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

Oby benches Roy

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

  • #76
    Re: Oby benches Roy

    Whats Obie doing these days? Its always interesting to me with a player or coach leaves one of my teams and he's not picked up by someone, its pretty telling, I think.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Oby benches Roy

      Well I always love the "as soon as it's over then move on" attitude people take about sports stuff. Hey, Americans, it's Dec 18, 1941, time to get over the whole Pearl Harbor thing, sheesh. You just keep beating it to death.

      Yes, I'm fully aware of the differences here but it's an ANALOGY addressing the foolish idea that the instant something stops being true you should just be emotionally over it. That's ridiculous. The JOB era went on at least a year longer than it should have, and all this "JOB had it tough" is BS because all we wanted was for him to DEVELOP THE KIDS so that by the year he was fired he'd actually have them playing .500 ball and showing a level of experience. That Vogel was able to do this in about 3 weeks only made many of us more bitter about the wasted years.

      That's what bugs me most of all, that the development of the team was hindered by JOB and drug behind by a couple of years on the whole "yes but brawl..." cover. This thread said it all, just freaking play Roy and you can keep your job. That's all JOB had to do.

      Now Roy's getting his $15m per and fans would have been thrilled to give him 10-11m if not the fully 15. That's a far cry from how JOB treated him, yet only about 90-100 games past when Roy "had a long way to go to be good". And that's ignoring the all-star appearance well before that.


      The strawman of "it was a tough spot" is just such crap. It was an easy spot because the fans knew the team wouldn't win and that it was rebuild time. Instead of doing that and taking pride in the improvement of the kids on his watch, he benched them and milked Troy, Dun, Ford and Posey for all the wins he thought they could give him while prolonging the healing process (developing the future core).

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Oby benches Roy

        I agree JOB had it pretty easy. We knew we weren't going to be good all he had to do was playing young guys. And he pretty much banished our 2 best defensive players to the bench for long portions of their development (Roy and Paul). That's pretty telling that JOB rewarded one end of the floor over the other. I.E. DC got here as a second year player under JOB and was the unquestioned starting point from day 1, which end is DC strongest at again? (Not trying to hate on DC here, but it's true...JOB rewarded offense over D.)


        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Oby benches Roy

          Originally posted by Speed View Post
          Whats Obie doing these days? Its always interesting to me with a player or coach leaves one of my teams and he's not picked up by someone, its pretty telling, I think.
          Ironically, had JOB continued with the playing style that was WORKING in the first weeks of that final season instead of reverting to jack-a-3 when he discovered that Posey could do an excellent Troy Murphy impression, I think he'd have a job somewhere.
          "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

          "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Oby benches Roy

            This video promotes truthiness to the fullest.
            First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Oby benches Roy

              Originally posted by Haywoode Workman View Post
              couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less couldn't care less
              The mouth says "I could care less".

              The heart means "I could care less".

              The expression is "I couldn't care less".

              I wonder if JOB has shoulder hair that is such a stark contrast like the capuchin monkey.
              "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Oby benches Roy

                I think if he'd had played the youngsters, what would it have meant 5-8 games different in the Loss column, if even that. That was the toughest pill to swallow, you had youngster who were better, but just inconsistent. In retrospect, I hope the franchise looks back to the Dunleavy/Murphy trade and every time since then and realize winning 34 games and prolonging the turnaround isn't helping your fanbase, it isn't keeping them hanging on, it solidifying the casual fans indifference. I said it then, give a winner or at least give me hope in the future. Those years were neither and it was pretty tough.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Oby benches Roy

                  Originally posted by Speed View Post
                  I think if he'd had played the youngsters, what would it have meant 5-8 games different in the Loss column, if even that. That was the toughest pill to swallow, you had youngster who were better, but just inconsistent. In retrospect, I hope the franchise looks back to the Dunleavy/Murphy trade and every time since then and realize winning 34 games and prolonging the turnaround isn't helping your fanbase, it isn't keeping them hanging on, it solidifying the casual fans indifference. I said it then, give a winner or at least give me hope in the future. Those years were neither and it was pretty tough.
                  Yep they should have flipped the fans in indy the bird and just kept Steven Jackson. (only half joking) .

