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

J.O. definately not playing tonight vs. Mavs

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

  • #16
    Re: J.O. definately not playing tonight vs. Mavs

    Originally posted by ABADays View Post
    I guess this could be construed as bashing but, sincerely, it's not. JO has never been a leader. He is very injury prone - very. He doesn't fit into this offensive "scheme" and, in my mind, he has never been a FRANCHISE player. His trade value is virtually nil and we are stuck with a franchise player contract when there is every question of who is even the best player on the team.
    QFT -

    IMHO - JO was just forced into a leader role by TPTB and marketing to label him as the new face of Pacers as Uncle Reg was on his way outta here...

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: J.O. definately not playing tonight vs. Mavs

      The whole problem about trading JO now is its like the stock market, you don't sell low. I would guess this moment his stock is the lowest its been, ever.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: J.O. definately not playing tonight vs. Mavs

        Originally posted by Speed View Post
        The whole problem about trading JO now is its like the stock market, you don't sell low. I would guess this moment his stock is the lowest its been, ever.
        considering how the JO trade speculations have dissolved with his outings....I'd say you're on target

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: J.O. definately not playing tonight vs. Mavs

          Originally posted by Evan_The_Dude View Post
          This might become an intersting scenario. If J.O. is forced to miss extended action (like 1-3 months) and we go on a nice run during that time, do we bring him back when it's time and risk messing up the chemistry we've built or do we trade him? Could we have seen J.O.'s last game in a Pacers uniform?
          It's a shame that a fluke from JO and the Pacers' past should get credibility even before it really happens. All it does is spawn premature speculation.

          JO may be injured again and the team surely are trying to run and they may even have some success doing so w/o JO's help, but to suggest he should be traded or that he should lose his starting role upon his return even before we know how well the team will perform while he's out..

          I think we all need to just take a big step back and wait to see how things unfold before going back to ESPN's Trade Machine or declaring JO a lost cause. Give him a chance to get healthy and then let's see how him performs within JOB's system at 100%. If his numbers don't improve at or near his 20/10 standard, I'll fall in step behind the rest of the nay-sayers and petition for JO to be gone myself!

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: J.O. definately not playing tonight vs. Mavs

            Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post
            It's a shame that a fluke from JO and the Pacers' past should get credibility even before it really happens. All it does is spawn premature speculation.

            JO may be injured again and the team surely are trying to run and they may even have some success doing so w/o JO's help, but to suggest he should be traded or that he should lose his starting role upon his return even before we know how well the team will perform while he's out..

            I think we all need to just take a big step back and wait to see how things unfold before going back to ESPN's Trade Machine or declaring JO a lost cause. Give him a chance to get healthy and then let's see how him performs within JOB's system at 100%. If his numbers don't improve at or near his 20/10 standard, I'll fall in step behind the rest of the nay-sayers and petition for JO to be gone myself!
            Agreed.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: J.O. definately not playing tonight vs. Mavs

              Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post
              It's a shame that a fluke from JO and the Pacers' past should get credibility even before it really happens. All it does is spawn premature speculation.

              JO may be injured again and the team surely are trying to run and they may even have some success doing so w/o JO's help, but to suggest he should be traded or that he should lose his starting role upon his return even before we know how well the team will perform while he's out..

              I think we all need to just take a big step back and wait to see how things unfold before going back to ESPN's Trade Machine or declaring JO a lost cause. Give him a chance to get healthy and then let's see how him performs within JOB's system at 100%. If his numbers don't improve at or near his 20/10 standard, I'll fall in step behind the rest of the nay-sayers and petition for JO to be gone myself!

              I'd say the majority of the people on this board enjoy watching the Pacers minus J.O. and that's been the case for the last 2 seasons. How long has J.O. been in and out of the lineup with injuries? Since the brawl year? I think that's when it started showing that we're a better and more enjoyable team to watch when Jermaine isn't playing. Sure, we'd like to fit our "Superstar" into our new system and have him playing a part in this new era, but are we being realistic here?

              What put us into the position we're in now is hopes and wishes.

              We hoped Ron Artest would get his act together so he can be a contributor to this team. We hoped Jonothan Bender would get over his knee issues and be the next big thing. We hoped Stephen Jackson would be able to keep his mouth shut and stop barking at the ref's, and we hoped his legal woes wouldn't hurt the way the fans looked at this team. We hoped that Jamaal Tinsley would finally become that player we saw flashes of in his rookie season [which this season he's doing much much better]. We hoped Sarunas Jasikevicious would turn us into a running team. We've been hoping Jermaine would be able to be healthy and help this team win games.

              Aren't you guys tired of hopes and dreams? Don't you want to see a realistic plan for the future? Jermaine at 29 years old can't stay healthy. Why are we building a team around his abilities? Why are we still expecting him to be a 20-10 guy? He's NOT a 20-10 guy anymore. Or should I say, him being a 20-10 guy in this system won't work. It will take him too many missed jump shots to hit 20 points. He's a post guy that we brought in shooters and, had our current players improving their shots over the summer to play around. Yet, he wants to shoot himself. That's why it's not working. You can't build a jump shooting team around just a jump shooter.

