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

Pacers talk about how they plan to use Stephenson

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

  • #16
    Re: Pacers talk about how they plan to use Stephenson

    Originally posted by pacers74 View Post
    That is right in theory, but how many second round picks have been steals and worked out? There have been a number of them, and we can only hope and dream Lance is our Gilbert Arenas, minus the gun thing and the injuries.
    Just curious: about when did Golden State figure out they had a diamond in the rough with Arenas? Summer league? Preseason? Trade deadline? Three years in?
    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Pacers talk about how they plan to use Stephenson

      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
      There is a reason Tyreke Evans was drafted 5th overall and Lance Stephenson was not...
      sssh, it's a love fest.
      Seriously, I just can't believe all the hype about a #2 pick that hasn't set foot on the big floor yet.
      The PTB NEED to hype SOMETHING since no trade got done.
      Does anyone here remember James White and what they were saying about HIM??
      He shot well in summer league because almost all of his shots were in the paint as he overpowered summer league point guards that still made him look painfully slow at times on defense. He real position would look to be #2, but supposedly he shot less than TWENTY FIVE PERCENT on shots outside the paint last season........................

      And as effective as Evans can be, there are plenty that don't see him as a full time answer to the pg position.
      IF Stephenson can be a smaller scale version of Evans, that will be great. And he will play and have some good minutes in all likelyhood.
      MAYBE even a few at pg....................... maybe
      Last edited by MLB007; 07-23-2010, 12:27 PM.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Pacers talk about how they plan to use Stephenson

        Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
        Just curious: about when did Golden State figure out they had a diamond in the rough with Arenas? Summer league? Preseason? Trade deadline? Three years in?
        Gilbert Arenas wasn't "Born Ready"
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Pacers talk about how they plan to use Stephenson

          I would love to see Lance to split time between PG and SG. He should get some experience but not enough to overwhelm him. Not saying it would, cause he was Born Ready!
          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


          • #20
            Re: Pacers talk about how they plan to use Stephenson

            Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
            Just curious: about when did Golden State figure out they had a diamond in the rough with Arenas? Summer league? Preseason? Trade deadline? Three years in?


            Gilberts second year was his breakout year. He started all 82 games and averaged 18.3 ppg and 6.3 apg.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Pacers talk about how they plan to use Stephenson

              I sure hope Lance turns out like Gilbert. There certainly seems to be similarities in their game.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Pacers talk about how they plan to use Stephenson

                Well, I'll say this again. Much of our discussion revolves around a too rigid notion of player roles.

                Every successful team needs to have all of the necessary skills on the floor as many minutes as possible. But it doesn't matter how those skills are arranged among the five players on the floor.

                Somebody needs to have good court vision in the halfcourt, but it doesn't have to be the point guard. If a wingman has it, then the team is well armed. If the center has it, you're good. There is no rule at all that the point guard must have it and no one else.


                I can imagine six months or a year from now, Lance Stephenson is going to become the same sort of punching bag as Troy Murphy has been. He'll be doing enough good things on the court to earn himself some minutes, but there will be a number of posters who use the vomit emoticon every time they mention his name, saying how disgusted they are by the notion of a 6"5' point guard and he's really a 2 guard and so on.

                It is valid to ask whether each and every player has this or that important skill. It is valid to ask whether each player's skills earn him minutes on the floor, and whether any combination of five players is optimal.

                But I suggest that it is NOT valid to criticize every player according to these too restrictive and ill-fitting notions of what skill combinations are required based on player positions that don't even officially exist.
                And I won't be here to see the day
                It all dries up and blows away
                I'd hang around just to see
                But they never had much use for me
                In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Pacers talk about how they plan to use Stephenson

                  Originally posted by pacers74 View Post
                  scouting services putting as a 2 or a 3 doesn't really mean that much. It has to do with his height more than anything. In high school and AAU and really even the NBA, you don't see very many 6'5" guys that can play the 1.
                  Tyreke Evens was thought two be a SG and he is doing okay at PG. If Lance is even close to that good, then we will have found our answer.

                  No, they put him as a 2 or a 3 because in AAU coaches tried to play him at Point and it didn't work out. And in college coaches tried to play him at point and it didn't work out.

                  I agree, for the most part, positions can be fluid. But in order to be successful in the NBA you need an actual PG. (and before anyone says it, yes, Fisher is a PG he knows the offense he runs, inside and out.)

                  Stephenson's going to be playing some PG this year, because he's probably the best ballhandler of the wings, and his name is not TJ Ford.
                  Last edited by Sookie; 07-23-2010, 02:17 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Pacers talk about how they plan to use Stephenson

                    Originally posted by MLB007 View Post
                    sssh, it's a love fest.
                    Seriously, I just can't believe all the hype about a #2 pick that hasn't set foot on the big floor yet.
                    The PTB NEED to hype SOMETHING since no trade got done.
                    Does anyone here remember James White and what they were saying about HIM??
                    He shot well in summer league because almost all of his shots were in the paint as he overpowered summer league point guards that still made him look painfully slow at times on defense. He real position would look to be #2, but supposedly he shot less than TWENTY FIVE PERCENT on shots outside the paint last season........................

