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

Dunleavy says that Offense is Better When he is involved

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

  • #16
    Re: Dunleavy says that Offense is Better When he is involved

    I usually hate these types of comments. However, Dunn is a player that has lacked confidence throughout his NBA career so for him to be sticking out his chest a little bit bodes well for us going forward.
    Slug 'em Sabres!!!!!
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=cj1SUF4wzu0

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Dunleavy says that Offense is Better When he is involved

      I don't understand what Dunlevy is trying to say. It's clear Jim O'Brian wants him to score, and Dunlevy now admits he needs the ball to have an impact on this team, why is it then he still comes out every 3rd or 4th game and will go 3-6 from the floor and get 8pts and just never look into the game offensively.

      I don't expect him to score 20 points a game every game and I understand he likes to take good shots but if your going to be one of our top 3 players on the offensive end your going to have to create shots and scoring opportunities for yourself and he has shown when he's looking to score he can do that. He needs to be aggressive.There is no other way around that.

      I looked at his game log this year and he's had 4 games where got no more then 8 attempts and all were losses and most of the time he hovers between 10-12 shots.When he shoots more then 16 times were 6-0. I would like to see him and Granger in the 15-17 range constantly putting pressure on there opponents to guard them. It's shown when we do that we are a tough team to beat.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Dunleavy says that Offense is Better When he is involved

        Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
        Not when Dunleavey takes a lot of shots.
        Wow. I actually went and looked up mediocre. This coming from a man with good is the enemy of great on his sig? We are a team that is going to be fighting for a playoff spot in the East. That is mediocre.
        "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

        "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Dunleavy says that Offense is Better When he is involved

          Is it just me or does Wells excel at asking questions to elicit statements that sound brash when taken out of context, then leaving the question out of the subsequent article?

          Seems to me we have gotten into this kind of discussion about at least one player each year since he joined the Star.

          Don't get me wrong, I don't mind someone who can ask those kind of questions, but presenting them as if they were unsolicited statements - particularly when they sound self-serving, which they tend to do - grates on me a bit.
          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


          • #20
            Re: Dunleavy says that Offense is Better When he is involved

            Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
            The reason I'm not offended or upset that he's saying this is because the team is 5-0 in games he scores 20 or more.

            It's hard to argue with that.
            I agree 100%.

            I don't know why anyone would be upset with his comments.

            No matter if anyone likes it or not Mike is one of our best players. For us to be successful we need him to score, make things happen. We need Jamaal to. We need Danny to. And we need Jermaine to.

            I don't care what Dunleavy's record has been in the past. I don't really care what his stats have been in the past. He has had a real good year for us and it's clear that when he plays well so does this team. It isn't rocket science.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Dunleavy says that Offense is Better When he is involved

              This is a quote Mike never would have said in Golden State. We are seeing a more aggressive Mike on the court and off the court, and I LOVE it.

              He is wrong though, the true telling stat is that the team is 7-0 when I record the games on my DVR.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Dunleavy says that Offense is Better When he is involved

                I really don't have a problem with what Mike said. He should be taking 15 shots a game in this offense.

                I just didn't like seeing JO blamed after a quote like that. Mike has had trouble keeping involved in his entire NBA career. This isn't something new that happen when he started playing with JO.
                "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

                "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Dunleavy says that Offense is Better When he is involved

                  Originally posted by FrenchConnection View Post
                  I usually hate these types of comments. However, Dunn is a player that has lacked confidence throughout his NBA career so for him to be sticking out his chest a little bit bodes well for us going forward.

                  Dunleavy's problem is that he's always been the type of guy to "Let the game come to him" and nothing else. Now that's great. Nothing wrong with letting the game come to you.

                  Problem is that in an 82 game season, the game isn't going to automatically come to you in everyone of them. Sometimes, you've got to grab the game by its horns. The really good players can do this. They can impose their will. I've seen Granger do this a few times, which is a good sign.

                  He's got to find ways of asserting himself even when the game is a little bit out of flow and not everything is "coming to him." You can't expect it to come straight to you 82 times a year. Just doesn't work like that.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Dunleavy says that Offense is Better When he is involved

                    Originally posted by FrenchConnection View Post
                    I usually hate these types of comments. However, Dunn is a player that has lacked confidence throughout his NBA career so for him to be sticking out his chest a little bit bodes well for us going forward.
                    Exactly. He's right too.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Dunleavy says that Offense is Better When he is involved

                      would anyone call this a chicken or egg scenario?

                      Is the offense better because DunDun is involved? or does DunDun just benefit when the offense is better due to other factors such as ball movement/etc?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Dunleavy says that Offense is Better When he is involved

                        We need 3 consistent scorers. Dunleavy is one of those scorers, so if he's not getting touches, then there's a problem. So I agree what he's saying
                        R.I.P. Bernic Mac & Isaac Hayes

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Dunleavy says that Offense is Better When he is involved

                          I don't think he was saying that with an ego. He was just pointing out what we've all noticed this season.

                          When he's scoring and involved in the offense, the Pacers seem to do well. You can see it in the stats.

                          I think he was just saying as a self motivation type thing. Pretty much an our team is better when I show up and contribute.

                          Can't argue with that!

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Dunleavy says that Offense is Better When he is involved

                            i didn't think this deserved it's own thread. another dunleavy article, with more quotes from dun dun

                            http://blog.washingtonpost.com/wizar...p_this_up.html

                            Can Dunleavy Keep This Up?

                            The list of disappointments from the 2002 NBA Draft is longer than Beyonce's weave. Yeah, Yao Ming, Amare Stoudemire, Caron Butler and Carlos Boozer (a second-round pick) have become all-stars, but it's pretty pitiful when three of the top six picks are already out of the league after just five years - Jay Williams (No.2) and Dajuan Wagner (No. 6) both had unfortunate health problems; Nickoloz Tskitishvili (No. 5) was just plain terrible.

