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 Knock Out game: Round 4

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

  • Re: Pacers Knock Out game: Round 4

    Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
    I think that's quite a weird jump. In-fact West said he decision to leave had nothing to do with PG or Hibbert, he simply didn't think we could win a title this season. That doesn't mean he isn't excited about PG or he is more concerned about Hibbert's reduced role. In-fact I don't think he ever commented on Hibbert's role he only said he didn't like how Larry blasted him in public. I hope we prove him wrong but that seems to be stretching what he said.
    If David thought this team had any chance to contend, why would he take $10 million less? Sure, he skips to the beat of a different drummer, but he ain't $10million stupid. I hope this is at least a playoff team, but I don't know... They've lost more this offseason than they've gained, even with PG returning, presumably, to full health. This is a roster right now with only three legit NBA starters, one of which I've never been impressed with and was hoping he was just using the Pacers to get Miami to overpay him. I agree, I hope they prove me wrong, that's why they play the games once the season starts.
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers Knock Out game: Round 4

      Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
      He has played great games, but nothing I would call dominant.
      Exactly. Paul has had his moments and gotten hot, but he simply hasn't been dominant. IMO, being dominant is more than just one game or a few. It requires more of a resume' than Paul has at this point. It requires that a player go into the game with other players knowing he may well take over...and he takes over. Paul has more potential to do that than about any Pacer in history but he needs to show it.

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers Knock Out game: Round 4

        Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
        If David thought this team had any chance to contend, why would he take $10 million less? Sure, he skips to the beat of a different drummer, but he ain't $10million stupid. I hope this is at least a playoff team, but I don't know... They've lost more this offseason than they've gained, even with PG returning, presumably, to full health. This is a roster right now with only three legit NBA starters, one of which I've never been impressed with and was hoping he was just using the Pacers to get Miami to overpay him. I agree, I hope they prove me wrong, that's why they play the games once the season starts.
        Lost more than we gained? Thats a tough sell imo... PG at 100% is far superior to Roy or David and probably more valuable than both combined. Not to mention Myles, Monta, and Jordan Hill.

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers Knock Out game: Round 4

          Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
          Exactly. Paul has had his moments and gotten hot, but he simply hasn't been dominant. IMO, being dominant is more than just one game or a few. It requires more of a resume' than Paul has at this point. It requires that a player go into the game with other players knowing he may well take over...and he takes over. Paul has more potential to do that than about any Pacer in history but he needs to show it.
          If by dominant you mean a guy who dominates game in and game out then ok I can agree, there is probably only 2-3 players in the league who can do that. But Paul has had his fair share of dominant moments. It's totally unfair to say you can't think of a time when he was dominant. He took over many games and put us on his back to get a victory.

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers Knock Out game: Round 4

            Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
            Paul has more potential to do that than about any Pacer in history but he needs to show it.
            Exactly. We've had a few other players at the cusp like Paul is right now and for whatever reason didn't materialize. Jalen couldn't get along with Isiah and was traded for the guy that almost destroyed the franchise. JO couldn't stay healthy. Rifleman peaked too young. Alex English was traded for the hope that Big Mac would sell some tickets for a franchise going broke. Bender was a wasted pick.

            In a twisted way, it is interesting that Reggie runs to the top of this list because there were plenty of times in his early days when it appeared he was the one who wasn't going to get it. He was Mr. First Quarter, not Mr. Clutch. Everybody know he wanted to play for the Lakers and spent all summer practicing with Magic, Byron, Worthy, etc. and didn't want to be Indy (especially during his "Hollywood" nickname days). Signing the big contract extension the day Dick Versace was fired certainly didn't look good for him and if the Knicks didn't fall in love with Allan Houston in '96 then I'm pretty sure Bryant Stith was actually DW's fallback choice. Yikes.

            So let's let it play out. Let's also not pretend that he's already at that level because he wasn't before the injury. He can get there, I agree, but so far he hasn't.
            Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
            Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
            Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
            Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
            And life itself, rushing over me
            Life itself, the wind in black elms,
            Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers Knock Out game: Round 4

              Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
              He has played great games, but nothing I would call dominant.
              What is dominant to you? An every game thing or a 60 point game? I'm not sure what definition we are working under here.

