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

Bird on NBA radio at 11:30 today (Friday) Mark Boyle is hosting

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

  • Re: Bird on NBA radio at 11:30 today (Friday) Mark Boyle is hosting

    Originally posted by imawhat View Post
    Unfortunately, Bird said the starting lineup is set. Any changes would be to the bench.

    Unfortunately, the starting lineup includes Teague and Monta.

    Gay has been a losing player......on some pretty untalented teams. Put him in our lineup where he fits really well and lessen his role, and suddenly he's a very valuable player that takes pressure off of Paul. He'd be a very good addition to our team.

    Larry also said Paul would play the '2' if a player such as Rudy is acquired. If Rudy is acquired he will start at the '3' and Paul will move to the 2. Monta will most likely be backup PG.

    Comment


    • Re: Bird on NBA radio at 11:30 today (Friday) Mark Boyle is hosting

      Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
      Yes, but those stats can almost always be useful in a supportive role. We're not talking about Gay, Ellis, or even Thad being the main guy. We're talking about a supporting cast.
      When it comes to starters, it depends. Guys like Monta Ellis are very difficult to plug into a starting lineup.

      Thats why you see guys like Lou Williams, Jason Terry, etc. thrive off the bench, but rarely make it as a starter. I can see Monta's value as a bench player, but I don't think he has any as a starter.

      Comment


      • Re: Bird on NBA radio at 11:30 today (Friday) Mark Boyle is hosting

        Originally posted by Grimp View Post
        Larry also said Paul would play the '2' if a player such as Rudy is acquired. If Rudy is acquired he will start at the '3' and Paul will move to the 2. Monta will most likely be backup PG.
        I couldn't find the quote you are quoting, so I'mma just reply to you.

        When did Bird say the starting lineup was set? I didn't hear it, but the quality was pretty bad.

        Comment


        • Re: Bird on NBA radio at 11:30 today (Friday) Mark Boyle is hosting

          Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
          When it comes to starters, it depends. Guys like Monta Ellis are very difficult to plug into a starting lineup.

          Thats why you see guys like Lou Williams, Jason Terry, etc. thrive off the bench, but rarely make it as a starter. I can see Monta's value as a bench player, but I don't think he has any as a starter.
          You really think Monta starting for Mavs didn't workout because he didn't get out of the first round versus championship Spurs? He was their leading scorer and they took the champs to 7.

          I'm not saying Monta is the same guy he was 2 years ago, but to say he never was a winner as a starter is silly.

          Comment


          • Re: Bird on NBA radio at 11:30 today (Friday) Mark Boyle is hosting

            Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
            Monta at the sg is not the end of the world. To me its a matter of how he can be used better to get his efficiency up. Bird gave his criticism today about monta not being in the high pick and toll and then Nate said we we used him in the corner. Like we did Hill last year. That's the same opinion I had voiced by the head coach. So yea I think it can work.
            I'm having a reading comprehension problem here. Are they saying they want to use Monta off the ball like they used Hill? I personally don't think it's the end of the world either if that's the case. I think it can work offensively. Defensively is where there could be problems against certain teams. I prefer Paul guarding SFs since the majority are 3 and D types. Guarding those types of players puts him in better position to quickly get to the paint to dig down on post players and help on the boards. If we get Gay that would ease some of my concerns about PG chasing guards in the pick and roll and off screens all of the time. At least if PG is stuck out on the perimeter Gay would be down there helping instead of Teague or Ellis.
            Last edited by CJ Jones; 07-09-2016, 12:30 AM.

            Comment


            • Re: Bird on NBA radio at 11:30 today (Friday) Mark Boyle is hosting

              Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
              I couldn't find the quote you are quoting, so I'mma just reply to you.

              When did Bird say the starting lineup was set? I didn't hear it, but the quality was pretty bad.
              In the presser he said the starting line-up is "probably" set I believe.

              Comment


              • Re: Bird on NBA radio at 11:30 today (Friday) Mark Boyle is hosting

                Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                You really think Monta starting for Mavs didn't workout because he didn't get out of the first round versus championship Spurs? He was their leading scorer and they took the champs to 7.

                I'm not saying Monta is the same guy he was 2 years ago, but to say he never was a winner as a starter is silly.
                I think having a guy like Ellis in the starting lineup puts your team at a disadvantage. The fact that in 12 NBA seasons, he has won less playoff games than our 2013 team alone is pretty telling.

