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 sign Jordan Hill

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

  • Re: Pacers sign Jordan Hill

    Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
    That is all your personal opinion and you are entitled to it. No matter how narrow minded and inaccurate I find it to be. If you believe its all one sided you may as well reinsert your head back where it belongs.
    I second Ace's personal opinion. I don't think many have any issues with your opinion of Roy (no matter how much they disagree with it). It's the melodramatics that's the issue.

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers sign Jordan Hill

      Originally posted by P_George View Post
      I just want to say this; our defense and rim protection moving forward worries me, but honestly... that rim protection didn't win us any rings. Being stuck in that inevitable purgatory of good, but not good enough was getting old. And it was at a point where it was basically two teams in the East - Miami and Indiana. You look around at these up-and-coming teams and they're doing the small ball thing with teams like Milwaukee, Orlando, Golden State, etc. I think our team has the potential to be crazy good on offense. We have floor spacing to spare and our bench has some spark plugs on it that you'd assume could really, really put up some points(Miles, Stuckey, Young). Excited to see the finished product.

      Bingo! In my view we were never real contenders with that core. I've been pining for Larry to make this philosophy change for years. Just because we get quicker and more athletic doesn't mean we have to be bad defensively. We don't have to be small either. Looks like Larry is looking for bigs who are athletic and quick. Long time coming.

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers sign Jordan Hill

        I like the signing. Don't expect JHill to be an All Star or anything outrageous. At this point, we probably know as much about the bigs rotation as we know about quantum physics on this board, lol. Jordan, LaVoy, Ian, Myles, doses of PG... I don't know how Frank is going to put it together.

        What I do know is that we needed more depth on the block and this signing provides that. Are we content? Obviously not. Are we better than the injured and dysfunctional mess that loomed ominously in the coming season? Yes. I think where a lot of us are getting hung up is the expectation that Paul was going to return healthy to the same contender he last played for. But the reality is that team was completely gone. Lance gone, Roy vanished, West (don't ban me for this) quit on that team. That run was fantastic to see, and we've all been so starved for success that we weren't willing to admit it.

        Signing Monta, drafting Myles, waving goodbye to West, and dumping Roy is as clear as it gets. This is a new team. Jordan isn't the answer in the frontcourt, but he'll be serviceable and we will continue to improve over the next couple seasons, and will be solid contenders again with PG leading the way.

        Also, for everyone wondering where JH will fit, we're in the East. Most nights we'll be able to play him with LaVoy and not be terribly over-matched down low. Get rebounds and putbacks, and hit an occasional mid-range shot while just getting a body on most Eastern bigs, then let our talented wing rotation do the rest. Should be fun this year. Grab your popcorn.
        Last edited by pizza guy; 07-10-2015, 06:53 AM.
        It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers sign Jordan Hill

          Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
          That is all your personal opinion and you are entitled to it. No matter how narrow minded and inaccurate I find it to be. If you believe its all one sided you may as well reinsert your head back where it belongs.
          I feel this Roy topic affects you perhaps a bit too much..

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers sign Jordan Hill

            Originally posted by P_George View Post
            I just want to say this; our defense and rim protection moving forward worries me, but honestly... that rim protection didn't win us any rings. Being stuck in that inevitable purgatory of good, but not good enough was getting old. And it was at a point where it was basically two teams in the East - Miami and Indiana. You look around at these up-and-coming teams and they're doing the small ball thing with teams like Milwaukee, Orlando, Golden State, etc. I think our team has the potential to be crazy good on offense. We have floor spacing to spare and our bench has some spark plugs on it that you'd assume could really, really put up some points(Miles, Stuckey, Young). Excited to see the finished product.
            MIL is not doing the small ball thing. They are freakishly tall and long.

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers sign Jordan Hill

              Originally posted by Ichi View Post
              MIL is not doing the small ball thing. They are freakishly tall and long.
              And they are great defensively as well.
              Originally posted by IrishPacer
              Empty vessels make the most noise.

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers sign Jordan Hill

                Originally posted by Wage View Post
                I hope you are right, but I'm not as optimistic. The Raps won 49 games last year, and while I think they handed out some crazy contracts, I think they will be a better team this year. The Heat are obviously all about health, but a Dragic, Wade, Winslow, Bosh, Whiteside line up scares me quite a bit. I think the Wizards were criminally underrated last year. I feel like they were a John Wall fractured Hand from being in the ECF. Bucks are a very good young team that now has playoff experience, and just added Monroe and Jabari Parker to the court. And the Hawks may fall off, but they won 60 last year, so they have a long way to fall before we catch up.
                The Wiz may not have been in the 2nd round if not for The Truth, who is not with them any longer. I just don't see that team as being as good as I once thought they were. The Raptors do not scare anyone. MIL, CHi, CLE, WAS, ATL are the teams to look out for imo. But WAS barely so. I think the East is pretty decent if healthy, and that includes us.

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers sign Jordan Hill

                  Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                  My bet is about Roy's rim protection. You have said several times that you consider that Roy's rim protection is overstated by this board. I couldn't disagree more with that and that's why I want to take you up on a bet. That's why I made all those clarifications to my post. Do you want to bet on Roy's rim protection or no?