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers Knock Out game: Round 4

                Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
                Lost more than we gained? Thats a tough sell imo... PG at 100% is far superior to Roy or David and probably more valuable than both combined.
                I disagree. Paul has yet to prove anything without our smashmouth core. Can he do it? Sure, but it is unproven.

                Not to mention Myles,
                Not any time soon. Can you say "foul trouble"? He's a 19 year old rookie C. He won't be able to stay on the court. I'm willing to give him some time but he'll also need it.

                Monta,
                Chuck? Yuck.

                and Jordan Hill.
                You can't be serious.
                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                And life itself, rushing over me
                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers Knock Out game: Round 4

                  Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                  I disagree. Paul has yet to prove anything without our smashmouth core. Can he do it? Sure, but it is unproven.



                  Not any time soon. Can you say "foul trouble"? He's a 19 year old rookie C. He won't be able to stay on the court. I'm willing to give him some time but he'll also need it.



                  Chuck? Yuck.



                  You can't be serious.
                  Well lets look at who we lost. David West was bad last year, no other way to put it. He was poor. Hibbert was his usual self, very good defender but a roller coaster ride on offense. So honestly lets compare.

                  Paul George vs Roy.... If anyone says Roy is better here i have no clue what to say

                  Ellis vs D-West..... IMO its pretty clearly Ellis, he was the best player on a playoff team in Dallas. If you honestly think a 35 year old West is better than Ellis you must have skipped a year and ignored all Pacers basketball this past season. Even if for some reason you'd take West over Ellis, go ahead and make it Jordan Hill, Myles Turner, and Ellis vs West. If you still say West i am at a loss of words.

                  Now you can make the argument that the fits aren't right regardless of who is the superior player, and I can listen to that but to say we lost more than we gained is absolutely shocking to me.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers Knock Out game: Round 4

                    Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                    There's an MVP conversation that early in the season?

                    I guess I had the disadvantage of following the first half of that season from Chicago, where the national media treated that team as an ensemble with no true "superstars" but with great synergy.

                    Paul George was a rising star, which helped his name in the conversation, but he was not the superstar on that team. There wasn't a superstar, it was a balanced team with all five starters making significant contributions at both ends of the court. Sure, the bench stunk but this was a starting five that the Pacers hadn't seen since the 1970s. No weak link. Paul's ASG start/ fan voting, the big bonus Paul was due to make if he made all-NBA, Sir Lancelot's Allstar video. You can say what you want about Roy's mental state but somewhere in January that great team splintered into five uncooperative individuals and lost its synergy.

                    Jury's still out on whether the remains of that team have the necessary maturity.

                    The fact that David West was more discouraged about Roy's reduced role than he was excited about the return of Paul George ought to at least serve as a warning that this won't all be smooth sailing ahead.
                    Paul won eastern conference player of the month in November that year over Lebron who also had a crazy start. Yeah MVP speculation in November and December is worth pretty much nothing, but Paul was at the top of the a lot of media folks early polls or whatever you want to call them.

                    I'm making the point to support JO BTW

                    As to your last comment about West....where is the proof of that? Because he defended Roy on his way out the door or left to go play with the Spurs? I don't think anything West said or did indicates he was discouraged about Roy's reduced role, maybe he was discouraged by how Bird chose to handle it but that is as far as I would go.
                    Last edited by Trader Joe; 07-28-2015, 12:23 AM.


                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers Knock Out game: Round 4

                      Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                      His actions. He didn't like what Larry did to Roy/ said about Roy. And he hasn't commented at all on the return of PG. Except that he decided he would have a better chance to win elsewhere than if he stayed with the PG-led Pacers.

