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

excellent article by Conrad Brunner

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #1

    excellent article by Conrad Brunner

    There are some good quotes by Scola who along with West always provide the most insight into what is going on with the team.

    http://www.1070thefan.com/blogs/brun...int-turnaround

    Lifeless Pacers show no hint of turnaround


    Conrad Brunner


    Jan. 28, 2015

    With a smile on my face and warmth in my heart, I ventured to Bankers Life Fieldhouse Tuesday night to welcome back the Pacers with open arms, fully intending to gather material for an upbeat story detailing five reasons to be optimistic about the rest of the season.

    After several hours of talking about the team, watching the team and talking to the team, I left the arena unable to muster more than two reasons, and one of those was the trade deadline.

    The other?

    The schedule.

    You see, for everything else that has afflicted this team, the schedule has been a multiplier, with 27 of the first 46 games on the road, not to mention 12 sets of back-to-backs. The Raptors’ visit Tuesday night signified a fulcrum, the beginning of the season’s most friendly stretch, five in a row and 15 of 20 at home. In that span are just two sets of back-to-back games.

    So now’s the time, right? The survival part of the season is officially over. If a run is going to be made, here’s the chance.

    “It’s very important,” said Frank Vogel. “It’s not an endless season. You have to make a move at some point. For us, I don’t want to say we’ve prolonged it but we would’ve hoped to have made our run by now and we haven’t had a great month. So hopefully during this stretch we can turn it around.”

    That was before the game. Then the Pacers opened this key home stand with another listless loss, 104-91, to Toronto. The Raptors are a very good team but did not play particularly well. Nobody had a huge night, there was no hot hand. Basically, they got energy from their bench, played aggressively, helped each other out on defense and took advantage of the multitudinous holes in the Indiana defense. Toronto played hard. Indiana played soft.

    This performance by the Pacers didn’t exactly signal a turnaround. In fact, this looked very much like a team that has lost belief it is capable of achieving a goal as humble as eighth place in the Eastern Conference. At 16-31, with losses in eight of their last nine games, they have created plenty of reason to fuel doubt – despite the favorable schedule.

    “I believe it doesn’t matter what kind of schedule we have,” said Luis Scola. “We’ve got to fight with our own problems. We’ve got to find a way to play better and if we don’t fix that problem, we can play any team on any court and we’re going to struggle. We’ve just got to figure out how to fix our problems before we can look at the other team or the schedule or anything else.”

    And those problems are?

    “We’ve got a little bit of everything,” he said. “Confidence, rhythm, not the best energy, guys are without morale, our defense is not that good, we don’t have a good flow moving the ball, passing the ball, we’ve got a lot of turnovers so right now we’ve got a little bit of everything.”

    Guys are without morale? There’s a clause with a cause.

    Apparently, the return of George Hill from his latest injury has not proved quite as inspiring as anticipated. Hill has played relatively well in limited minutes, and within a week or so should be ready to resume a full-time load. But face it, even if Paul George walked through that door (and he most certainly is not) this would be a very average team.

    “The good thing is it can only get better,” Hill said. “I don’t think it can get any worse from here. We’re already at the bottom. We’ve just got to try to turn things around.”

    Asked if he could identify one or two things that could lead to a turnaround, Hill replied:

    “Offense and defense.”

    Truth be told, it starts with one thing above all else: effort.

    The Pacers of November were wildly short on talent but their energy, aggression and hustle were in abundance. They won games they had no reason to win simply because they tried harder, worked harder, went after it harder. They weren’t a particularly good team by any means, but they were easy to like.

    The Pacers of January are losing games they have no reason to lose and have become a loathsome group because of their utterly uninspired play.

    Was it simply too much to expect for any team to play that hard for a full season?

    “It wasn’t too much to ask and we need to get back to that,” Scola said. “It’s the first step. Until we do that, all the other changes we do, all the other adjustments we do, they won’t work because in this profession if you don’t do that, then nothing works.”

    Until the Pacers rekindle that lost energy, the list of reasons for optimism will remain as empty as their results.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: excellent article by Conrad Brunner

    Man, Hill sounded down. I do agree with Brunner though, this team isn't much above average even with a healthy roster.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: excellent article by Conrad Brunner

      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post

      Apparently, the return of George Hill from his latest injury has not proved quite as inspiring as anticipated. Hill has played relatively well in limited minutes, and within a week or so should be ready to resume a full-time load. But face it, even if Paul George walked through that door (and he most certainly is not) this would be a very average team.

      “The good thing is it can only get better,” Hill said. “I don’t think it can get any worse from here. We’re already at the bottom. We’ve just got to try to turn things around.”

      Asked if he could identify one or two things that could lead to a turnaround, Hill replied:

      “Offense and defense.”

      Gotta say, UB, I'm pleasantly surprised that you posted and appreciated an article that is honest about the current situation.

      As to the bolded? Amen. Even Brunner, normally a sunshiner through and through, sees the obvious. We simply cannot go into next season with these guys and think things will be hunky dory with Paul George returning.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: excellent article by Conrad Brunner

        I think there is a cancer within what is considered the "core" of this team, and Hibbert and West are at the center of it.
        Danger Zone

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: excellent article by Conrad Brunner

          Originally posted by Rogco View Post
          I think there is a cancer within what is considered the "core" of this team, and Hibbert and West are at the center of it.