                            Some people probably thought the No. 3 pick from that draft was out of the league, too, since Mike Dunleavy Jr. had done little to distinguish himself as any more than the son of the coach of the Los Angeles Clippers. Dunleavy wasn't worthless his first five seasons in the NBA, spent mostly at Golden State, just not somebody worthy of such a high draft pick.

                            This season, his first full season with the Indiana Pacers, Dunleavy is averaging career highs in points (16.6), rebounds (6.1), field goal percentage (48) and three-point percentage (39.3). He is shooting with confidence, attacking the basket with aggression. Who is this guy?

                            Not the trembly-kneed guy who often looked afraid to shoot. Not the tentative guy Baron Davis sometimes ignored when he was handing out assists. And certainly not the confused guy who had no sense of who he was as a player. That guy is gone - at least through the first month of the regular season.

                            "My career - it's alive! It's alive!"" He tracked down the ball. Did Mike Dunleavy finally find his game, too? (AP Photo/David Zalubowski)

                            Dunleavy still isn't putting up the numbers you'd expect from the franchise players typically selected at the third slot - he never will, and there is no guarantee that he will be able to keep up this pace for the rest of the season. But Dunleavy is serviceable. And, he is finally showing what he is capable of when he's in a system that complements his strengths, and for a coach (Jim O'Brien) who has confidence in his abilities.

                            "The stuff he brings to the table," Dunleavy recently said about O'Brien, "fits well for me, for this group of players and this team. We're not just standing around and watching one or two guys play."

                            The Pacers (8-8) appear to be in the process of phasing out Jermaine O'Neal, whose back-to-the-basket game doesn't fit with O'Brien's Rick Pitino-influenced, see-the-three-be-the-three offense. Dunleavy, Danny Granger (career-high 18.4 points) and point guard Jamaal Tinsley (13.9 points, career-high 8.3 assists) are thriving. It might not be a coincidence that Indiana is 5-1 without O'Neal this season. It is 3-7 with him. (You get the feeling that O'Neal will have to turn into an overdribbling, gunslinging Antoine Walker to blend in better).

                            O'Neal has missed the past five games, and the Pacers have lost once. They've pulled off back-to-back road wins against the Denver Nuggets and Portland Trail Blazers this week, with Dunleavy combining for 50 points and 15 rebounds in those victories.

                            He had 20 points and 11 rebounds in Portland. His 30-point game on Tuesday in Denver - where he outscored Carmelo Anthony and Allen Iverson - was just two points shy of his career high. He's already had five games with at least 20 points this season. He never had more than 13 in any season with the Warriors.

                            Over his past five games, Dunleavy is averaging 18.6 points, 6 rebounds, shooting 57 percent from the field and 47 (9 for 19) percent from beyond the three-point line. It's the kind of production that Warriors general manager Chris Mullin thought he'd get out of Dunleavy when he handed him a ridiculous (at the time) five-year, $44-million extension in 2005.

                            When you look at Dunleavy's history in Golden State, it's easy to understand how he often looked defeated and depressed. The Warriors had three different coaches - Eric Musselman, Mike Montgomery and Don Nelson - his first five seasons. Each coach had his own style and suggestion on what kind of player Dunleavy should be. He's 6-foot-9 with a decent skill set, but Dunleavy has always been known as player who can do a number of things okay, but nothing exceptionally well. He was tried out as a point forward, a slashing swingman, and a designated shooter. He could never find a role that fit him.

                            "There wasn't a set system year in, year out that I could get used to," Dunleavy said. "There was so much change. That made it real tough. Every coach was different, from what position I was going to play, to how to shoot a jump shot. Maybe that was my fault for listening. I want to be a coachable player. I always did what they asked of me."

                            It got him nowhere and nothing but grief. Fans in the Bay Area had turned on him completely. He would routinely get booed at home games and his body language cried out for a change of scenery. Then, he finally got his wish when he was shipped to Indiana as part of an eight-player trade in January. "For whatever reason, it wasn't the right fit for me out there. I felt that way from Day One," Dunleavy said about Golden State. "When the trade happened, [Pacers CEO] Donnie [Walsh] gave me the call and I just felt relieved. I was just happy to move on."

                            The Warriors were glad to move on as well. Especially after Golden State's new acquisitions, Stephen Jackson and Al Harrington, helped the organization end a 13-year playoff drought and sparked an improbable run that included a first-round upset of the 67-win Dallas Mavericks. The Pacers, however, finished the season 15-29 - including an 11-game losing streak - after the trade and failed to make the playoffs for the first time in 10 years.

                            O'Brien said Dunleavy was one of the main reasons he took the job in Indiana. "[Troy] Murphy, Dunleavy, Ike Diogu, people looked at what happened with the trade last year - the Pacers went down and I think they kind of pinned it on them. I think that was a mistake," O'Brien said. "I think when all is said and done, people that have an interest in the Indiana Pacers are going to be real happy with that trade."

                            Dunleavy already is. "All in all, where I'm at right now, I'm happy," Dunleavy said. "I think as a professional athlete, I never lost confidence. I may have been uncomfortable or unsure in situations. But in terms of my abilities, I never lost confidence. I always knew that if I was in the right situation, the right scenario, everything would be great."
                            check out the second photo in the link

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Dunleavy says that Offense is Better When he is involved

                              That photo is classic.

                              And I think it's a bit premature for Dun to say these things as the sample size under JOB is still relatively small. Considering he's always faded after November basically, he needs to prove he's worthy of getting involved every night offensively.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Dunleavy says that Offense is Better When he is involved

                                Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                                check out the second photo in the link


                                Wow. Had forgotten that.
                                This space for rent.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X