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 4/14/2015 - Pacers Vs. Wizards

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

  • Re: Post Game Thread 4/14/2015 - Pacers Vs. Wizards

    Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
    I have presented in argument in which no one will even attempt to debunk. Why is it okay that we expect PG to get us 20-5-5-2 with lockdown D, yet its okay for Roy to average 11-7-1 with solid D.
    Because Paul George is one of the best players in the NBA? There just aren't that many great two-way players in the league.

    EDIT: I should clarify that I don't have specific statistical expectations for either player, but I definitely expect more out of Paul George because he is a better player overall.
    Last edited by LG33; 04-15-2015, 02:35 PM.

    Comment


    • Re: Post Game Thread 4/14/2015 - Pacers Vs. Wizards

      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
      So you honestly think every player has the same role?

      If your answer is "no" then you've answered your own question. If you answer "yes" then why are we limiting this conversation to just Roy?
      yes since86 thats exactly right. Roy hibberts should be playing point gaurd. you got me.



      im done with the BS. Larry Bird will and is going to settle it.

      Comment


      • Re: Post Game Thread 4/14/2015 - Pacers Vs. Wizards

        Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
        yes since86 thats exactly right. Roy hibberts should be playing point gaurd. you got me.
        If you acknowledge that different players have different roles, then the logical extension of that is that different roles are followed by different expectations.

        But then again, I'm pissing up a rope talking logic.
        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

        Comment


        • Re: Post Game Thread 4/14/2015 - Pacers Vs. Wizards

          Originally posted by Peck View Post
          OMG are you kidding me? There are people on here who Roy can do no wrong, period. If Roy has a bad game, if they will even admit to him having a bad game it is because of some illness or injury that nobody seems to know about but them. That he is not only an elite level rim protector but is possibly the greatest of all time (yes some hyperbole there but if I could remember who I would try and dig up the post by the guy comparing Roy to Bill Russell, I'm not kidding).

          When Roy has a game of 3 points and 1 rebound we are inundated with advanced metrics telling us that our eyes are at fault for not understanding that in reality he was responsible for the team gathering 32 rebounds and his offensive production doesn't matter because he alters every shot (yes hyperbole again but you get the point).

          Why is it so hard for people on the pro Hibbert side to admit that some on your side go to far the other way? I am freely telling you that some anti Hibbert people go to far, it is so impossible that some people make excuses for him.
          I defend Roy a lot from time to time, but I'm definitely not pro-hibbert. I know what we're getting from him now, and I know in 2016 he comes off the books and I DO NOT want him back.

          Also completely agree about DG- He ultimately would have made way better on defense and offense. As you said he was very valuable of course as that weakside shot blocker, but he helped on offense as well. Had he stayed healthy he would have forced the offense to PG/Hill while he remained that incredibly valuable spot up shooter. That would have forced the offensively challenged Vogel to have a decent offense.

          But. Injuries happen. That one definitely derailed the Pacers title chances with the current core. But **** happens.

          Comment


          • Re: Post Game Thread 4/14/2015 - Pacers Vs. Wizards

            Originally posted by Peck View Post
            OMG are you kidding me? There are people on here who Roy can do no wrong, period. If Roy has a bad game, if they will even admit to him having a bad game it is because of some illness or injury that nobody seems to know about but them. That he is not only an elite level rim protector but is possibly the greatest of all time (yes some hyperbole there but if I could remember who I would try and dig up the post by the guy comparing Roy to Bill Russell, I'm not kidding).
            Am I missing these posts? There are some posters that lean sunshiny towards all things Pacers, but none that I can think of that are blindly faithful Roy Hibbert enthusiasts. You're going to need to find me some sources if you want to convince me because I just don't see it. I would have no problem finding sources for the opposite. They're quite literally everywhere.

            Comment


            • Re: Post Game Thread 4/14/2015 - Pacers Vs. Wizards

              Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
              I have presented in argument in which no one will even attempt to debunk. Why is it okay that we expect PG to get us 20-5-5-2 with lockdown D, yet its okay for Roy to average 11-7-1 with solid D.
              I don't expect PG to get us 20-5-5-2 with lockdown D.

              Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
              so if PG only averaged 13-3-3-1 at 19 mill per it would be okay because he plays good defense????
              As long as he shows up to big games then I would have no problem with it.
              Originally posted by IrishPacer
              Empty vessels make the most noise.

              Comment


              • Re: Post Game Thread 4/14/2015 - Pacers Vs. Wizards

                The thing with Roy is simple, on a couple different levels.

                1. You're beating a dead horse. We ALL know your feelings about Roy. Using every postgame thread, every game thread, every thread that even comes close to mentioning Roy to spout the same things that you've said the previous thread, gets extremely annoying.
                2. No amount of your *****ing changes one damn thing. Accept him for what he is, you'll be happier.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • Re: Post Game Thread 4/14/2015 - Pacers Vs. Wizards

                  Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                  If you acknowledge that different players have different roles, then the logical extension of that is that different roles are followed by different expectations.