              It would take J.O. to realize he's not going to EVER take over as the #1 option, and he'd have to stay healthy to be effective for this team. Otherwise we're unrealistically leaning on a guy that THINKS he's still a 20-10 guy to go out there and try to get his 20 points because he thinks that's going to help us win, all the while slowing things down (though it's not that bad these days), and then we have to sit back and hope that he can stay healthy. Then WHEN he's hurt, we have to comprimise and change the teams strategy due to his absence.

              Look, I know injuries happen, but like with Bender, there comes a time when enough is enough and you have to move on. Having him in and out of the lineup with him being our supposed leader is going to do nothing for our future. I'm not saying what we should do with him, but I'm saying he shouldn't be playing here anymore. I like the guy, I've met the guy in person and he's a really really great friendly person, but this team is headed in a direction where his services are probably better suited for another team. We're finally moving forward, slowly, but we're making progress. It's time to let go of what's not working.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: J.O. definately not playing tonight vs. Mavs

                Originally posted by ABADays View Post
                I guess this could be construed as bashing but, sincerely, it's not. JO has never been a leader. He is very injury prone - very. He doesn't fit into this offensive "scheme" and, in my mind, he has never been a FRANCHISE player. His trade value is virtually nil and we are stuck with a franchise player contract when there is every question of who is even the best player on the team.
                ABA - you've hit the nail on the head. I don't see it bashing, I see it as the plain truth, and I've been saying your exact sentiment here about JO's leadership skills for a long time. I will admit, at one point before the brawl, he was a player that at least lived up to his contract (I think the year he was runner up for MVP - before the brawl), but other than that year he has not lived up to his franchise player tag.

                Speed has it correct here too. Its very hard to sell low - thats why I wish they had figured out over the summer to trade him to LA. Showcasing him in Obie's system is going to be hard, unless Obie changes his strategy back to RC's system temporarily. Oneal, was very good in RC's system. You can only hope that LB can turn into a car salesman overnight to some team and sell a old chevy and get the price of a cadillac back for him, or at least some draft picks. We are fine without JO as we are now anyway. Plus, we lose his horrendous contract - the Simons have to hating that right about now, with only about 8-10000 fans each game.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: J.O. definately not playing tonight vs. Mavs

                  Someone will take him for pennies on the dollar. He could be the missing piece to get a team over the top. On this team however, he's basically worthless.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: J.O. definately not playing tonight vs. Mavs

                    Originally posted by ABADays View Post
                    I guess this could be construed as bashing but, sincerely, it's not. JO has never been a leader. He is very injury prone - very. He doesn't fit into this offensive "scheme" and, in my mind, he has never been a FRANCHISE player. His trade value is virtually nil and we are stuck with a franchise player contract when there is every question of who is even the best player on the team.
                    I have to somewhat disagree with you, ABA. When JO was at his peak and had a good team around him, he was amazing. He came in 3rd in MVP voting a few seasons ago for a reason.

                    Alas, his chronic knee issues and the dwindling of talent around him have led to his current form.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: J.O. definately not playing tonight vs. Mavs

                      If JO could get over his self and except a role that doesn't involve him being the number one option on offense, he could really help us when he's healthy.

                      He needs to just play D, block shots and rebound and only take higher quality shots, not fade away weak @ss outside shots. He could take our defense from mediocre to very good.
                      "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: J.O. definately not playing tonight vs. Mavs

                        A few points:

                        1. He should not be played when injured. As we've seen this season his production drops dramatically. A fit Murphy is better than an unfit JO. It also hurts his trade AND makes the injury problem worse, or at the very least delays it's full recovery. Nothing infuriates me more in sports than teams (and they do this all over the world) playing unfit guys on reputation because for every heroic performance there dozens of times when it backfires.

                        2. If the Pacers medicos are not confident that he can get back to full fitness then I'd trade him for expiring contracts and draft picks. No hesitation at all.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: J.O. definately not playing tonight vs. Mavs

                          Some things I would like to point out....I too think that the ball movement and offense appears to run alot better with JONeal off the court.....but I think that we would likely miss the one thing that he did bring to the court when he was healthy....his defensive presense.

                          I mentioned this before when we tossed around the idea of moving Foster last season......don't complain about the defense if JONeal is moved.

                          Admittedly, I am in the "Let's see how this offense runs without JONeal out and then see how we do with a healthy JONeal" camp before deciding to move on with or without him.....but I also recognize that our defense will suffer if he is not in the lineup. If he is moved....we have to get a Big Man that can solidly defend, run, rebound and can reasonably score as a 3rd/4th scoring option. Also...while we are at it....we might as well get a solid backup perimeter defender at the PG or SG position.
                          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: J.O. definately not playing tonight vs. Mavs

                            FWIW, I thought our defense was pretty good last night.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: J.O. definately not playing tonight vs. Mavs

                              Originally posted by Mal View Post
                              FWIW, I thought our defense was pretty good last night.
                              I agree 100%. Sure, we gave up over 100 points, but the weak side help defense was great, and we only got dinged for 1 defensive 3 seconds.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: J.O. definately not playing tonight vs. Mavs

                                Originally posted by ABADays View Post
                                I guess this could be construed as bashing but, sincerely, it's not. JO has never been a leader. He is very injury prone - very. He doesn't fit into this offensive "scheme" and, in my mind, he has never been a FRANCHISE player. His trade value is virtually nil and we are stuck with a franchise player contract when there is every question of who is even the best player on the team.
                                ++


                                How can that be? I thought it was Dun and Murph with those kind of contracts.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X