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

Why aren't the Nets better than us?

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

  • #16
    Re: Why aren't the Nets better than us?

    because they know that they are not going anywhere right now and want to secure Jhon Wall and also because they are not playing a team "who gives them a better chance to win"
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Why aren't the Nets better than us?

      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
      because they know that they are not going anywhere right now and want to secure Jhon Wall and also because they are not playing a team "who gives them a better chance to win"
      to be fair, nor do we..

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Why aren't the Nets better than us?

        I don't think the Nets personnel is better than the Pacers. Lee and Lopez are good...although the gap between Lopez and Hibbert is not huge. Harris is supposed to be the star but is over-rated based on his performance this year. Yi is over-rated because he is very inconsistent. Also, the Nets defense is worse than the Pacers. More than anything, Granger is head and shoulders better than anyone on the Nets. Other factors are Watson, D Jones and some of our younger players like Price and Rush. They are easily as good as the Nets supporting cast.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Why aren't the Nets better than us?

          I would say having the best player between both teams could be a big part of it. Plus better role/bench players.

          I don't think Lee is better than Rush though. Maybe a push.
          "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

          - ilive4sports

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Why aren't the Nets better than us?

            The answer to this question is simply Danny Granger. If you put Granger on the Nets they would have more wins right now than the Pacers do with him. The Nets starters are better than the Pacers as is their supporting cast. I would say ours would be better if our players were healthy.
            JOB is a silly man

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Why aren't the Nets better than us?

              But shouldn't Devin Harris off-set Danny Granger?

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Why aren't the Nets better than us?

                Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                But shouldn't Devin Harris off-set Danny Granger?
                I actually love D Harris but he is not better than Granger.
                JOB is a silly man

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Why aren't the Nets better than us?

                  Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                  But shouldn't Devin Harris off-set Danny Granger?
                  No. Harris was playing very well last year. I'm not sure how he's doing right now, but earlier this year he was not doing well at all. I guess the same could be said of Granger...but here's the difference:

                  Harris is supposed to be the PG, yet he is usually scoring the ball and rarely shoots the 3 effectively. As a result, he expends a lot of energy on the offensive end and is not in a good position to get back on defense nearly as well as he would otherwise. In contrast, our guards are not the primary scoring weapons and as a result can focus more on D and get back to guard the fast break more effectively. The bottom line is...you really don't want your PG to be your go-to guy on offense. Sure, there have been success stories, but not too many in the recent past. The floor leader should be good at stopping penetration and getting others involved in the game, not calling his own number.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Why aren't the Nets better than us?

                    If I had to guess...

                    I think the Pacers have more mediocre veteran players in their rotation, who while they aren't that good, bring their mediocre play every night.

                    Nets appear to have a lot more younger players who really don't bring it every night.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Why aren't the Nets better than us?

                      Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                      If I had to guess...

                      I think the Pacers have more mediocre veteran players in their rotation, who while they aren't that good, bring their mediocre play every night.

                      Nets appear to have a lot more younger players who really don't bring it every night.
                      Yes, that is a factor. What we have on the Pacers is a number of solid backups playing big minutes. With D Jones, Watson, Dunleavy, Murphy and Ford...we have numerous players with a lot of NBA experience. Against most teams most of these guys hurt you. Against the Nets, they may actually help.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Why aren't the Nets better than us?

                        Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                        If I had to guess...

                        I think the Pacers have more mediocre veteran players in their rotation, who while they aren't that good, bring their mediocre play every night.
                        Yep....and that as well.

                        The best example? Troy Murphy is a much better player than a scrub like Josh Boone. Unfortunately, he's not that good either. He's mediocre, and it's illustrated by his being on a 30-something win team practically every year he's been in the league.

                        In the NBA you either need to be really good or really bad. You don't want to be the "best" bad team (i.e. 13th pick in the draft), which is kind of where guys like Murphy lead you every year.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Why aren't the Nets better than us?

                          they have an easy schedule the rest of the way, maybe at the end (record) they won't look as bad compared to the pacers record


                          Mon 08 @ Memphis 8:00pm YESHD WFAN 660
                          Wed 10 @ Dallas 8:30pm YESHD WLIB 1190
                          Fri 12 @ Oklahoma City 8:00pm YESHD Bloomberg 1130
                          Sat 13 @ Houston 8:30pm YESHD Bloomberg 1130
                          Tue 16 vs Atlanta 7:30pm YESHD WFAN 660
                          Wed 17 @ Philadelphia 7:00pm YESHD Bloomberg 1130
                          Sat 20 vs Toronto 7:30pm YESHD Bloomberg 1130
                          Mon 22 vs Miami 7:30pm YESHD WFAN 660
                          Wed 24 vs Sacramento 7:30pm YESHD WFAN 660
                          Fri 26 vs Detroit 8:00pm YESHD WFAN 660
                          Sat 27 @ Chicago 8:00pm YESHD NBALP WGN America Bloomberg 1130
                          Mon 29 vs San Antonio 7:30pm YESHD WFAN 660
                          Wed 31 vs Phoenix 7:30pm YESHD WFAN 660
                          April Opponent Time Local TV Nat TV Radio
                          Sat 03 vs New Orleans 7:30pm YESHD Bloomberg 1130
                          Sun 04 @ Washington 6:00pm YESHD WFAN 660
                          Wed 07 @ Milwaukee 8:00pm YESHD Bloomberg 1130
                          Fri 09 vs Chicago 8:00pm YESHD Bloomberg 1130
                          Sat 10 @ Indiana 7:00pm YESHD Bloomberg 1130
                          Mon 12 vs Charlotte 7:30pm YESHD WFAN 660
                          Wed 14 @ Miami
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Why aren't the Nets better than us?

                            Their players are mostly slashers with few good jump shooters, and they have one of the worst benches in the NBA if not the worst.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Why aren't the Nets better than us?

                              Jay Z wants to move the team to Brooklyn and then they become relevant in the business that is the NBA!!!!

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Why aren't the Nets better than us?

                                PG- Harris has sort of come around, but he had a major drop off from last year. Their backups are terrible. So their starter is moderately better than our options and their backups a bit worse. All in all, the Nets are slightly better here and we should obviously prefer Harris to any of our guys.
                                SG- Lee has also sort of come around, but he started off hurt and was terrible. Our various options were hurt and terrible. So this is basically a trainwreck for both sides. I'd still probably take Lee over Rush but I don't think either are high quality players.
                                SF- Granger is light years better than the various junk the Nets have here.
                                PF- The Yi vs. McBob/Tyler question doesn't explain much since Murphy has played the lion's share of our minutes at PF and is obviously better than any of them.
                                C- Lopez is better, but Hibbert is decent.

                                So the Pacers are better because:
                                1. In the places the Nets are better, the difference is less than in the places the Pacers are better.
                                2. If you look at their best guys as a five man unit, the Pacers can at least throw out lineups where you have to guard everyone on the floor. In contrast, many of the Nets lineups feature guys who create 4 on 5 situations where opponents routinely ignore them and cheat against the better players, and guys who couldn't guard a folding chair.

                                Another question would be... which Pacers players would improve the Nets?
                                Granger, Murphy, Dunleavy, maybe Head?
                                SportsTwo.com

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X