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

Odd Thoughts: Super quick L.A. thoughts....

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

  • #46
    Re: Odd Thoughts: Super quick L.A. thoughts....

    Originally posted by BillS View Post
    Well, there are an awful lot of people saying that the Pacers only have great defensive numbers because most teams have played like crap against them.

    Me, I give the defense a HECK of a lot of credit for that, but who am I next to ESPN?
    I have not seen anybody saying that and yes we have to give the Pacers D a lot of credit for what they are doing, specially Roy and Paul George.
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Odd Thoughts: Super quick L.A. thoughts....

      Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
      No one said he'll ever be an "impact player." Certainly not me. Just that he's far from a walking $4 million mistake like so many people are quick to accuse him of.
      Apologies....."impact player" is the wrong word to use. I meant more of a rotational Player that can be counted on to contribute on the offensive and defensive end of the court...think a "slightly better offensive version" of Jeff Foster.

      To be clear, I am not disagreeing with you that Mahinmi ( much like Green ) just needs some time to adjust to his role on the Team and that he can contribute more....I'm simply trying to assess his offensive skills beyond a solid mid-range jumpshot ( for a Big Man ), getting put-back points while going for rebounds and being a solid FT shooter for a Big Man.

      What I don't know if he has any other type of reliable go-to-moves that can be relied upon if he is called upon to score....or if he will get his points like the way that Foster did
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Odd Thoughts: Super quick L.A. thoughts....

        Originally posted by CableKC View Post
        Apologies....."impact player" is the wrong word to use. I meant more of a rotational Player that can be counted on to contribute on the offensive and defensive end of the court...think a "slightly better offensive version" of Jeff Foster.

        To be clear, I am not disagreeing with you that Mahinmi ( much like Green ) just needs some time to adjust to his role on the Team and that he can contribute more....I'm simply trying to assess his offensive skills beyond a solid mid-range jumpshot ( for a Big Man ), getting put-back points while going for rebounds and being a solid FT shooter for a Big Man.

        What I don't know if he has any other type of reliable go-to-moves that can be relied upon if he is called upon to score....or if he will get his points like the way that Foster did
        The guy had taken a total of ~400 attempts *total* in his previous four seasons. Expecting well developed, reliable offensive moves might be a reach at this point in his career.

        This is the first time in his career where he's actually being given the chance to really contribute offensively. A decent midrange shot along with put-backs seems like a good start. Expecting a refined post game is more realistic within a year or two.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Odd Thoughts: Super quick L.A. thoughts....

          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
          The great defensive numbers have continued to hold for the Ps. They hold opponents to the worst fg% in the league, rebound the most, outrebound their opponents the most, and leading the league in blocks.

          If the Pacers ever figure out to be consistant on the offensive end, the can really turn their record around quickly.
          This is what I am saying.......the defense and offense for the Starting lineup is great....but the weakest aspect of this Team is the 2nd unit and it's ability to score. It may take another month...but I think that with a combination of Vogel figuring out what the best combination of Starters and the 2nd Unit and DJ, Green, Mahinmi and ( most notably ) Stephenson becoming more comfortable with their roles when they are on the floor...I think that the scoring end of the 2nd Unit equation is going to figure itself out. I know that it will suck for another couple of weeks if not for the next month....but I think that they just need time. As you suggest....once they figure it out....heck, even if Green and Stephenson becomes more confident.....we'll become far more competitive.

          Another related question in relation to the 2nd unit....we know that the offense sucks with most of the Players from the 2nd unit ( often having to rely upon a Starter to score )...but how is the overall defense of Green, Mahinmi, Young and Stephenson ( I'm including him in the discussion for the long-term ) when they are on the floor?
          Last edited by CableKC; 11-28-2012, 04:46 PM.
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Odd Thoughts: Super quick L.A. thoughts....

