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

Post Game Thread 2/24/2015 - Pacers @ Thunder

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

  • #76
    Re: Post Game Thread 2/24/2015 - Pacers @ Thunder

    Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
    "physical limitations?" Roy is 7 foot freaking 2 for crocks sake.
    "Hey man don't make fun of that kid in the wheel chair"
    "He's 6ft for crocks sake...."

    Phsyical limitations goes beyond height. I would have thought that would have been obvious.

    EDIT: And yes I know I took it to the extreme, and Roy isn't in a wheelchair. Just pointing out that "phsyical limitations" in no way are limited to how tall someone is. I mean we're talking about a 7fter that couldn't do a pushup nor run up and down the court longer than a few minutes at the age of 18.
    Last edited by Since86; 02-26-2015, 09:22 AM.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Post Game Thread 2/24/2015 - Pacers @ Thunder

      Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
      "physical limitations?" Roy is 7 foot freaking 2 for crocks sake. im not buying that boloney. you are correct and I have lowered my expectations. however, I believe roy should have advanced his offensive game way more by now. he just has no clue about positioning, and with his size he should eat offensive glass for breakfast.



      I will agree that I was a bit harsh that roy is soft, he will absorb contact but at the same time he should give a hard foul every now and again just to make offensive players think twice. there is a way to go about it where its not obvious. just once I woulda loved to seen him knock D BAG Wade on his *** last ECF.

      you are correct regarding roys next contract, I should have qualified with the expectation the salary cap is going to balloon season after next. with that said he is not worth over 12M even under those circumstances. other than "rim protection" he truly don't bring much. and his rim protection is flawed due to a lack of foot speed in covering ground (reference jeff Teague blow bys last postseason as one example).

      listen I like Roy, but I don't want to overpay for his services. that's the bottom line.
      Let me get this straight, Roy's rim protection is flawed because he can't stay in front of one of the league's fastest point guards?

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Post Game Thread 2/24/2015 - Pacers @ Thunder

        Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
        Your assertion that Roy is soft is just dead wrong and it makes me think you're not objective when it comes to Roy. It seems like you say nothing about him when he plays well and just wait for the opportunity to dog on him if he doesn't. Roy has never been afraid of contact which at times this year has cost him with foul trouble but for the norm he's been smart enough using the verticality rule to stay in the game and be very effective at protecting the rim. Roy gets more non block stops then he does blocks and it's easy to see from the reaction he gets from opposing players that the non blocks come from their fear of driving on him. Ask Al Horford how soft Roy is. Laying the wood as you put it is not a measure of a good defender anyway, anyone can smack someone when they're driving the lane but it doesn't make you a good defender.
        I loved Foster and Dale both of which were great defensive players as is Roy but all 3 players were completely different in how they defended. The end result though is that Roy is a more effective defensive player then Jeff or DD. I must say that I miss both of these guys and I loved watching Dale have it out with the Knicks.
        As far as what Roy's next salary nets, you can be quoted at 10 but he'll get at least 15 mil. Keep in mind that the salary cap is going up so if we're able to lock him down at that we'll be lucky.
        I can't tell if I consider this just madness or blasphemy.

        Look Roy is a great rim protector, hell I'll call him elite and won't bat an eye. But that's it. He is not a great one on one defender in the post, he is slow laterally and while verticality is a nice tool to have in your bag he is only successful at it because he can go straight up and is already 7'2" tall other than that he can't jump over a phone book.

        So if you want to say that Roy is the best rim protector of the three, I'll agree. But that is it, both Davis and Foster were better overall defenders than what Roy is.


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

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Post Game Thread 2/24/2015 - Pacers @ Thunder

          Why can't we just say that DD, Foster, and Roy were all great defenders in their own way? I honestly can't think of 3 more different, but still strong defenders on the same franchise at the same position in recent memory.

