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

I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

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

  • #46
    Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
    Rush had a knee surgery in college how we know he is not afraid of getting hurt again.(same thing)
    ya acl tears are tuff to come back from

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

      Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
      refer to my post below Rush is just as good as shooter as Mike he just doesnt shoot to much.
      rush is a decent shooter but needs to shoot more

      it seems like if he misses just 1 3 point attempt he stops shooting

      i like rush and i want him to start. in fact hes one of my favorite pacers along with granger of course but theres something about his offense that isnt right and it annoys me

      he never gets to the free throw line and needs to learn to be aggressive and just dribble towards the hoop

      a rotation of rush and george at sg is young but both guys are good enough to play the position
      In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

        Originally posted by Robert Swift View Post
        rush is a decent shooter but needs to shoot more

        it seems like if he misses just 1 3 point attempt he stops shooting

        i like rush and i want him to start. in fact hes one of my favorite pacers along with granger of course but theres something about his offense that isnt right and it annoys me

        he never gets to the free throw line and needs to learn to be aggressive and just dribble towards the hoop
        in the pre season he looked like he is getting more agressive but idk. We need Rush's defense to win games.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

          Originally posted by Reeder View Post

          http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/boxscore...03011&old_bs=1





          Seems to me that there's an awful lot selective criticism regarding Mike's shooting effort on Saturday night. Granger's 2-7 3 point in the same game doesn't seem to be all that much better.

          Back to lurk mode.
          And yet Danny is still shooting 45.8% from 3 through the first 3 games.
          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
            Plus, he's an extremely intelligent player that definately has the mental ability to pick up the finer details.

            You're just not losing much by getting 2pts less a game, while shooting a better percentage to get it. Plus you get better defense, which is what they really need.

            Scoring isn't an issue. The Pacers have, and will continue, to be able to put the ball in the basket.
            First I don't agree that he is an intelligent player at all. We will just have to agree to disagree here as until someone develops a standardized basketball intelligence test we're stuck with our opinions.

            Next, this whole thread has been about me expressing that Mike Dunleavy provides the Pacers with more points even if he is not scoring. His movement opens up opportunities for other players. Causes defenses to get lost and break down. He may not be the one that scores, but often is the reason a player got a good shot.

            So, IMO, we're not just talking about 2 points. I'm not sure anyone can argue that Brandon Rush's presence on the offensive side of the floor makes anyone better. He only contributes to the score if he is actually scoring.

            Also, barring injury or a significant reduction in minutes, I will take the KStat Oath that I will eat my shoe if Dunleavy ends the year averaging 11 points or less.
            House Name: Pacers

            House Sigil:



            House Words: "We Kneel To No King"

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
              Rush had a knee surgery in college how we know he is not afraid of getting hurt again.(same excuse)
              I didn't suggest that Mike was afraid of getting hurt??? He had a very serious knee injury that took about 2 years to heal

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                And yet Danny is still shooting 45.8% from 3 through the first 3 games.
                Both of these numbers will even out with more games. Mike will shoot better than 21% and no way Danny will shoot damn near 50% from three.
                House Name: Pacers

                House Sigil:



                House Words: "We Kneel To No King"

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                  I didn't suggest that Mike was afraid of getting hurt??? He had a very serious knee injury that took about 2 years to heal
                  To be fair, sometimes it takes players a really long time to get over the mental and physical aspect of any knee injury.

                  I used an example from the WNBA, Swin Cash finally returned to her pre-ACL form. And she tore it in 2006. (And some players get over it quickly, as in..right away) Some players never recover..it depends on the person. (And a lot of my examples are women, as the majority of ACL tears I've seen are through women's players)

                  That injury, in particular has got to be traumatic mentally. It's not a contact injury. One minute a player is moving, the next their knee snaps and they aren't playing for 8 months. Sometimes it simply happens when they are running..or pivoting..or a jump stop. Typical basketball moves. I can understad where players struggle, mentally, to get over it. Because the fear of it happening again has got to be there.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    I didn't suggest that Mike was afraid of getting hurt??? He had a very serious knee injury that took about 2 years to heal
                    but the fact of the matter is mike is not quick enoght anymore. because of his knee to play any sort of defense. which has always been his weakness anyway.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                      Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                      To be fair, sometimes it takes players a really long time to get over the mental and physical aspect of any knee injury.

                      I used an example from the WNBA, Swin Cash finally returned to her pre-ACL form. And she tore it in 2006. (And some players get over it quickly, as in..right away) Some players never recover..it depends on the person. (And a lot of my examples are women, as the majority of ACL tears I've seen are through women's players)

                      That injury, in particular has got to be traumatic mentally. It's not a contact injury. One minute a player is moving, the next their knee snaps and they aren't playing for 8 months. Sometimes it simply happens when they are running..or pivoting..or a jump stop. Typical basketball moves. I can understad where players struggle, mentally, to get over it. Because the fear of it happening again has got to be there.
                      This photo show to me he is not playing timidly. He landed right on his knees after this shot.

                      http://www.nba.com/pacers/photogallery/101030_13.html
                      House Name: Pacers

                      House Sigil:



                      House Words: "We Kneel To No King"

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        I didn't suggest that Mike was afraid of getting hurt??? He had a very serious knee injury that took about 2 years to heal
                        You are suggesting that Mike is not shooting well because his leg is not strong enough.
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                          Originally posted by Diamond Dave View Post
                          First I don't agree that he is an intelligent player at all. We will just have to agree to disagree here as until someone develops a standardized basketball intelligence test we're stuck with our opinions.
                          And even with standardized testing people complain and say it's not about IQ it's about phsyical ability. And I'm directly talking about the NFL test. But that's beside the point.