            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
            This is what I am saying.......the weakest aspect of this Team is the 2nd unit and it's ability to score. It may take another month...but I think that with a combination of Vogel figuring out what the best combination of Starters and the 2nd Unit and DJ, Green, Mahinmi and ( most notably ) Stephenson becoming more comfortable with their roles when they are on the floor...I think that the scoring end of the 2nd Unit equation is going to figure itself out. I know that it will suck for another couple of weeks if not for the next month....but I think that they just need time. As you suggest....once they figure it out....heck, even if Green and Stephenson becomes more confident.....we'll become far more competitive.

            Another related question in relation to the 2nd unit....we know that the offense sucks with most of the Players from the 2nd unit ( often having to rely upon a Starter to score )...but how is the overall defense of Green, Mahinmi, Young and Stephenson ( I'm including him in the discussion for the long-term ) when they are on the floor?
            Surprised you haven't pointed out that 3 out of the starting 5 (Hill, George, and Hibbert) are shooting at or below 40%?

            Isn't that an issue?

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Odd Thoughts: Super quick L.A. thoughts....

              Originally posted by docpaul View Post
              Surprised you haven't pointed out that 3 out of the starting 5 (Hill, George, and Hibbert) are shooting at or below 40%?

              Isn't that an issue?
              Not as much of an issue compared to the 2nd unit scoring.

              I'm not as concerned as much with the scoring from Hill, GH and Hibbert....I think that their scoring and shooting will improve over time as they adjust to life without Granger...for the next 2-3 months...and then will continue to improve when Granger does return.

              Believe me, I hate the PG shooting percentage sucks compared to last year....but I know that he also has a far different role than he did last year. I hate the Hibbert has reverted to Bruce Banner compared to the Hulk that he was in the Playoffs last year....but I think that all of these concerns will recede over time.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Odd Thoughts: Super quick L.A. thoughts....

                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                I have not seen anybody saying that and yes we have to give the Pacers D a lot of credit for what they are doing, specially Roy and Paul George.
                ESPN today pretty much said the Lakers' only problem was their offense. No real mention of Pacers' defense, at least while I was watching at the health club.
                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


                • #53
                  Re: Odd Thoughts: Super quick L.A. thoughts....

                  Originally posted by BillS View Post
                  ESPN today pretty much said the Lakers' only problem was their offense. No real mention of Pacers' defense, at least while I was watching at the health club.
                  Well their offense is horrible, not just for the game last night but the whole season reason why they got rid of Mike Brown and hired D'Antoni(an offensive coach).
                  @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Odd Thoughts: Super quick L.A. thoughts....

                    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                    Well their offense is horrible, not just for the game last night but the whole season reason why they got rid of Mike Brown and hired D'Antoni(an offensive coach).
                    I thought their offensive average was 99 ppg. Last night they scored 77. Now, either their offense was 20+% worse than their usual bad offense, or the Pacers' defense made them look even worse than usual.
                    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


                    • #55
                      Re: Odd Thoughts: Super quick L.A. thoughts....

                      Originally posted by BillS View Post
                      I thought their offensive average was 99 ppg. Last night they scored 77. Now, either their offense was 20+% worse than their usual bad offense, or the Pacers' defense made them look even worse than usual.
                      By bad offense I mean no offense at all, I've been watching them since the begginning of the year and they don't know what to do in offense, yes they score 99 points per game but they score that much because of the weapons they have not because their offense is that good.

                      Not saying that the Pacers D didn't have anything to do with it but acting like the Pacers shut them down is not accurate in my opinion.

                      Edit: For example Morris was open must of the night and he made 0 out of 6 open uncontested shots, Artest had similar open shots and made 1 out of 8, Jamison 1 out of 7, Duhon 0 out of 3, Meeks 0 out of 3.

                      Note that I'm just counting the players that in the majority of their time on the floor were shooting long jumpers and uncontested 3's, Kobe, Gasol and Howard were to me the only ones that were taking contested shots must of the time and great job by the Pacers defense for somewhat controlling them.
                      Last edited by vnzla81; 11-28-2012, 06:05 PM.
                      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Odd Thoughts: Super quick L.A. thoughts....