                Comment


                • Re: Bird on NBA radio at 11:30 today (Friday) Mark Boyle is hosting

                  Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
                  In the presser he said the starting line-up is "probably" set I believe.
                  Thats odd, I thought it sounded as if he wasn't sure what they were doing yet....but again, the audio was pretty meh.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Bird on NBA radio at 11:30 today (Friday) Mark Boyle is hosting

                    Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                    I think having a guy like Ellis in the starting lineup puts your team at a disadvantage. The fact that in 12 NBA seasons, he has won less playoff games than our 2013 team alone is pretty telling.
                    I don't care about those sort of stats. He doesn't shoot well enough in today's NBA to be a starter.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Bird on NBA radio at 11:30 today (Friday) Mark Boyle is hosting

                      Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                      Thats odd, I thought it sounded as if he wasn't sure what they were doing yet....but again, the audio was pretty meh.
                      To be fair, Larry would probably say he feels the starters are set even if he truly felt the exact opposite. He also seemed very open to the idea of Monta as a 6th man.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Bird on NBA radio at 11:30 today (Friday) Mark Boyle is hosting

                        It probably wouldn't even be so bad if Ellis would just realize that he's not a good shooter. He just keeps popping. If he would just concentrate on his drive and dish game and forget about long jumpers, we would probably be in much better shape. Might go back to Vogel. I like Vogel, but it seems that many of our players kept all their bad habits because Frank didn't want to call people out.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Bird on NBA radio at 11:30 today (Friday) Mark Boyle is hosting

                          Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                          I think having a guy like Ellis in the starting lineup puts your team at a disadvantage. The fact that in 12 NBA seasons, he has won less playoff games than our 2013 team alone is pretty telling.
                          And Tracy MCGrady never got past the first round, but I bet wouldn't mind a prime T-Mac, would you? What's your point?


                          Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                          Comment


                          • Re: Bird on NBA radio at 11:30 today (Friday) Mark Boyle is hosting

                            I was glad to hear Larry mention Monta's strengths in regards to getting him in the paint again. Hopefully he can find a place for him in the rotation where this happens, I do think it's where he's at his most effective.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Bird on NBA radio at 11:30 today (Friday) Mark Boyle is hosting

                              Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                              And Tracy MCGrady never got past the first round, but I bet wouldn't mind a prime T-Mac, would you? What's your point?
                              Lol depends on which version of "prime" McGrady you are talking about. Because "prime" Houston McGrady is one of the most inefficient chuckers the game has ever seen. McGrady from his last season in Orlando until he retired was simply not a good basketball player.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Bird on NBA radio at 11:30 today (Friday) Mark Boyle is hosting

                                Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                                I'm having a reading comprehension problem here. Are they saying they want to use Monta off the ball like they used Hill? I personally don't think it's the end of the world either if that's the case. I think it can work offensively. Defensively is where there could be problems against certain teams. I prefer Paul guarding SFs since the majority are 3 and D types. Guarding those types of players puts him in better position to quickly get to the paint to dig down on post players and help on the boards. If we get Gay that would ease some of my concerns about PG chasing guards in the pick and roll and off screens all of the time. At least if PG is stuck out on the perimeter Gay would be down there helping instead of Teague or Ellis.
                                I posted from my phone so it isn't you.

                                Bird said he wanted Ellis in the high pnr and Nate said he would use him on the corner. Both point to the need for him to be used differently than he was last year and although at first that sounds like 2 guys in the FO not on the same page but if you think about it Ellis will most likely run some point with the backup unit and that is where he will run the high pnr that bird referred too. As a starter though I think Nate wants him to go to the corner and spread the floor and Ellis can hit a high percentage at the corner 3. So Ellis will be used differently depending on the unit he is playing with which is how most fans would probably want it like that as Teague is the better high pnr slasher and passer in the starting unit. Bird and Nate though believe that Monta as a starter gives the Pacers the ability to push the ball up the court much faster since the starting unit isn't dependent on one guard pushing the ball up the court on a fast break. That was a problem last year and it won't be as much of a problem if both those speedy guards are racing down the court and making quick decisions before the defense sets up. Hill and PG are too slow in making decisions and I believe its because they are too slow with the ball and forcing the issue in the paint to either draw a foul or finish at the rim.


                                As for PG running around screens chasing sg I think you are not making much sense here. PG will guard the best player most of the time. If its a sg then he will be guarding that guy regardless of whether the Pacers have Ellis or Gay. However Gay wont save PG from a defense assignment unless its a big sf. To me that's a bit redundant though because if the Pacers go big basically Thad can do that and do it better than Gay. The big lineup that Bird mention would be Teague, PG, Thad, Myles, AL. That would probably work against teams like Memphis but against teams like Boston who run a small pg/sg combo Teague and Ellis are better suited for that lineup. Now if you consider say the Raptors PG will be always assigned to DeRozan regardless. That pushes Monta on Carroll which doesn't kill you defensively. Against the cavs you basically have Monta on JR Smith, PG is on Lebron and of course Teauge is on Irving and Thad is on Klove. JR for the most part just camps out on the corner so its not going to kill you defensively either so basically I think much of the concern is over blown.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X