                      That's the complaint everybody has now, right? He saw a major rebuilding around Paul and decided that if the Pacers were pushing out Roy that he'd rather take $10 million less and be elsewhere. Maybe at some point in the future the new PG-led Pacers can be as good as the Hibbert/ West/ Hill/ PG Pacers... time will tell. But everyone is mad that he looked at what Bird was trying to do and didn't want any part of it. I can't blame him. It is hard to look at this roster right now and feel good about early-renewing my season tickets.

                      Dumping Roy and drafting Turner may pay off down the road. But David saw that this team wouldn't be contending any time soon.

                      David couldn't have known that his cap space was going to pay for Chuck Ellis, so that's not David's concern. But I can't say I'm looking forward to watching that.
                      Believing the driving force behind West's decision was Roy Hibbert seems like a massive stretch.

                      Do I think West sensed a period of transition? yes. Do I think he really thought we could win/compete for a title playing Roy 30 minutes a night? Absolutely not. I don't believe West would be a Pacer right now even if Larry had decided to give Roy one more go.
                      Last edited by Trader Joe; 07-28-2015, 12:34 AM.


                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers Knock Out game: Round 4

                        Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                        He has played great games, but nothing I would call dominant.
                        If Paul hasn't been dominant, then Roy hasn't been dominant it's as simple as that as far as I'm concerned.

                        I would call Paul's 2013-14 playoffs dominant personally. I would also call Roy's 12-13 playoffs dominant.

                        Paul was very, very good in the 13-14 playoffs. Regaining much of his early season form that slipped away in Feb, March and early April, and he did that at a time when a lot of the team (other than West), was really floundering. That's worth something IMO.

                        I know it's been a long time since we've seen him play basketball consistently so who knows, he may never be that guy again, which would be a shame.
                        Last edited by Trader Joe; 07-28-2015, 12:32 AM.


                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers Knock Out game: Round 4

                          Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                          I disagree. Paul has yet to prove anything without our smashmouth core. Can he do it? Sure, but it is unproven.



                          Not any time soon. Can you say "foul trouble"? He's a 19 year old rookie C. He won't be able to stay on the court. I'm willing to give him some time but he'll also need it.



                          Chuck? Yuck.



                          You can't be serious.
                          I partially agree, but I'm more optimist on how good we can be. Come on, with all the injury's we had. With 3rd stringers starting a large amount of the season. We still only missed the playoffs by 1 game. If healthy, this roster is a net plus from last season.

                          Myles is a rookie so we really have no idea what we'll get. I think he'll be starter by mid season, I know that's being optimistic. He could replace what Hibbert gave us overall last season, in different ways.

                          Monte is a huge upgrade over what West did last season, I'm comparing them because West basically turned into a 18 foot SG that was allergic to the paint.

                          I have no idea what J Hill can give us, so point agreed with there. I'm optimistic Allen can give us good play though.
                          "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers Knock Out game: Round 4

                            Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
                            Well lets look at who we lost. David West was bad last year, no other way to put it. He was poor. Hibbert was his usual self, very good defender but a roller coaster ride on offense. So honestly lets compare.

                            Paul George vs Roy.... If anyone says Roy is better here i have no clue what to say

                            Ellis vs D-West..... IMO its pretty clearly Ellis, he was the best player on a playoff team in Dallas. If you honestly think a 35 year old West is better than Ellis you must have skipped a year and ignored all Pacers basketball this past season.
                            I'm not going to attempt to compare those guys across positions. Doesn't make any sense.

                            But this is a donut team now. Nothing in the middle. There will be plenty of roster moves during training camp and before the deadline. There's no way the roster is set as is.

                            Chuck Ellis was near the bottom of my FA wish list for the Pacers. I don't like his game. But in fairness, he was certainly ahead of Jordan Hill on that same list.
                            Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                            Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                            Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                            Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                            And life itself, rushing over me
                            Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                            Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers Knock Out game: Round 4

                              Jermaine O'Neal was an All Star more times than Reggie Miller or any other Pacer in their NBA history

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers Knock Out game: Round 4

                                is Hill/Ellis/Miles/PG/Hill our likely starting 5? Jesus I hope Turner's a prodigy that Rick Barnes's idiocy kept hidden.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X