          Also, if we're really ranking it, you're gonna have tough time selling me that Foster is actually better defensively than Roy. Roy is a major lynch pin in one of the league's best defensive teams over the past now 4 years. Foster was good, but he also played on a team that was actually anchored defensively by two other people, Ron and JO. Roy and Paul are the anchors of this team's defensive strategy. I would never say that about Foster, even though I still think he was very good.
          Last edited by Trader Joe; 02-26-2015, 10:42 AM.


          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Post Game Thread 2/24/2015 - Pacers @ Thunder

            Listen PacerNation, I realize I may seem to be beating a dead horse on Roy. Well excuse the **** out of me from trying to see my beloved Franchise make a collosal mistake with Roys next contract.

            I believe my position has merit. Were not talking about a 3M per 3 year contract waste of space with Chris Copeland type of deal here. Were discussing 15M over likely 4 seasons. How F****** would we be with Lance Stephenson's chemistry/immaturity issues right now like Jordan is at this time. Some may say lance would be fine here, but I was against paying that cat "whatever it takes" as many as half as on here suggested last year which was just absolutely absurd for a kid that immature and "selfish."

            Flat out, I could give two ***** about contracts like CJ Miles, Stuckey, Copeland... but were discussing up to potentially 25% of our cap room for a small market Franchise on a player that really doesn't excel at much outside of being 7'2. I get centers are paid a premium and we do not attract top flight talent here in Indiana but I trust in Bird more than most to assemble a damn good roster and the only player worth max money is PG. Building around him is paramount for the next 4+ seasons and Hibbert has peaked.

            Im attached to my beloved Franchise, not the players. there is a reason as much as I despise Bill Belicheat that the Cheatriots are successful. They do not overpay for scrub talent. Not that roy is but he aint worth 25% of our cap number.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Post Game Thread 2/24/2015 - Pacers @ Thunder

              Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
              Listen PacerNation, I realize I may seem to be beating a dead horse on Roy. Well excuse the **** out of me from trying to see my beloved Franchise make a collosal mistake with Roys next contract.

              I believe my position has merit. Were not talking about a 3M per 3 year contract waste of space with Chris Copeland type of deal here. Were discussing 15M over likely 4 seasons. How F****** would we be with Lance Stephenson's chemistry/immaturity issues right now like Jordan is at this time. Some may say lance would be fine here, but I was against paying that cat "whatever it takes" as many as half as on here suggested last year which was just absolutely absurd for a kid that immature and "selfish."

              Flat out, I could give two ***** about contracts like CJ Miles, Stuckey, Copeland... but were discussing up to potentially 25% of our cap room for a small market Franchise on a player that really doesn't excel at much outside of being 7'2. I get centers are paid a premium and we do not attract top flight talent here in Indiana but I trust in Bird more than most to assemble a damn good roster and the only player worth max money is PG. Building around him is paramount for the next 4+ seasons and Hibbert has peaked.

              Im attached to my beloved Franchise, not the players. there is a reason as much as I despise Bill Belicheat that the Cheatriots are successful. They do not overpay for scrub talent. Not that roy is but he aint worth 25% of our cap number.
              I could be wrong, but I thought the cap for the summer of 2016 was being predicted at 90 million. Signing Roy to a $15 million a year contract at that time would be similar to signing him at around $13 million now. I still think $15 million would be a little high, but not terrible under those circumstances.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Post Game Thread 2/24/2015 - Pacers @ Thunder

                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                Listen PacerNation, I realize I may seem to be beating a dead horse on Roy. Well excuse the **** out of me from trying to see my beloved Franchise make a collosal mistake with Roys next contract.

                I believe my position has merit. Were not talking about a 3M per 3 year contract waste of space with Chris Copeland type of deal here. Were discussing 15M over likely 4 seasons. How F****** would we be with Lance Stephenson's chemistry/immaturity issues right now like Jordan is at this time. Some may say lance would be fine here, but I was against paying that cat "whatever it takes" as many as half as on here suggested last year which was just absolutely absurd for a kid that immature and "selfish."

