horford in 2011.

        I would throw big money at him. He is your Player "X". Plays PF/C great shot blocker and rebounder. Smart player. Athletic. Plays the pick and roll well. Can move over to center, but does better at PF. He would be a monster next to Hibbert.

        As for the PG position. We need to be praying that the Nets win the lottery if we don't. The Nets need PF help and hopefully a package for Hansborough or #10 and an expiring possibly would get it done. Devin Harris, Brandon Rush, Danny Granger, Al Horford, Roy Hibbert sounds appealing to me. Price, DJones, Hansborough, and McRoberts can be the future of our bench. Maybe that is too wild to be prophetic.
        In regards to this.....other then Horford, is there any other "Player X" that is out there?

        I'm just trying to get an idea about who fits that mold that is athletic enough to be a PF but also is strong enough to be a Center.
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Tbird Topics: Defending Jim O'Brien, comparing us to San Antonio pre dynasty, and draft strategy with the summer of 2011 in mind

          Dirk in 2011, can he be player x?
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Tbird Topics: Defending Jim O'Brien, comparing us to San Antonio pre dynasty, and draft strategy with the summer of 2011 in mind

            Does Nene fit the "player" X need?

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Tbird Topics: Defending Jim O'Brien, comparing us to San Antonio pre dynasty, and draft strategy with the summer of 2011 in mind

              I'm sorry. I just really disagree with everything you said regarding O'Brien.

              I believe coaches should be given a chance, I hate when a coach is given the door after only a few seasons - they deserve a chance to make a difference and it can be hard to do that with someone elses team. In fact, Jim O'Brien is the first basketball coach that I have really been set on firing. I loved Carlisle, but I understod why they fired him, I didn't think Thomas was near as bad as O'Brien and never cared if he was fired or not. O'Brien is different, he is stubborn and refuses to acknowledge what works and what doesn't work. I saw the team quit on him many times this year, however last year I don't think they ever quit on him. But your giving all the credit to O'Brien for changing the mentality of the team, when I think it was actually Bird who just got guys whos attitude reflect what we see now. I think they've always had that mentality, it wasn't anything O'Brien did or did not do. If O'Brien showed the willingness to change, then I might have more understanding torwards him, but he hasn't. The fact that you openly say players are professional when O'Brien misuses them show that its their attitude that made that reaction, not respect torwards him.

              I have NBA League Pass and often, I would get to listen to the other teams broadcasters. You know your coach is bad when other teams broadcasters are constantly questioning his coaching from only watching a few games a year.

              If I was Jim O'Briend attorny and forced to defend him. I would simply plead insanity. Thats the only thing that would explain his decisions.

              In regards to another coach making a difference. I definitely think there are a few out there who could have gotten more wins. There are probably even a few who wouldn't have gotten as many, but I still would have rather had them. Jim O'Brien coaches bad basketball and installs bad habits into the players. Whether or not another coach could have gotten more wins this year is irrelevant to me, because our future won't be as good with the way O'Brien has handled things. Any new coach is going to have to start from scratch again.
              Last edited by Dr. Awesome; 05-09-2010, 03:00 PM.
              https://www.twitch.tv/xxSnEaKyPxx
              https://www.youtube.com/xxSnEaKyPxx

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Tbird Topics: Defending Jim O'Brien, comparing us to San Antonio pre dynasty, and draft strategy with the summer of 2011 in mind

                Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                I'm sorry. I just really disagree with everything you said regarding O'Brien.

                I believe coaches should be given a chance, I hate when a coach is given the door after only a few seasons - they deserve a chance to make a difference and it can be hard to do that with someone elses team. In fact, Jim O'Brien is the first basketball coach that I have really been set on firing. I loved Carlisle, but I understod why they fired him, I didn't think Thomas was near as bad as O'Brien and never cared if he was fired or not. O'Brien is different, he is stubborn and refuses to acknowledge what works and what doesn't work. I saw the team quit on him many times this year, however last year I don't think they ever quit on him. But your giving all the credit to O'Brien for changing the mentality of the team, when I think it was actually Bird who just got guys whos attitude reflect what we see now. I think they've always had that mentality, it wasn't anything O'Brien did or did not do. If O'Brien showed the willingness to change, then I might have more understanding torwards him, but he hasn't. The fact that you openly say players are professional when O'Brien misuses them show that its their attitude that made that reaction, not respect torwards him.

                I have NBA League Pass and often, I would get to listen to the other teams broadcasters. You know your coach is bad when other teams broadcasters are constantly questioning his coaching from only watching a few games a year.

                If I was Jim O'Briend attorny and forced to defend him. I would simply plead insanity. Thats the only thing that would explain his decisions.

                In regards to another coach making a difference. I definitely think there are a few out there who could have gotten more wins. There are probably even a few who wouldn't have gotten as many, but I still would have rather had them. Jim O'Brien coaches bad basketball and installs bad habits into the players. Whether or not another coach could have gotten more wins this year is irrelevant to me, because our future won't be as good with the way O'Brien has handled things. Any new coach is going to have to start from scratch again.
                I think people are missing the point when they say "what would the difference have been with a different coach."

                I don't know about you, but I don't want to watch Josh, Roy, and Tyler become Murphy lite.

                I don't want to watch Rush and Price learn that they better jack up threes, or they're coming out.