                    And as effective as Evans can be, there are plenty that don't see him as a full time answer to the pg position.
                    IF Stephenson can be a smaller scale version of Evans, that will be great. And he will play and have some good minutes in all likelyhood.
                    MAYBE even a few at pg....................... maybe
                    At 6'5 and in the 220 range he will be able to overpower a lot of NBA pgs. More importantly I think he will figure out how to get to the foul line much sooner than most rookie pg/sg's.

                    Right now I feel safe saying that he is a going to be a capable scorer for the Pacers. How good will he be at passing? IMO he is 3/4 years away from being a 5 assist per game player and thats if he really works on it.

                    As to the whole James White comment, James was hyped because he was athletic not because he was a good basketball player. The only thing they have in common is that they both went to Cincy.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Pacers talk about how they plan to use Stephenson

                      Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                      No, they put him as a 2 or a 3 because in AAU coaches tried to play him at Point and it didn't work out. And in college coaches tried to play him at point and it didn't work out.

                      .
                      I might be wrong but I'm pretty sure he played point forward at cinci which is why he bulked up to 240 pounds.I really think putting on all that wieght in a small time period really hurt his game.It certainly didn't help his quickness or conditioning . That to me was the main reason for his struggles.Lance certainly wasn't selfish at Cinci and showed in spurts excellent court vision and solid ball handling. We will see how much of a project he is at that spot soon enough but I think he has a chance as long as he buys into it which is hard to do when he has been asked to score most of his life.
                      Last edited by nyballer31; 07-23-2010, 02:45 PM. Reason: hard to type on the phone

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Pacers talk about how they plan to use Stephenson

                        Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                        At 6'5 and in the 220 range he will be able to overpower a lot of NBA pgs. More importantly I think he will figure out how to get to the foul line much sooner than most rookie pg/sg's.

                        Right now I feel safe saying that he is a going to be a capable scorer for the Pacers. How good will he be at passing? IMO he is 3/4 years away from being a 5 assist per game player and thats if he really works on it.

                        As to the whole James White comment, James was hyped because he was athletic not because he was a good basketball player. The only thing they have in common is that they both went to Cincy.
                        I think if Bird is serious about Lance playing pg Then Lance doesn't need to be 220pds.He will need all the help he can get if he's going to defend other pgs.I would like to see him come into training at 195 -200 pds.Obviously that is no subsitute for effort,determination and technique but it will certainly help and he would still be able to punish pg's with his strenghth.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Pacers talk about how they plan to use Stephenson

                          Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                          There is a reason Tyreke Evans was drafted 5th overall and Lance Stephenson was not...
                          Because Tyreke played for Coach Calipari and they were a top program in the nation?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Pacers talk about how they plan to use Stephenson

                            Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                            No, they put him as a 2 or a 3 because in AAU coaches tried to play him at Point and it didn't work out. And in college coaches tried to play him at point and it didn't work out.

                            I agree, for the most part, positions can be fluid. But in order to be successful in the NBA you need an actual PG. (and before anyone says it, yes, Fisher is a PG he knows the offense he runs, inside and out.)

                            Stephenson's going to be playing some PG this year, because he's probably the best ballhandler of the wings, and his name is not TJ Ford.
                            I think thats a easy statement to say because most teams have a actual PG at the 1, how many teams can you think of that don't, which players tried and were unsuccessful, how does their success compare to players that aren't actual pg playing the one...

                            Honestly I don't know, but just thinking off the top of my head I come up with Tyreke Evans...Possibly Steph Curry but we will see how he does next year he really started playing well near the end and their team record isn't due to his PG play IMO.

                            I think Lance will play mostly the 1 possibly a little 2 but over who...? maybe if Rush and Granger are out of the game, but I think the Pacers want to get dunleavy a lot of time also... It will be hard for him to see decent if any time at the 2 this year. He has more UPside as a 1 anyway...

                            Question is if he does blossom well this year at the 1, what do the Pacers do next off season if they have the chance to draft or sign a good prospect at the that is a "True PG", especially if it is in the draft.
                            Why so SERIOUS

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Pacers talk about how they plan to use Stephenson

                              I don't know if is just me but Lance is really similar to Stephon Marbury and the way he used to play, neither is a true one but they can play the position, just look at this videos.












                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Pacers talk about how they plan to use Stephenson

                                Those videos are great. I could watch them all day. Maybe Lane will turn out to be a tougher more physical Marbury, without the Starbury.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X