                  Now, as far as rebounding is concerned. I've said numerous times that rebounding is a team exercise. Individual rebounding numbers don't mean a lot to me. You may believe that Jordan Hill is a better rebounder than Roy but the fact of the matter is that the Pacers were a much better rebounding team than the Lakers. As long as you continue to consider rebounding an individual activity then I don't think that we can agree on a bet that has to do with rebounding.
                  Clear example of what I am illustrating. I have never said such thing. Rim protection is all Roy has got. Hence the reason you want to put this algebraic metrics formuation stipulation into our bet. I am not disagreeing with all stats, its just that defensive metrics are as team orientated if not more so than rebounding or scoring etc. I will take a gander later @ the link you provided.

                  All I have essentially stated repetitionally is that Roys rim protection does not make him an elite defender. I have supported this view with multiple head to head box score production vs elite. Not rehashing this same tired argument.

                  I simplified the terms to rebounding. Its a much more definitive stat which I prefer when it involves wagers of any kind. Can't say I blame you one bit for backing down from these conditions.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers sign Jordan Hill

                    Originally posted by P_George View Post
                    I just want to say this; our defense and rim protection moving forward worries me, but honestly... that rim protection didn't win us any rings. Being stuck in that inevitable purgatory of good, but not good enough was getting old. And it was at a point where it was basically two teams in the East - Miami and Indiana. You look around at these up-and-coming teams and they're doing the small ball thing with teams like Milwaukee, Orlando, Golden State, etc. I think our team has the potential to be crazy good on offense. We have floor spacing to spare and our bench has some spark plugs on it that you'd assume could really, really put up some points(Miles, Stuckey, Young). Excited to see the finished product.
                    I'm have to disagree with you. While i'm excited that we are getting more athletic, one fact remains. No team beat us in the playoffs except Miami who had an ungodly talented line up, and they in many of those series they got some really lucky breaks that swung the tide in their favor. Granger injury, PG's concussion, the Lancetics. I really think in all 3 series, we were just as good as team as Miami. So I really question the idea of changing the style so much other than Hibbert and West were teetering on the edge of their production vs money. I would have rather of seen Bird reload on younger more athletic bigs. This power post style might have its downfalls but i'd put my money on it over any team in the East that doesn't have Lebron James. I just think teams that are able to control the Pace are much better suited to playoff success.

                    I don't see ECFs as being stuck in purgatory, and our team from 2 seasons ago would have defeated both the Cavs and the Warriors. That Cavs team was seriously flawed and injury riddled, and Draymond Green couldn't hope to hold West's jock strap provided he had something to play for.
                    We were just snakebit with injury last year.
                    You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers sign Jordan Hill

                      Originally posted by Ichi View Post
                      MIL is not doing the small ball thing. They are freakishly tall and long.
                      Yup Milwaukee has that dark horse look, but i'm not so sure they will be good enough defensively to make a playoff run with Monroe and Parker. Giannis is a defensive stud, but he lacks fundamentals IMO.
                      You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers sign Jordan Hill

                        Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                        Yup Milwaukee has that dark horse look, but i'm not so sure they will be good enough defensively to make a playoff run with Monroe and Parker. Giannis is a defensive stud, but he lacks fundamentals IMO.
                        Yeah, it will be very interesting to see how they mask that frontcourt on D.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers sign Jordan Hill

                          Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                          Clear example of what I am illustrating. I have never said such thing. Rim protection is all Roy has got. Hence the reason you want to put this algebraic metrics formuation stipulation into our bet. I am not disagreeing with all stats, its just that defensive metrics are as team orientated if not more so than rebounding or scoring etc. I will take a gander later @ the link you provided.

                          All I have essentially stated repetitionally is that Roys rim protection does not make him an elite defender.
                          So, to make this clear once and for all. Do you believe that Roy is an elite rim protector? If yes, then all is well and we don't need to have a bet. If not, then we need to have this bet and close this argument once and for all.

                          Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                          I have supported this view with multiple head to head box score production vs elite. Not rehashing this same tired argument.
                          But you have failed to take into account that a lot of their scoring has come against the rest of our bigs (either when Roy is on the bench or when he defends someone else). Take the 13-14 ECSFs against the Wizards as an example. People complained that Gortat scored on Roy but the reality is that Roy was guarding Nene (and he did an awesome job at that) while West was the one that was guarding Gortat and allowed him to score.

                          Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                          I simplified the terms to rebounding. Its a much more definitive stat which I prefer when it involves wagers of any kind. Can't say I blame you one bit for backing down from these conditions.
                          I'm not backing down from any conditions simply because those conditions were never set. I'm the one who proposed the bet and I couldn't be any more clear. My bet is about rim protection. Do you accept it or not?
                          Originally posted by IrishPacer
                          Empty vessels make the most noise.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers sign Jordan Hill

                            So, is this our championship roster for the next 2 to 3 years?

                            GH / Stuckey / Young
                            Monta / Miles
                            PG13 / Solo / Rudez
                            Jordan / Lavoy / ???
                            Myles / ????
                            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers sign Jordan Hill

                              Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                              So, is this our championship roster for the next 2 to 3 years?

                              GH / Stuckey / Young
                              Monta / Miles
                              PG13 / Solo / Rudez
                              Jordan / Lavoy / ???
                              Myles / ????
                              I hope Solo is not a part of our long term plans. He's as mediocre as it gets.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers sign Jordan Hill

                                Originally posted by presto123 View Post
                                I hope Solo is not a part of our long term plans. He's as mediocre as it gets.
                                No. Maceo Baston is as mediocre as it gets. lol
                                Seriously though, I don't share this opinion when it comes to Solo.. But I wouldn't bet a ton of money on him being a solid player for his career either. He's an interesting guy to me, and looking forward to see how he pans out.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X