                I want them to continue to learn good fundamentals, not some gimicky crap. And Jimmy teaches them gimicky crap...and doesn't even give them as much time to play his gimicky crap as he should.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Tbird Topics: Defending Jim O'Brien, comparing us to San Antonio pre dynasty, and draft strategy with the summer of 2011 in mind

                  More than anything else the point guard is the key and what we're lacking. In the franchise history we've only had 2 really good point guards. Freddy Lewis and Marc Jackson. When we had them we won championships and were title contenders. Freddy was a free agent and we traded for Marc. If we can pick up a good PG and stay healthy this can be a good team. TJ looked like a good PG when we made the trade, but did not live up to expectations. I think we are going to have to trade for a point guard. The Pacers have been successful in the past when they were able to trade for a player who was sitting on the bench somewhere else and came here to play well. I hope we can do that again as I don't believe that we can get a top quality PG in the draft (whether we drafted at the 4th or the 10th!) However, getting a good trade is very hard. One thing to remember about the draft, Wall could turn out to be another Oden.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Tbird Topics: Defending Jim O'Brien, comparing us to San Antonio pre dynasty, and draft strategy with the summer of 2011 in mind

                    Great points BMac.

                    One thing I will say is that I don't know that we had huge expectations for Ford. He was salary filler for O'neal. Without adding his three years to that deal, Toronto would have taken on way more money than they already did. So in looking back, would you trade Ford and Hibbert for O'neal? I wouldn't trade Ford straight up for O'Neal if that trade even worked realistically. Anything we got from Ford was a bonus IMO. But he is a prototypical backup PG who can give you 20 minutes of mayhem. We have been relying on him as a starter and that just isn't suitable. He would be great for a team that had a solid cheap young PG, such as Milwaukee, NJ (if they get Wall), Charlotte, Chicago (if they trade Hinrich), and Boston. We would be a solid destination for him if we could rely on Price to give us starter minutes.

                    In regards to us being compared to San Antonio, I think that is a suitable reference. I just think the Spurs started with an emphasis on defense and that is clearly not our team's philosophy. They were a top defensive team for several years. We are a bottom defensive team. I am talking about the Spurs with early Robinson, not early Duncan. Robinson came in and was a clear difference maker year one. They also had young guys in Vernon Maxwell, Willie Anderson, Sean Elliott, and Rod Strickland, and the veteran in Terry Cummings. Those teams that really started out with their young guys and gave them legitimate minutes.

                    When I look at our roster, we still have way too many minutes getting eaten up by older players who have less talent. This is further assurance that our team will be better once JOB is gone. He is not a coach that prioritizes defense. With a 7'2" shot-blocker, our defense should be much better, but we also need to give him some serious help on the interior to not expose him. The makeup of our "veteran" team is nothing like those Spurs teams. The young core I will agree with. The only difference is their young guys were playing significant minutes. If you parallel Robinson/Elliott to Hibbert/Rush, they still had Willie Anderson and Rod Strickland eating up the majority of the minutes at SF and PG. If you want to compare Granger to Cummings as the veteran older player, this means that Price and Hansborough/McRoberts weren't getting nearly the minutes they should have compared to those young Spurs players. I wish we wouldn't hold this team back anymore by wasting time playing Murphy, Dunleavy and Ford other than spot minutes off the bench. It does nothing to get us closer to becoming a good team. Yes those early Spurs teams had much better immediate success than we have, but I think most of that is our "veterans" playing worse defense. Bring in the young legs and let them figure out how to defend. Plus they had a coach in Larry Brown that emphasizes defense that JOB does not. I can't wait for 2011-2012.
                    "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Tbird Topics: Defending Jim O'Brien, comparing us to San Antonio pre dynasty, and draft strategy with the summer of 2011 in mind

                      Wow. Are we still having fallout from the Brawl in that we are lauding bringing professionalism as the main selling point for our coach? Have we become that gun-shy (oops, sorry) of even a whiff of controversy that we play it safe in terms of our roster, and don't take chances?

                      (It would make a fascinating book to dissect just how far reaching the effects of the brawl have been for this franchise...even to this day.)

                      I like the idea of the Spurs model, but there were some unique things about the Spurs they we don't have, and frankly, no one else does either. Popovich was GM and set a tone, then fired Bob Hill, and took over the coaching, setting his stamp there, too. Pop used force of personality to bring his military sensibilities to the Spurs from top to bottom.

                      For me, I don't feel like we have a master plan for this organization, despite what Bird says. I don't feel a sense of vision for the future and that has been my major gripe. If we wanted to build a team based on O'Brian's style of play, we would have drafted the high flying Javale McGee over Hibbert (jmho). Does drafting Tyler fit with this team? Really? In terms of O'Brien's style of offense/defense? (I actually think the 76ers roster fits more with what style O'Brien projects)

                      I've said it before, but despite Bird's endorsement of JOB, my biggest gripe if what I feel is a lack of direction. (And I'm sorry, that all fine and dandy that JOB has brought a more professional stance to the team, and I admire that quality in teams like Utah and the Spurs, about everything else he brings just doesn't do it for me. And, no, I'm not trying to derail this into JOB bashing.)

                      T-Bird's original post had me overwhelmed with a ton of stuff I'd like to say about his original post, which I thoroughly enjoyed, but being at work and time constraints for me in to this tiny response.
                      Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Tbird Topics: Defending Jim O'Brien, comparing us to San Antonio pre dynasty, and draft strategy with the summer of 2011 in mind

                        Love Nene and Horford and both fit the mold of player X for me, but how realistic is it that we could acquire them regardless of the method of acquisiton? You really think the Hawks won't suck it up an retain Horford? Can't imagine Nugz want to part with Nene for zilch. I think player X will have to be more under the radar than them, although I don't have a great suggestion right now.
                        I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                        -Emiliano Zapata

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X