          Where did you get THAT from this article?
          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

          • #6
            Re: excellent article by Conrad Brunner

            Originally posted by 3rdStrike View Post
            Gotta say, UB, I'm pleasantly surprised that you posted and appreciated an article that is honest about the current situation.

            As to the bolded? Amen. Even Brunner, normally a sunshiner through and through, sees the obvious. We simply cannot go into next season with these guys and think things will be hunky dory with Paul George returning.
            We will only have 8 of the 15 Players next season from the roster, so I don't expect to go into next season "hunky dory" even with PG13 returning. My guess is that the rest will be gone since they are Expiring Contracts. The question is what will Bird do to replace the holes that we have.

            That's why I don't expect the same results next season even with the return of PG13......I think that the 8 Players could be a good foundation to build upon and if Bird makes the right signings ( yeah, I know....good luck with that ) to fill the remaining needs that can hopefully complement the rest of the existing roster while drafting the right Player....we can still be a solid Playoff Team. Then in the summer of 2016.....with West likely gone.....continue to build upon that.
            Last edited by CableKC; 01-28-2015, 01:57 PM.
            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: excellent article by Conrad Brunner

              Originally posted by 3rdStrike View Post
              Gotta say, UB, I'm pleasantly surprised that you posted and appreciated an article that is honest about the current situation.

              As to the bolded? Amen. Even Brunner, normally a sunshiner through and through, sees the obvious. We simply cannot go into next season with these guys and think things will be hunky dory with Paul George returning.
              I get the feeling the point he was making was that he expected the team didn't feel good about its chances either. If they don't feel they are playing well enough to excel in a favorable situation, how could he?
              Time for a new sig.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: excellent article by Conrad Brunner

                Originally posted by BillS View Post


                Where did you get THAT from this article?
                Guys are without morale? There’s a clause with a cause.

                While certainly not a smoking gun or a quoted admission, I don't think it's a real stretch to believe that one of the lack of moral players is our center who seems to suffer from moral issues from time to time. As to West I doubt the moral issue is from him however it is not unfair to say that what defined the beginning of the season wins (effort, energy, ball movement) all kind of went away when West returned.

                Again I'm not saying Rogco is right, but I don't think he is as far off base as you seem to think he is.


                Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: excellent article by Conrad Brunner

                  The team has played horribly for the most part the past 2 or 3 weeks. Hard to believe they won a game in Milwaukee not that long ago.

                  But what I don't understand why so many in this forum must find something bad (or almost evil) going on here. Example: West and Roy are a cancer within the team.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: excellent article by Conrad Brunner

                    Originally posted by BillS View Post


                    Where did you get THAT from this article?
                    Cuz, they are considered low hanging fruit. If GH starts playing terribly, he'll be called out as well.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: excellent article by Conrad Brunner

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      The team has played horribly for the most part the past 2 or 3 weeks. Hard to believe they won a game in Milwaukee not that long ago.

                      But what I don't understand why so many in this forum must find something bad (or almost evil) going on here. Example: West and Roy are a cancer within the team.
                      Its simple, poster X doesn't like said player (or players) and therefore said player must be the reason we are losing. It doesn't go much deeper than that imo

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: excellent article by Conrad Brunner

                        Originally posted by Peck View Post
                        Guys are without morale? There’s a clause with a cause.

                        While certainly not a smoking gun or a quoted admission, I don't think it's a real stretch to believe that one of the lack of moral players is our center who seems to suffer from moral issues from time to time. As to West I doubt the moral issue is from him however it is not unfair to say that what defined the beginning of the season wins (effort, energy, ball movement) all kind of went away when West returned.

                        Again I'm not saying Rogco is right, but I don't think he is as far off base as you seem to think he is.
                        Having a lack of morale is not what I'd call being a cancer. I see extrapolating Roy and West being down to Roy and West have infected everyone else on the team with bad attitudes as being far off base.
                        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

                        • #13
                          Re: excellent article by Conrad Brunner

                          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                          The team has played horribly for the most part the past 2 or 3 weeks. Hard to believe they won a game in Milwaukee not that long ago.

                          But what I don't understand why so many in this forum must find something bad (or almost evil) going on here. Example: West and Roy are a cancer within the team.
                          I think people are just searching for answers. We're really underperforming as a team, even considering the injuries, so what's causing the underperformance? If it's not morale, what is it? And if it is morale, what's causing the morale issues. This team, on paper, is better than the Jim O'Brien era teams.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: excellent article by Conrad Brunner

                            There were two things that stuck out to me in the article.

                            First was that Brunner identified as the trade deadline as something to look forward to. That makes me think that a trade or two (I hope) is being worked on.

                            The second thing is Scola saying that there is no reason a team can not play as hard as we did in November all season. It seems to me like Scola plays hard all the time (not necessarily good, but with effort) and he is trying to lead by example. The sign of a good veteran.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: excellent article by Conrad Brunner

                              Originally posted by BillS View Post
                              Having a lack of morale is not what I'd call being a cancer. I see extrapolating Roy and West being down to Roy and West have infected everyone else on the team with bad attitudes as being far off base.
                              That is something Rogco would have to explain, I honestly don't know what he was trying to say. I just think that it is not to hard for me to imagine that a player, no matter who the player is, who has to be catered to in one degree or another would impact the moral of the team.


                              Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                              Working...
                              X