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

Pacers Wizards Post Game Thread: LANCE! LANCE! lance.

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

  • #61
    Re: Pacers Wizards Post Game Thread: LANCE! LANCE! lance.

    Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
    Is that a real worry? Dear lord that would be the last of my concerns. (unless we are talking about poor fits Like Lance playing with MCW wouldnt be ideal they play a lot a like, although I bet it would work out)


    Lance will be the same age as Brandon Roy when Brandon Roy was a rookie(when he becomes a FA). I don't see how you can call a 23 year old (the age of some draft players stunting growth of rookie teammates). Lance would be brought in to play with rookies and make them better.

    You need talent in this league to win, most rebuilding teams would be smart to get a young guy like Lance. It would be like adding another top #10 pick who is NBA ready to the team. But I hope you are right and teams shy away from Lance because he will hurt other development . I am in the complete oppoiste view I believe Lance improves the players around him so he would help other get better quicker.
    Its hard to take you serious when you seem incapable of making your point without using emoticons.

    But no teams don't want Lance coming in and acting like he did in the 4th quarter last night if they have Wiggins, Parker or any of the other amazing freshmen. Those guys are likely to be the "guys" for better or worse on their teams next year.

    Much in the same way Bird wanted George played in the JOB years and in fact was one of the reasons we canned him. You don't stunt the development of a young star to keep veterans happy. You take your lumps playing the rookie so they can grow and improve.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Pacers Wizards Post Game Thread: LANCE! LANCE! lance.

      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
      Bad Lance doesn't exist that much anymore really IMO.

      Anyway I thought Vogel made the rigth move, Lance got a ton of love too
      Bad Lance doesn't exist as much. But I still see uninterested Lance way tooo much on defense. Sadly in the NBA defense is undervalued so thats probably not going to keep the bidding for him down at all.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Pacers Wizards Post Game Thread: LANCE! LANCE! lance.

        If Lance really gets too good to let go, you make some trades. Perhaps you have to deal George Hill or DWest. I don't know. But if he's really your #2 guy, you don't let him go. You go with Scola or CJ Watson as the starter...and deal West or Hill for an expiring. Yes, that sounds terrible. But again if Lance is playing like the second coming you really need to do that.

        Edit: we are not there yet. GHill and West are staying unless Lance starts playing like LeBron lite.
        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


        • #64
          Re: Pacers Wizards Post Game Thread: LANCE! LANCE! lance.

          Lance is fun to watch when he is playing selfless ball. Entertaining, yes, but 8 turnovers? He did have 10 assists so he was +2 possessions and two buckets.

          I'm not worried about keeping Lance because I'd bet the farm that if he continues this good/bad Lance style of ball they will trade him before the deadline for assets and not think twice about it.

          I like watching Lance but I also think you have a couple of guys on the bench who can step in and perform without too much of a drop off in performance of the overall team.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Pacers Wizards Post Game Thread: LANCE! LANCE! lance.

            not gonna lie i'll be pissed if we don't keep lance alongside paul george for the forseeable future if it comes down to something like the luxury tax when we have a freaking billionaire owner

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Pacers Wizards Post Game Thread: LANCE! LANCE! lance.

              Originally posted by able View Post
              The team was really good at times last night, Lance had a few highlights, but why everyone is creaming over a guy who had 10 ast and 8 turnover, that is 1 more turnover then the rest of the team combined, is beyond me.
              I understand he is talented, but his facial expressions on the bench when Vogel pulled him were not what i like to see, i have seen Artest, I have seen Tinsley

              as for his value, as long as he shows the boneheaded Lance so often (and yes i know only half a game at a time, which is still half a game to much) his value is nowhere near what you all think, at least not for the Pacers.
              He's averaging 2.8 turnovers per game, which is the exact same as Paul George. But he is also the team leader in assists (5.2 APG). The next highest is Hill (3.7 APG). He's adjusted extremely well to his drastically increased ball handling duties and has a talent for setting up his teammates which is unmatched by anyone else on the roster. Any way you slice it, there's no getting around the fact that Lance is one of the main reasons that the team is 15-1.