                  But then again, I'm pissing up a rope talking logic.
                  i could say the same when the very stats you presented weeks ago regarding rebounding numbers in comparison of west vs east proved the exact theory i exemplified. so much for the logic rope you continue to **** on.

                  but thats now irrelevant at this point right. ahhh.... i see how it works. only considered logic when the bias you present works to your favor.

                  PD propaganda at its finest.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Post Game Thread 4/14/2015 - Pacers Vs. Wizards

                    Originally posted by Peck View Post
                    OMG are you kidding me? There are people on here who Roy can do no wrong, period. If Roy has a bad game, if they will even admit to him having a bad game it is because of some illness or injury that nobody seems to know about but them. That he is not only an elite level rim protector but is possibly the greatest of all time (yes some hyperbole there but if I could remember who I would try and dig up the post by the guy comparing Roy to Bill Russell, I'm not kidding).

                    When Roy has a game of 3 points and 1 rebound we are inundated with advanced metrics telling us that our eyes are at fault for not understanding that in reality he was responsible for the team gathering 32 rebounds and his offensive production doesn't matter because he alters every shot (yes hyperbole again but you get the point).

                    Why is it so hard for people on the pro Hibbert side to admit that some on your side go to far the other way? I am freely telling you that some anti Hibbert people go to far, it is so impossible that some people make excuses for him.
                    I'm probably one of the people that you're talking about so allow me to be clear.

                    If people didn't go out of their way to say BS about Roy or any other of our players I wouldn't say BS to defend them.

                    When people were attacking Danny and DC, I was defending those two and not Roy. It doesn't has anything to do with the player attacked. I have assumed the exact same position every time one of our players is atacked. It's as simple as that.
                    Originally posted by IrishPacer
                    Empty vessels make the most noise.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Post Game Thread 4/14/2015 - Pacers Vs. Wizards

                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      The thing with Roy is simple, on a couple different levels.


                      2. No amount of your *****ing changes one damn thing. Accept him for what he is, you'll be happier.
                      translation - set expectations low.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Post Game Thread 4/14/2015 - Pacers Vs. Wizards

                        Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                        i see how it works. only considered logic when the bias you present works to your favor.

                        PD propaganda at its finest.
                        No, it's considered logic because you're unable to coherently come up with an argument.


                        When you actually provide some thought out reason for why Paul and Roy should have the same expectations attached to them, come find me.
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Post Game Thread 4/14/2015 - Pacers Vs. Wizards

                          Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                          translation - set expectations low.
                          Translation - live within the confines of reality, and not your fantasty
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Post Game Thread 4/14/2015 - Pacers Vs. Wizards

                            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                            Translation - live within the confines of reality, and not your fantasty
                            and for you reality is the cap is irrelevant. great perspective. how did you not become an NBA GM with wisdom such as this. isaiah shoulda brought you into the knicks long ago ... that dumpster fire woulda fit you like a glove.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Post Game Thread 4/14/2015 - Pacers Vs. Wizards

                              By the way rebounding is tricky to judge off of RPG anyways. As "bad" as Roy does, and I'll freely admit sometimes he does a terrible job eating up rebounds, I never think it is as bad as people say. First- his per 36 numbers are comparable to guys around the league we consider good rebounders. On top of that, I just don't see him getting beat for offensive boards much. We've all seen from time to time when guys are getting beat on the boards, but generally when the traffic is thick around the middle Roy most of the time comes up with it in traffic.

                              I've also seen plenty of times guys who are capable rebounders not end up with a lot of rebounds. Danny Granger is a great example of that. At the SF spot he was always considered a below average rebounder. He wouldn't great 5 or 6 defensive boards a game like Rudy Gay or Paul George. But he always averaged more offensive rebounds than both. He just didn't crash the boards much. But if you watched... when he did? The results were predictable. He's strong base and absurdly long arms helped him in that area.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Post Game Thread 4/14/2015 - Pacers Vs. Wizards

                                Originally posted by Peck View Post
                                Who?
                                You answered that question yourself.

                                Originally posted by Peck View Post
                                I don't think you are giving enough credit to the fact that some people just got tired of Roy's game before that. There might be a few who blame him for some part of last season (I am one of them) but I don't know of anyone who blames him for all of it. It was a myriad of issues IMO, some of which we will never know.
                                The thing is that Roy played very good basketball before the ASB. Heck, he played well enough to be an All-Star. So, no, people couldn't get tired of his game before our team's collapse.

                                Roy started playing awfully the exact same time the team collapsed. That's when people turned on him and the team.

                                That said, I agree that our collapse last season was caused by a myriad of issues that we will probably never know.
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X