                Flat out, I could give two ***** about contracts like CJ Miles, Stuckey, Copeland... but were discussing up to potentially 25% of our cap room for a small market Franchise on a player that really doesn't excel at much outside of being 7'2. I get centers are paid a premium and we do not attract top flight talent here in Indiana but I trust in Bird more than most to assemble a damn good roster and the only player worth max money is PG. Building around him is paramount for the next 4+ seasons and Hibbert has peaked.

                Im attached to my beloved Franchise, not the players. there is a reason as much as I despise Bill Belicheat that the Cheatriots are successful. They do not overpay for scrub talent. Not that roy is but he aint worth 25% of our cap number.
                It's a lot easier to do that when contracts aren't fully guaranteed.

                Not picking on you here PP, but just in general, we need to stop comparing the NBA to the NFL. The only thing they have in common is that they are professional sports leagues.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Post Game Thread 2/24/2015 - Pacers @ Thunder

                  Also, just my personal opinion, but I think it's hard to argue that Roy hasn't been fairly paid on this deal. Important piece of two conference finals teams, important piece of an extremely strong defense.

                  I don't know what Roy's value will be on his next deal, but you see guys like Mozgov commanding two first round picks in trades and you start realize that bigs who can defend and chew bubble gum at the same time are still worth a lot.


                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Post Game Thread 2/24/2015 - Pacers @ Thunder

                    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                    Why can't we just say that DD, Foster, and Roy were all great defenders in their own way? I honestly can't think of 3 more different, but still strong defenders on the same franchise at the same position in recent memory.

                    Also, if we're really ranking it, you're gonna have tough time selling me that Foster is actually better defensively than Roy. Roy is a major lynch pin in one of the league's best defensive teams over the past now 4 years. Foster was good, but he also played on a team that was actually anchored defensively by two other people, Ron and JO. Roy and Paul are the anchors of this team's defensive strategy. I would never say that about Foster, even though I still think he was very good.
                    Well if I'm being honest here only one of them was a great defender and I don't have to tell anyone who I think that was. He was the only one combined speed, footwork, strength and yes rim protection. The other two had elements of this in their game but neither combined it all.

                    Roy & Jeff are the exact opposites in fact as far as defense goes. Jeff wouldn't know a blocked shot if it were broken down frame by frame and diagramed for him and Roy Hibbert uses footwork and leverage in the same way that Homie the clown does, in other words "Homie don't play that".

                    It would be interesting to see who Uncle Buck would grade as a better defender Foster or Hibbert.


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

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Post Game Thread 2/24/2015 - Pacers @ Thunder

                      Originally posted by Peck View Post
                      Well if I'm being honest here only one of them was a great defender and I don't have to tell anyone who I think that was. He was the only one combined speed, footwork, strength and yes rim protection. The other two had elements of this in their game but neither combined it all.

                      Roy & Jeff are the exact opposites in fact as far as defense goes. Jeff wouldn't know a blocked shot if it were broken down frame by frame and diagramed for him and Roy Hibbert uses footwork and leverage in the same way that Homie the clown does, in other words "Homie don't play that".

                      It would be interesting to see who Uncle Buck would grade as a better defender Foster or Hibbert.


                      I got a hearty chuckle out of that. So true. Foster didn't give the first **** about blocking shots.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Post Game Thread 2/24/2015 - Pacers @ Thunder

                        Foster just cared about good azz defense.


                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Post Game Thread 2/24/2015 - Pacers @ Thunder

                          Is Jeff Foster the most overrated player in Pacers history?

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Post Game Thread 2/24/2015 - Pacers @ Thunder

                            Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                            Is Jeff Foster the most overrated player in Pacers history?
                            Where is this coming from? Jeff is one of the most beloved dudes to ever lace his shoes up here and turned marginal talent into a great career.

                            A few years ago I think there was a thread about retiring his number and the vast majority of posters said no way. I am not sure who is overrating him.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Post Game Thread 2/24/2015 - Pacers @ Thunder

                              Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                              Is Jeff Foster the most overrated player in Pacers history?

                              Are you kidding?



                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Post Game Thread 2/24/2015 - Pacers @ Thunder

                                I love Foster. One of my favorite Pacers ever. And that's all I have to say about that.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X