                  I hate the revisionist history around here. (for Naptown) Roy couldn't stay on the floor because he was a foul magnet and slow as a rookie. 2nd year Roy broke down (by his own admission) mid season. Roy developed just fine. He is far better now than he was as a rookie.

                  At the beginig of PG's Rookie season he was horrible with team defense. While he was always a great on the ball defender, he was constantly out of position(normal for a young rookie). Most the players people complained needed developed are no longer a part of this team.

                  Screw the ex- coach, just don't pretend like his haters rallying call wasn't for Mcroberts to get more minutes. Why don't people just accept that he was a baby sitter brought here to run a tight ship until we were out of cap hell. We were going to suck with or without him.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Oby benches Roy

                    Originally posted by spazzxb View Post
                    Yep they should have flipped the fans in indy the bird and just kept Steven Jackson. (only half joking) .

                    I hate the revisionist history around here. (for Naptown) Roy couldn't stay on the floor because he was a foul magnet and slow as a rookie. 2nd year Roy broke down (by his own admission) mid season. Roy developed just fine. He is far better now than he was as a rookie.

                    At the beginig of PG's Rookie season he was horrible with team defense. While he was always a great on the ball defender, he was constantly out of position(normal for a young rookie). Most the players people complained needed developed are no longer a part of this team.

                    Screw the ex- coach, just don't pretend like his haters rallying call wasn't for Mcroberts to get more minutes. Why don't people just accept that he was a baby sitter brought here to run a tight ship until we were out of cap hell. We were going to suck with or without him.


                    I choose sucking without him and by sucking I mean no more than 20 wins a year. With the clown the Pacers not only sucked but they sucked without a purpose.
                    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Oby benches Roy

                      Originally posted by spazzxb View Post
                      We were going to suck with or without him.
                      The venom wouldn't have been nearly as bad if we had sucked while actually playing our young players and getting them valuable playing time instead of sucking because our idiot head coach wanted to give TroyJames PoseyMurphy 15+ minutes a game while our young players sat at the end of the bench or in a suit. Remember how Bird had to practically force O'Brien to play Tyler, so the moron responded by not dressing Josh and continue the force-feeding of James Posey?
                      "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                      "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Oby benches Roy

                        I hated JOB's system and rotations. But I was not fed up until he was extended. That made no sense and the writing was on the wall. And for the lame duck excuse? I just do not buy it. For a GM who just does a handshake agreement with the owner, he would then be a lame duck to the staff he has surrounded himself with. Maybe that is why Morway was such a slouch, and JOB himself was whatever he was.

                        All I know is the handshake, good ole boy, my word is oak agreements are not concrete and do not allow closure. Now Donny has a lame duck handshake agreement.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Oby benches Roy

                          Originally posted by spazzxb View Post
                          Yep they should have flipped the fans in indy the bird and just kept Steven Jackson. (only half joking) .

                          I hate the revisionist history around here. (for Naptown) Roy couldn't stay on the floor because he was a foul magnet and slow as a rookie. 2nd year Roy broke down (by his own admission) mid season. Roy developed just fine. He is far better now than he was as a rookie.

                          At the beginig of PG's Rookie season he was horrible with team defense. While he was always a great on the ball defender, he was constantly out of position(normal for a young rookie). Most the players people complained needed developed are no longer a part of this team.

                          Screw the ex- coach, just don't pretend like his haters rallying call wasn't for Mcroberts to get more minutes. Why don't people just accept that he was a baby sitter brought here to run a tight ship until we were out of cap hell. We were going to suck with or without him.
                          Except that we stopped sucking the moment he was fired.

                          "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Oby benches Roy

                            Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                            Except that we stopped sucking the moment he was fired.

                            Mcroberts didn't :-)jk

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X