                        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                        By bad offense I mean no offense at all, I've been watching them since the begginning of the year and they don't know what to do in offense, yes they score 99 points per game but they score that much because of the weapons they have not because their offense is that good.

                        Not saying that the Pacers D didn't have anything to do with it but acting like the Pacers shut them down is not accurate in my opinion.
                        These are serious questions, I'm not just blowing you off -

                        1) If a "bad" offense is still "effective" - meaning it puts up 99 points per game - what exactly are you describing as "bad" and what is it that makes the "bad" part of the offense matter? My reason for asking this is that even if your offense is "give it to the superstar and let him score" I wouldn't describe it as "no" offense unless the superstar isn't scoring. For it to be "bad", there must be something that renders it vulnerable - inconsistency, subject to failure if a single component isn't present, etc.

                        2) If a "bad" offense is rendered "ineffective" - meaning it puts up 20% fewer points in a game - what DID shut them down? Is it that the offense as it stands has already shown to have a deviation that in and of itself explains a 20-point swing? I'd submit that this is the lowest regular season point total for the Lakers, 5 points lower than the previous (which was against San Antonio, arguably a strong defensive team that WOULD get credit for "shutting them down"), and near the outside end of 2 standard deviations from that average point total. That would qualify, to me, as "shut down" no matter how "bad" the opponent offense actually is.

                        In other words, yes, the Lakers aren't the offensive powerhouse they have been in years past. However, the Pacers defense took the current Laker offense to an extended low, which can't be sufficiently explained by the inconsistency of the Lakers offense or by unforced failure of individual players. After such an analysis, I think we CAN say the Pacers defense was more than just peripherally involved and was likely the most significant factor in the Lakers offensive (in both senses of the word) performance.
                        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


                        • #57
                          Re: Odd Thoughts: Super quick L.A. thoughts....

                          The Lakers scored 115 against the Mavs over the weekend, btw. Their offense is improving. We exploited their offensive weaknesses by clogging the lane with our bigs and they don't really have anyone to take advantage of our biggest weakness at PG. i also thought we did a good job limiting Kobe's effectiveness as a facilitator and closing out on threes. For a team without players to create offense for others by getting into the lane, a big team like the Pacers is a nightmare.

                          If they had hit a regular percent of FTs and limited TOs a bit, I still doubt they would have cracked 90. We definitely lucked out a bit but, then again, we had some bad luck on offense too. We'll take it.
                          Last edited by rexnom; 11-28-2012, 06:22 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Odd Thoughts: Super quick L.A. thoughts....

                            By the way did anybody else noticed that people were yelling at Morris not to shoot it anymore? that guy is just a horrible player.
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Odd Thoughts: Super quick L.A. thoughts....

                              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                              By the way did anybody else noticed that people were yelling at Morris not to shoot it anymore? that guy is just a horrible player.
                              Well, I know some fans that were cheering him ( and Duhon ) to shoot more
                              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Odd Thoughts: Super quick L.A. thoughts....

                                BAMF's go to move, his "Reggie Miller curl off screen, leg kicking 3PA" = pushing into 2 guys, literally shoving them away and then hitting the soft one footed fade away. He might be the most physical pure offensive player in the game. I swear he actually enjoys the contact as part of his scoring move. You could probably defend him better by not letting him bump into you.



                                Ian absolutely has an issue with ball handling on drives, that's his weak spot and the next area he needs to improve. I think he can, but for now it's a TO waiting to happen. He is athletic and smooth enough to get it, much in the way that PG could also take better care of the ball.


                                I love/hate Joey Crawford
                                Me too. I love the insta-tech, not dealing with this crap attitude, but sometimes he needs to realize that not every call is beyond question. Let a guy have a voice on a call that maybe you missed or was at least close. There are ways to handle things without being so over the top.

                                However I do think a lot of this comes from a passion he has for reffing. And that brings me back to liking him.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X