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-Bulls postgame thread

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

  • Re: Pacers-Bulls postgame thread

    Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
    They are too dependent on post scoring, which is basically obsolete in today's NBA. Pau Gasol bricks shots while everybody else stands around. Same with Taj Gibson. The are a middle of the pack team in the east. Probably a 4 seed or so. Not a bad team, but they have a lot of issues.
    Yes, the league has changed but the Bulls are really only as good as DRose who has not been good this year. Several games he has scored less than 10 points. He's only cracked 20 twice. For those who think we shut him down, they might want to look at how he's been playing this year.

    As for the league...if Wilt or a new Shaq arrived...or maybe a Hakeem, we would see the league shift again. Wilt and Hakeem were more athletic than Ian...but incredible on offense. Young people really have no idea. Shaq absolutely demanded the other team guard him with a huge guy or he would foul everyone out and score every time.

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers-Bulls postgame thread

      Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
      To be honest, people didn't say that Ian wouldn't be able to play D or protect the rim. They simply said that he couldn't replace Hibbert's rim protection alone. And that point hasn't been proven wrong yet.

      Unfortunately, hoopdata (the site that used to have the amazing "defensive shot location" tab) isn't updated and thus I have no way of knowing what our opponent's FG% at the rim is. We do know that Ian has a great opponent FG% at the rim but we don't know what happens when Ian is not the one guarding the shot.
      Roy's negatives eclipses his defense far greater than Ian's negatives eclipses his defense.

      Ian is better for this team than Roy would have been. It is pretty obvious.

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers-Bulls postgame thread

        Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
        I remember that year. Danny was great. But he didn't make his teammates great like Paul is doing. Yes Paul needs to swing the ball more. But Paul is skipping the pass more than Danny ever did. Paul is more of a leader than Danny was on the court.

        All this is not to knock Danny. But Danny never had the speed that Paul does to get by elite defenders like Butler and Lebron. Just like JO did not have the offensive ability to get past Garnet, Duncan, Ben Wallace, and Rasheed.
        Danny was a leader actually. But otherwise I agree. Danny was a great player. Paul is simply on another level. It's really time to stop comparing the two because there is a huge gap in talent and it goes way beyond the fact Paul plays above the rim.

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers-Bulls postgame thread

          Originally posted by Rogco View Post
          A lot of people though said we would be awful, that the sky was falling, and that Hibbert was an elite defensive talent that couldn't be replace. They were countered by those of us who said we had created a defensive system designed to make Hibbert look good, and that by moving on from Hibbert, we could adjust the defense accordingly with more athletic players. I think the second has proven, so far, to be true.
          People did say that Hibbert was an elite defensive talent (and I still believe that this is true) but no one said that we would be awful or that the sky was falling. That was an exaggeration by the people who disagreed with those people. You know, that happens a lot in PD. People will often exaggerate the position that the person that they disagree with has in an attempt to discredit his argument. It's called a straw man argument and a ton of them are flying around in PD.
          Originally posted by IrishPacer
          Empty vessels make the most noise.

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers-Bulls postgame thread

            Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
            Roy's negatives eclipses his defense far greater than Ian's negatives eclipses his defense.

            Ian is better for this team than Roy would have been. It is pretty obvious.
            Sure, Ian is proving to be amazing for the team this season and that's what counts. The discussion wasn't about that, though. It was mostly about some people trying to discredit what our previous teams had achieved.
            Originally posted by IrishPacer
            Empty vessels make the most noise.

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers-Bulls postgame thread

              Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
              Sure, Ian is proving to be amazing for the team this season and that's what counts. The discussion wasn't about that, though. It was mostly about some people trying to discredit what our previous teams had achieved.
              Oh.....Carry on then!!

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers-Bulls postgame thread

                Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                People did say that Hibbert was an elite defensive talent (and I still believe that this is true) but no one said that we would be awful or that the sky was falling. That was an exaggeration by the people who disagreed with those people. You know, that happens a lot in PD. People will often exaggerate the position that the person that they disagree with has in an attempt to discredit his argument. It's called a straw man argument and a ton of them are flying around in PD.
                Acting like there were not people on here who predicted this team to be a complete doormat on defense is false and you know it.


                Comment


                • Re: Pacers-Bulls postgame thread

                  Originally posted by Ragnar View Post
                  We will have 30 million in cap this summer, we also have a pretty damn good roster so not a lot of needs if Turner works out. We have plenty of guards and small forwards. I could see us going after a big but everyone will have cap room so I don't have any hope of us landing Andre Dummond, although that would be awesome. My point is I think we can keep Ian no problem. He is probably not going to get much more than 10 million even in the new higher cap.

