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

A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

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

  • #31
    Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

    Originally posted by Isaac View Post
    Dunleavy is great at scoring in blowouts. Every time we were getting blown out Dunleavy would get scorching hot and get his stats. He's done that his whole career. He may not "suck" but he sucks at playing in any sort of pressure situation, and that's why if he's a main aspect of a team they are going to be terrible.
    You pretty much summed up Al Harrington as well.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

      Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
      I think Dunleavy is a solid player, does a lot of things well, not great, and brings a lot of other things to the floor that doesn't show up in the stat sheet.

      Murph.... well if you don't have something nice to say, don't say it at all. Hope he plays better

      JO is alright. I don't mind the guy, I think he plays hard and leaves it on the court. Thing is, he's not worth his contract either. I personally wanted him traded after his MVP type season. I figured that would be his best effort and his highest value. I thought Artest would be the guy to build around (swing and a miss on that one) but who knew he would snap and turn into the nutcase that he is. I was wrong on Artest, but I believe I was right on JO. He's a good player, and plays hard. Yes he's an all-star, but he should be given that the offense is built around him. He rebuilds and blocks shots, and that's nice, but he's not a go to guy in tough situations. he settles for too many jumpshots, he's injury prone, he wants certain brought in or built around him, then he also wants guys gone if they bump heads. With Reggie and Artest gone, the team hasn't really been really good. We've had good teams and good players, but we didn't have a guy to make a clutch shot, or get a clutch stop. Even Peja seemed to be a better 1st option then JO. You look at that Nets series and the 2 games Peja played we won. Granted his back is in bad shape, he was still a better option that season.

      As long as JO is here, I will root for and support him b/c I like the guy, I just don't think he was or ever will be a franchise player
      I agree with you on Dunleavy and JO, Mike is a good player to have on our team but he would be best suited as our first man off the bench.
      JO is indeed overpaid and overrated, at least by many here on this board. He never was a franchise player (only in name) and I will be very glad when he's traded to LA or another team. Hopefully his bandwagon fans will follow him.

      I was aware of the leg injury of Murphy, so he basically hasn't been able to show his best skills. I'll give him next season to prove himself a good contributor to our team (14/8 will do for me).
      Maceo Baston's #1 fan on Pacers Digest!

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

        Originally posted by Jermaniac View Post
        He is light-years away from being a good player also. Nothing about him says he is a good player, other then his IQ. WOOT for IQ. So many championships won with his IQ.

        I also for the first time in my life seen a fan of a player use "he passes the ball into the post well" attribute when defending a player. WTF is that? He passes the ball into the post well, now thats absurd.
        LOL, so are you sayin that he doesn't pass the ball into the post well - or are you just saying that it doesn't matter. because it is actually a very important skill - that is getting more and more difficult to find

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
          I may hate the he had to start him at the SG spot....
          As do I.

          I agree with this, and with tdubb. How many small forwards do we need? Why can't we get a shooting guard in here?
          This space for rent.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            LOL, so are you sayin that he doesn't pass the ball into the post well - or are you just saying that it doesn't matter. because it is actually a very important skill - that is getting more and more difficult to find
            Especially because the main receiver is no one else but Jermaine
            Maceo Baston's #1 fan on Pacers Digest!

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
              LOL, so are you sayin that he doesn't pass the ball into the post well - or are you just saying that it doesn't matter. because it is actually a very important skill - that is getting more and more difficult to find
              You also have to take into account that fewer and fewer teams need good entry passes into the post. Guards dominate a lot of the scoring and most teams don't run a system similar to the Pacers nowadays (slow pace and throw it into a big man).

              Plenty of players have the skill, but not many need to do it on a consistent basis.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

                The problem with Murphy and Dunleavy is less to do with them individually and more to do with the fact they are both on the same team with another poor defender: Jamaal Tinsley. We have too many bad defenders on the floor at the same time. That's why we were a different team with Quis.

                I would like to see JT and TM moved, but I am fine with Dun getting minutes if he is surrounded by 4 other good defensive players. I think Dun adds a lot on offense, helps with spacing and ball movement, rebounds very well for a pencil-thin guy....and with them adding strength to his frame, he might become very good. Yes, I'm fine with Mr. Dunleavy. Give him and the other players a chance to work from the start of the season.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

                  Originally posted by ajbry View Post
                  You also have to take into account that fewer and fewer teams need good entry passes into the post. Guards dominate a lot of the scoring and most teams don't run a system similar to the Pacers nowadays (slow pace and throw it into a big man).

