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 Vogel Should Be Next Year's Coach

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

  • Why Vogel Should Be Next Year's Coach

    Speaking for myself I am becoming a big Frank Vogel fan and my vote is that he becomes our next head coach. I like how he handles the players, his rotations (generally seems to know who to play), and one of his specialities plays out of time outs (very impressive). Yes, we had a rough stretch - name one coach and team this year that has not. You might find one somewhere but they are rare.

    If you disagree I would like to know what it is you expect some other coach can give us that Vogel is not or cannot?

  • #2
    Re: Why Vogel Should Be Next Year's Coach

    I would like to first see how the rest of the season plays out, but if things go well
    like making the playoffs and putting up a spirited fight, I would not be averse to
    bringing back coach Vogel.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Why Vogel Should Be Next Year's Coach

      I rather bring a coach with experience, I like the guy but I don't think he is the one.
      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Why Vogel Should Be Next Year's Coach

        Don Nelson? couldn't say that with a straight face.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Why Vogel Should Be Next Year's Coach

          I wouldn't mind if he is brought back, but some things have really been irking me about him as of late.

          1.) The Price/Rush/Jones/JMac/Foster lineup is disgusting. They should never, ever, ever, EVER all see the court together. He needs to do something to always keep someone who can create his own shot on the court at all times. This lineup is a disaster waiting to happen.

          2.) Waaaaaaaaay too much Rush in the fourth. It took Paul George two minutes in overtime to get two passes that got us four points with even better overall defense (PG is two times the team defender than Brandon) whereas Rush would be picking his nose in the corner. He is the most inconsistent player of all time and his defense for the most part has been somewhat lax.

          I don't mind if he is brought back as I like Vogel, but I want to give Mike Brown a hard look and if Rick Adelman is available we HAVE to take him.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Why Vogel Should Be Next Year's Coach

            Originally posted by RamBo_Lamar View Post
            I would like to first see how the rest of the season plays out, but if things go well
            like making the playoffs and putting up a spirited fight, I would not be averse to
            bringing back coach Vogel.
            I would like to see how the season plays out as well. If the Pacers make the playoffs and give a good show in the first round, win or lose I would like to bring him back. There are no real solid coaches out there in my opinion. I also prefer to give an assistant coach a shot before hiring the same old retreads. Frank wouldnt cost a great deal and could be our coach for the next several years because of his youth.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Why Vogel Should Be Next Year's Coach

              Originally posted by BringJackBack View Post
              I wouldn't mind if he is brought back, but some things have really been irking me about him as of late.

              1.) The Price/Rush/Jones/JMac/Foster lineup is disgusting. They should never, ever, ever, EVER all see the court together. He needs to do something to always keep someone who can create his own shot on the court at all times. This lineup is a disaster waiting to happen.

              2.) Waaaaaaaaay too much Rush in the fourth. It took Paul George two minutes in overtime to get two passes that got us four points with even better overall defense (PG is two times the team defender than Brandon) whereas Rush would be picking his nose in the corner. He is the most inconsistent player of all time and his defense for the most part has been somewhat lax.

              I don't mind if he is brought back as I like Vogel, but I want to give Mike Brown a hard look and if Rick Adelman is available we HAVE to take him.
              Seconded. I go about balistic when I see that lineup in there for any length of time.

              However to his credit he took Danny out early and put in Dahntay so that when that unit did start to struggle Danny came right back in and we not only maintained the lead but increased it by one (to 11).

              So I have faith that he, like Tyler & Paul, are learning.


              Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Why Vogel Should Be Next Year's Coach

                Most impressive to me about Vogel:

                Taking one of the youngest teams in the league from being left for dead on the side of the road after losing 6 straight, including 2 blowouts by 2 of the worst teams in the league, and having lost all of their confidence to winning 3 of 4 against playoff teams and playing as well as they have all year.

                Never lost confidence in the team, lost his composure or threw anyone under the bus and remained positive the whole time.

                If they finish the season showing continued improvement he has my vote.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Why Vogel Should Be Next Year's Coach

                  I won't be upset if we retain him, but I'd feel more comfortable with Mike Brown.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Why Vogel Should Be Next Year's Coach

                    I like Vogel too but I'm not sure he fits.
                    I don't think things will change much this off season. Of course we will make some changes, new players and all that, but the way I see things we won't get any big stars in addition to Granger via free agency/trade but rather rely on our young players. The problem with that is we will lack 2 things: leadership and experience, which are both very important when developing young players. I'm just not sure that a young coach is the right match for a young group.
                    Originally posted by Piston Prince
                    Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
                    "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Why Vogel Should Be Next Year's Coach

                      By the way, why does Rick Adelman get brought up? You would think one of two things:

                      1) If he's as good as you want to think he is, he wouldn't be let go by both Houston AND Sacramento.

                      2) Otherwise, surely Houston will just re-sign him, right?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Why Vogel Should Be Next Year's Coach

                        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                        I won't be upset if we retain him, but I'd feel more comfortable with Mike Brown.
                        I understand this line of thinking but I disagree strongly. I don't have faith that Mike Brown would be a "franchise" coach for us, his problems were on full display in Cleveland. He'll always be a decent coach but never a great coach, like Vinny Del Negro he'll probably end up downgrading by taking a job with a franchise less attractive than the one he was previously at, whether that is with Indiana or someone else is beside the point.

                        Rather that settle for a known mediocre entity, I wouldn't really mind rolling the dice with Frank. He's basically our only chance at getting a "superstar" coach since we're never going to snag one from another team. I'd be up for taking the gamble for a couple of years to see what he could do.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Why Vogel Should Be Next Year's Coach

                          I definately don't hate the idea(unlike the current coach of the Colts)

                          I'm curious to see how he would coach this team with a full season rather than half a season.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Why Vogel Should Be Next Year's Coach

                            Vogel's learning on the job. He's what this team needs now after Obrien, as a motivator. Next year? I don't know. But I don't want him to go somewhere else and become the next big thing in the coaching ranks. I want him to do it here.
                            "man, PG has been really good."

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Why Vogel Should Be Next Year's Coach

                              What if we win a first round playoff series under Vogel this year?

                              Spare the "Yeah right, what are you smoking?" comments.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X