                  With Paul playing like he is we should go after Durant or Derozan. You pair another high octane wing with Paul and we'd be hard to beat. I think we could make a case to Durant to come to Indy. I think he'd listen. Will he leave OKC? Who knows but I certainly think he'd sit down and let us pitch to him our offer, presentation, and all that.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers-Bulls postgame thread

                    Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                    To be fair....Grimp just wants the best for the Pacers....so we can't really fault him for that. The only problem is that this isn't NBA2k16....real life doesn't happen that way.
                    I'm thinking ahead to 2016-2017 season and beyond. If we're gonna do battle with the Cavs in future playoffs or ECF's we're gonna need a stacked roster with the perfect starting five and little to no drop off from the bench. Lebron even an aging one will be dangerous paired with a Kyrie and Kevin Love.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers-Bulls postgame thread

                      Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                      With Paul playing like he is we should go after Durant or Derozan. You pair another high octane wing with Paul and we'd be hard to beat. I think we could make a case to Durant to come to Indy. I think he'd listen. Will he leave OKC? Who knows but I certainly think he'd sit down and let us pitch to him our offer, presentation, and all that.
                      Unless there's some sort of secret deep friendship between PG and Durant I just don't see anything of that sort coming to fold, he's already got a top 5 talent in Westbrook next to him. If he leaves it's probably going to either be hometown with the Wizards or the Lakers, but I would put very good money down he's going to sign a 1 year max contract and wait until he and Westbrook are free agents.
                      "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

                      ----------------- Reggie Miller

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers-Bulls postgame thread

                        Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                        I don't understand how you can bash Mahinmi offensively but praise Whiteside. Whiteside is a much better overall player, but his offensive repertoire is the exact same base model. In fact, if anything, if you are talking about spreading the floor, I'd take Mahinmi's midrange shot over Whiteside's.
                        You just said it though, Whiteside is a better overall player. He is not a great scorer but you don't need him to be when he can have a game of 10 blocks and 15+ rebounds. I don't want Ian to be a scoring machine but he doesn't do anything great with consistency. He'll have a good game here or there but Whiteside for a whole season including this one has had games of 6+ blocks and 15+ rebounds.

                        It's very rare that he doesn't. Ian can't score with any flash or finesse or shoot just like Whiteside. But Ian won't deliver you consistent games of over 6 blocks and over 10 boards either. Whiteside's potential for 20+ rebound games often alone make him more valuable. Those rebounds are extra shots for your team and 1 and done's for the other team. Players like him and Drummond are good for your team because their rebounding abilities are momentum killers.

                        When that shot misses and they come flying in to dunk or tap the ball into the basket it's a back breaker for the other team.
                        Last edited by Grimp; 11-28-2015, 01:21 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers-Bulls postgame thread

                          On Granger/PG comparisons, all I have to say is:

                          - who was Danny stuck with as a coach at this stage of his career,

                          - what could Danny have been if he hadn't been injured, and

                          - how important was Danny's lobbying to us getting PG in the first place?

                          Yes, PG has surpassed him, but let's never forget what Danny was and could have been...

                          Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk
                          BillS

                          A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                          Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers-Bulls postgame thread

                            Originally posted by Cactus Jax View Post
                            Unless there's some sort of secret deep friendship between PG and Durant I just don't see anything of that sort coming to fold, he's already got a top 5 talent in Westbrook next to him. If he leaves it's probably going to either be hometown with the Wizards or the Lakers, but I would put very good money down he's going to sign a 1 year max contract and wait until he and Westbrook are free agents.

                            Paul is a top 5 talent. He just isn't as much a ball hog as RW can be sometimes. I think Durant would be crazy to brush off what can be built on a team with him and Paul George. Washington isn't looking so great anyways. Wall is still inconsistent at times. So is Beal. Their bigs aren't any better than the current Ibaka and Kanter. The Lakers? Maybe but why would Durant want to wade into that mess? Especially considering Kobe could still be there next season taking all those jumpers. Julius Randle has looked good but he hasn't put up Porzingis numbers or anything and Russell is still a big question mark.

                            I am not saying Durant is even a 40% chance or lock to come here but Larry would be crazy to not try and set up a meeting. The Spurs have never been big players or chasers in free agency. But when LaMarcus was available they made their move. Because he's a top talent. The Pacers aren't a team who often chase BIG FISH in free agency either but when a talent like Durant is available, and the money is there, and you have a talent like Paul to pair him with that's when you make an exception.
                            Last edited by Grimp; 11-28-2015, 01:25 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers-Bulls postgame thread

                              Originally posted by BillS View Post
                              On Granger/PG comparisons, all I have to say is:

                              - who was Danny stuck with as a coach at this stage of his career,

                              - what could Danny have been if he hadn't been injured, and

                              - how important was Danny's lobbying to us getting PG in the first place?

                              Yes, PG has surpassed him, but let's never forget what Danny was and could have been...

                              Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk
                              Danny was a hell of a player and if he had just stayed healthy 1 more season I fully believe the 13/14 team would've won the East, but that didn't happen sadly.
                              "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

                              ----------------- Reggie Miller

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers-Bulls postgame thread

                                Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                                People did say that Hibbert was an elite defensive talent (and I still believe that this is true) but no one said that we would be awful or that the sky was falling. That was an exaggeration by the people who disagreed with those people. You know, that happens a lot in PD. People will often exaggerate the position that the person that they disagree with has in an attempt to discredit his argument. It's called a straw man argument and a ton of them are flying around in PD.
                                At the PD meeting back in July, two people whose names shouldn't be mentioned, said that the Pacers need to keep Roy Hibbert if they want to be any good at defense. This comment now looks hilarious. People definitely believed that Roy was essential for high level defense
                                Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X