              Yes, the 8 turnovers were too many. But a few of them came at the end of the game when the game was long decided and he was trying to force the triple double. It's not like he would have been forcing that stuff in a tied game against the Heat. Lance is a player who has learned his boundaries and understands when he needs to play disciplined. This is a player who recently got a triple double while recording only one turnover.

              So he had a bad facial expression on the bench when he was pulled. I guess he can join virtually every other player in NBA history who has been ticked off at their coach at some point in the long season. He showed restraint and shook it off quickly, which shows maturity. He has done nothing to deserve being compared to the clowns of Artest and Tinsley, who were true team wreckers.
              Last edited by Sollozzo; 11-30-2013, 09:38 PM.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Pacers Wizards Post Game Thread: LANCE! LANCE! lance.

                The immediate body language didn't bother me nearly as much when he bounced back for the post game tv interview and was very positive. ...And said the right things too...
                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, thatís teamwork."

                -John Wooden

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Pacers Wizards Post Game Thread: LANCE! LANCE! lance.

                  Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                  So he had a bad facial expression on the bench when he was pulled. I guess he can join virtually every other player in NBA history who has been ticked off at their coach at some point in the long season. He showed restraint and shook it off quickly, which shows maturity. He has done nothing to deserve being compared to the clowns of Artest and Tinsley, who were true team wreckers.
                  I guess it didn't make it onto the tv, but he almost pulled the railing off of the stands near the Jeff Foster Memorial Stair-Stepper Plaque (at least there should be a plaque). I'm hoping he was frustrated with himself for not taking advantage of the opportunities he had rather than peeved at Frank for giving him the hook.
                  PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Pacers Wizards Post Game Thread: LANCE! LANCE! lance.

                    Originally posted by pacerfreak View Post
                    Lance is fun to watch when he is playing selfless ball. Entertaining, yes, but 8 turnovers? He did have 10 assists so he was +2 possessions and two buckets.

                    I'm not worried about keeping Lance because I'd bet the farm that if he continues this good/bad Lance style of ball they will trade him before the deadline for assets and not think twice about it.

                    I like watching Lance but I also think you have a couple of guys on the bench who can step in and perform without too much of a drop off in performance of the overall team.
                    I would be hesitant to conclude we wouldn't have a drop off. Clearly something is working with that 15-1 record.

                    IMO, Lance adds a dimension that this team lacks. He puts pressure on the other team because he can break down a defense either with a dribble drive or the pass. The opposition can be defending well overall, but he will cut into the lane and create chaos. Then he also has power and can bust through to the rack if they put a light weight on him...so they have to pay attention to him at all times. More attention than anyone on the team except Paul George. ...and no, there is no other wing on the bench who is close to as good. We are talking a huge drop off from Lance to OJ...and an even bigger one to Solomon Hill.
                    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


                    • #70
                      Re: Pacers Wizards Post Game Thread: LANCE! LANCE! lance.

                      Originally posted by MagicRat View Post
                      I guess it didn't make it onto the tv, but he almost pulled the railing off of the stands near the Jeff Foster Memorial Stair-Stepper Plaque (at least there should be a plaque). I'm hoping he was frustrated with himself for not taking advantage of the opportunities he had rather than peeved at Frank for giving him the hook.
                      We've seen worse. Better the railing than a TV camera worth thousands of dollars. I just hope Lance settles down. For his own good and the team's good.
                      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


                      • #71
                        Re: Pacers Wizards Post Game Thread: LANCE! LANCE! lance.

                        Originally posted by Bball View Post
                        Lance was forcing the issue at the end for points, but I got the feeling that his teammates wanted him to go for those 5 points to complete the milestone. The game otherwise was decided. So I didn't get the impression his teammates had a problem with what he was doing. No different than when a bench guy comes in to mop up at the end of the game and the guys try to get him a basket and want him to shoot.
                        I agree that the rest of the team wanted Lance to get his triple-double. They knew that Lance has done an excellent job at setting them up for 3 quarters and they knew that he deserved it.
                        Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
                        Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.

                        Panopticon

                        Originally posted by IrishPacer
                        Empty vessels make the most noise.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Pacers Wizards Post Game Thread: LANCE! LANCE! lance.