                  Plenty of players have the skill, but not many need to do it on a consistent basis.
                  I could not disagree more with all the talk about guards taking over the league.

                  The best teams continue to be those with a strong post presence. Whether it's Miami last year or San Antonio...they are the best. Without the post threat, there is no need to double down leaving the 3pt shot open...and your own bigs on the interior will be far more available to block the occasional drive to the bucket.

                  As for the entry pass, it's an important piece for a championship level team. It, along with a good passing big man with post skills, makes a huge difference because it can defeat the double team (which must be done if the big is dominant in the post). It is one of the reasons San Antonio's ball movement is a thing of beauty....and why they are repeat champions.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    LOL, so are you sayin that he doesn't pass the ball into the post well - or are you just saying that it doesn't matter. because it is actually a very important skill - that is getting more and more difficult to find
                    I can pass the ball into the post well.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

                      Originally posted by Jermaniac View Post
                      I can pass the ball into the post well.
                      In the NBA??

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        In the NBA??
                        If I was 6-7 yes. In the CBA I can go right now and throw the ball into the post. With out warming up and getting paid 8 mil.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

                          As a Warrior fan who watched way too many of Murphleavy's games, the main problem with them is that they complement eachother very poorly. Mullin somehow had numerous games and endless practices to realize this and yet he signed them both to long term deals.

                          You can have either one at their price, but having both is tough to swallow because you can't play both guys at the same time. Whenever you play both of them at the same time, you're simply giving away too much in terms of athleticism and defense.

                          There's no other way to put it.

                          It's especially bad when you have to play Dunleavy and Granger at the 2/3. Then you have Murphy at the 4 and you are just way too slow.

                          That means that one of these guys has to start as an overpaid role player and then one of them has to come off the bench as an overpaid 7th/8th man (I noticed this was Murphy down the stretch of the season). That's bad.

                          The Pacers need to try to unload one of these guys on the Lakers in any trade involving JO. If you can get Bynum as the primary piece while unloading one of the Murphleavy twins along with Jermaine, then that's a good trade for Indy.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

                            Originally posted by d_c View Post
                            As a Warrior fan who watched way too many of Murphleavy's games, the main problem with them is that they complement eachother very poorly. Mullin somehow had numerous games and endless practices to realize this and yet he signed them both to long term deals.

                            You can have either one at their price, but having both is tough to swallow because you can't play both guys at the same time. Whenever you play both of them at the same time, you're simply giving away too much in terms of athleticism and defense.

                            There's no other way to put it.

                            It's especially bad when you have to play Dunleavy and Granger at the 2/3. Then you have Murphy at the 4 and you are just way too slow.

                            That means that one of these guys has to start as an overpaid role player and then one of them has to come off the bench as an overpaid 7th/8th man (I noticed this was Murphy down the stretch of the season). That's bad.

                            The Pacers need to try to unload one of these guys on the Lakers in any trade involving JO. If you can get Bynum as the primary piece while unloading one of the Murphleavy twins along with Jermaine, then that's a good trade for Indy.
                            Extremely well put. A post that shows real understanding of the problem. I would only add that having Tinsley, another poor defender on the floor at the same time as Murphleavy, is a recipe for the lottery.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

                              Originally posted by Jermaniac View Post
                              Alot of things mainly his contract, if he sucked and was paid like 3-4 million a year I would be fine with him. But he sucks and is getting paid 8 million a year.

                              I still cant believe we took on both Murphy and Dunleavy and I never in my life will.
                              Hmmm, I thought they were a steal.
                              .

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

                                Dun has for the most part taken a bum rap. He is a very intelligent player and puts up starter numbers. If he puts on the 20 lbs of muscle that he was shooting for this summer, it will only add another facet to his game as he will be able to play some minutes at 4. His only shortcoming has been his outside shooting and I think it will improve.

                                As far as Murph.....he is a double-double player and will prove his worth this coming season. I see both as starters with Murph playing about 28 mins and Dun about 35 mins. Oh, and that will be on a 50 win team.

                                Sad but true....some don't or won't give the two the benefit of the doubt and say that the two "suck" simply because they are white. Those posters aren't hard to single out.
                                .

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X