                          What makes you think he isn't intelligent?

                          He doesn't get lost, and he understands the difference between a good open shot and a bad one. And that right there is his problem, and which is why I brought up JOb and the system.

                          JOb puts premium on taking open shots. How many times have I heard Clark or Quinn make the comment that Jim won't scold you for missing a shot, but he will for not taking one?

                          That's been my biggest issue with Jim. Taking a wide open 3 with 16 seconds left on the shot clock isn't always a good shot. Being aggressive is a fault half the time. I think Brandon understands that concept, and doesn't fit in, because he's not willing to just shoot shots because he can.

                          I find that extremely smart. He's not going to need the work when a new coach comes in, that a lot of the other players will need. Discipline is intelligence, to me.

                          Originally posted by Diamond Dave View Post
                          Next, this whole thread has been about me expressing that Mike Dunleavy provides the Pacers with more points even if he is not scoring. His movement opens up opportunities for other players. Causes defenses to get lost and break down. He may not be the one that scores, but often is the reason a player got a good shot.

                          So, IMO, we're not just talking about 2 points. I'm not sure anyone can argue that Brandon Rush's presence on the offensive side of the floor makes anyone better. He only contributes to the score if he is actually scoring.
                          And like I said, scoring isn't an issue, with or without Mike. Scoring is not a problem. The Pacers will score and they will score in bunches, with or without his cutting.

                          While it might lead to scores, directly or indirectly, those points are going to get produced in other ways if he's not on the floor. That's the nature of the beast. Their point production will NOT go down.



                          Originally posted by Diamond Dave View Post
                          Also, barring injury or a significant reduction in minutes, I will take the KStat Oath that I will eat my shoe if Dunleavy ends the year averaging 11 points or less.
                          I thought this wasn't about how many points Mike scored? I'm not trying to give you a hard time. I just don't think Mike is important offensively.

                          If you need Mike to score 18-19 points a game, the Pacers are in trouble, because that means either Danny, Roy, or DC aren't playing very well. You might as well throw in Tyler into that mix, because I see him as atleast a 2nd option with the backups.

                          They don't need Mike to score. They need him to shoot a high percentage and play good defense. Right now they're getting about 33% of that equation.

                          He's not shooting well, and the only thing good about his defense is his helpside.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                            Originally posted by Diamond Dave View Post
                            Both of these numbers will even out with more games. Mike will shoot better than 21% and no way Danny will shoot damn near 50% from three.
                            I know this. But Danny will shoot around 40%. I fully expect him to be on the high side of it too. Dunleavy will shoot just like he's always shot. About 35%-37%.

                            Mike will have a lot more 1 or 2 made 3pt attempt games than Danny will.
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                              I love how certain portions of our fanbase can rationalize blaming our defensive problems on one player. The last couple years, it was Murphy. Now that he's gone...Mike Dunleavy, come on down!

                              I'm not a huge Mike Dunleavy fan, but I really appreciate some of the things he does. I don't think some of you understand how important movement without the ball is on offense. It opens up some easy points in our half court offense. He's a smart player, and while he gets beat on defense a lot, that's partly because he is playing out of position. In a perfect world, this guy would guard opposing SFs. He's forced to guard SGs which are much quicker than he is. Also, I'm not a Rush fan. He plays good defense and that's about it. He is a kick in the balls to the offense. He stands idly, he is hesitant to shoot most of the time, and he can't draw a foul to save his life. Some of you guys seem to think since he has the talent to be a really good offensive player, that eventually it will click for him and he will get better. He shows flashes, but he always reverts back to his normal state of tentativeness. I agree with the OP, I'd rather see Dunleavy out there than Rush. I'd rather see Paul George than Rush too, although I'm sure you all agree with that because he's young and still has potential.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                                Originally posted by cdash View Post
                                I love how certain portions of our fanbase can rationalize blaming our defensive problems on one player. The last couple years, it was Murphy. Now that he's gone...Mike Dunleavy, come on down!

                                I'm not a huge Mike Dunleavy fan, but I really appreciate some of the things he does. I don't think some of you understand how important movement without the ball is on offense. It opens up some easy points in our half court offense. He's a smart player, and while he gets beat on defense a lot, that's partly because he is playing out of position. In a perfect world, this guy would guard opposing SFs. He's forced to guard SGs which are much quicker than he is. Also, I'm not a Rush fan. He plays good defense and that's about it. He is a kick in the balls to the offense. He stands idly, he is hesitant to shoot most of the time, and he can't draw a foul to save his life. Some of you guys seem to think since he has the talent to be a really good offensive player, that eventually it will click for him and he will get better. He shows flashes, but he always reverts back to his normal state of tentativeness. I agree with the OP, I'd rather see Dunleavy out there than Rush. I'd rather see Paul George than Rush too, although I'm sure you all agree with that because he's young and still has potential.
                                no i dont blame just mike but he is part of it but the main part is JOB system of defense and how we rotate and dont get a hand up in peoples face to contast shots

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X