                          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                          IMHO...I am very sure that he has played himself into the $7 to 8 mil a year range...and likely still going up. His Market value maybe $7+ mil...but I guarantee you that some team will overpay him.
                          I believe that Lance is very grateful to Bird. At times, he has expressed as much. It's not like Lance can go out and sign an offer sheet with the comfort that we can match; he is unrestricted.

                          However Lance can obtain offers from other teams and then have a discussion with Bird. If the offers are too high for the Pacers to match without sacrificing players that put them at risk of not being contenders, then Bird will let Lance know. My thinking is that Bird will not sacrifice a key player to retain Lance and that in turn, Lance will not ask for so much that it would cost the Pacers a key player. Both of the two guys share something in common as a key goal. They both are extremely competitive and they both want a championship.

                          The Pacers can shed Copeland's salary without too much difficulty. The same would probably apply to SHill. If we had to trade Mahinmi for a less costly center, it could be done but might damage the defensive performance of the bench. If we sacrificed Scola to find money for Lance, then that would hurt significantly.

                          There are a few things that Bird can do to find additional funds without exceeding the luxury tax threshold, so Lance has to be both reasonable and careful what he asks for. He may put Bird in a position that provides a result that Lance may not like. Lance certainly has a right to seek as much as possible and his performance does seem to support that amount increasing, but more than likely a successful agreement that ends up with Lance in a Pacer uniform will require more yielding from Lance than it will from Bird. There is only so much Bird can do personnel-wise without losing a step or two to the other top contenders.
                          Last edited by beast23; 11-30-2013, 11:55 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Pacers Wizards Post Game Thread: LANCE! LANCE! lance.

                            Originally posted by beast23 View Post
                            I believe that Lance is very grateful to Bird. At times, he has expressed as much. It's not like Lance can go out and sign an offer sheet with the comfort that we can match; he is unrestricted.

                            However Lance can obtain offers from other teams and then have a discussion with Bird. If the offers are too high for the Pacers to match without sacrificing players that put them at risk of not being contenders, then Bird will let Lance know. My thinking is that Bird will not sacrifice a key player to retain Lance and that in turn, Lance will not ask for so much that it would cost the Pacers a key player. Both of the two guys share something in common as a key goal. They both are extremely competitive and they both want a championship.

                            The Pacers can shed Copeland's salary without too much difficulty. The same would probably apply to SHill. If we had to trade Mahinmi for a less costly center, it could be done but might damage the defensive performance of the bench. If we sacrificed Scola to find money for Lance, then that would hurt significantly.

                            There are a few things that Bird can do to find additional funds without exceeding the luxury tax threshold, so Lance has to be both reasonable and careful what he asks for. He may put Bird in a position that provides a result to Lance that he may not like. Lance certainly has a right to seek as much as possible and his performance does seem to support that amount increasing, but more than likely a successful agreement that ends up with Lance in a Pacer uniform will require more yielding from Lance than it will from Bird. There is only so much Bird can do personnel-wise without losing a step or two to the other top contenders.
                            I remember reading that while lance is unrestricted Pacers still hold his bird rights? Is this correct and what exactly does that mean?

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Pacers Wizards Post Game Thread: LANCE! LANCE! lance.

                              I don't really think Lance's reaction (which wasn't that bad, let's not go crazy) was about stats so much as just not getting to keep playing. We've all seen how much fun he has on the floor when things are going well which they obviously were. Yeah he was playing for stats, and maybe I'm rationalizing because he's a Pacer, but I kinda feel like he was doing it as a challenge, not glory or whatever.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Pacers Wizards Post Game Thread: LANCE! LANCE! lance.

                                Originally posted by ThA HoyA View Post
                                I remember reading that while lance is unrestricted Pacers still hold his bird rights? Is this correct and what exactly does that mean?
                                Bird Rights mean you don't need cap space to sign your own free agent, we could theoretically give Lance the max if we wanted. Him being unrestricted means any team w/ enough cap space can sign him and we don't have the right to match the contract, he signs w/ somebody else he's gone, unlike Roy and Portland. Though I do get the feeling his team'll gauge offers and then come to the Pacers with "OK, this is what's out there, get as close as possible." He wants to stay here.

                                But if he gets big money we can't compete with, bummer, but hey, good for you Lance.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X