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

You probly thought Jason Kidd was declining

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

  • You probly thought Jason Kidd was declining

    ... because I know I've been sort of regarding him that way for awhile. I'm mean... he's old. 38 is usually beyond productive years for a PG.

    But look at his career stats:

    http://espn.go.com/nba/player/stats/_/id/429/jason-kidd

    His "decline" is very slow. He's still a productive PG at 38. His scoring is down a lil this year, but his assists are still 8+/game. He's never been generally fast or athletic, just crafty, in the Mark Jackson mold. So I guess it just makes sense that this guy keeps getting older than dirt... and still keeps producing.

    I've always been a fan of Kidd's, even back in college. It's just fun to go look at a guy who most people don't really give much thought to anymore and see that he's defying the odds.

    I like the Mavs this year. I think Dirk and Kidd and Carlisle and Marion are deserving. Terry has always been a baller, too.

    Just random thoughts about the Mavs. After last night's incredible comeback win, I think I've found the team I'm rooting for to win it all.
    There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

  • #2
    Re: You probly thought Jason Kidd was declining

    He a better shooter than he has ever been. but he isn't as good as when he was leading the Nets to back to back NBA Finals appearances

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: You probly thought Jason Kidd was declining

      Oh, I wouldn't argue that point at all, his prime was back with the Nets, but my point is, he's still not doing a half bad job at 38. And his shooting is down this year (.360s), but he's never been the world's best shooter. He had shooting years like this when he was younger.

      You look at his career stats and his stats this year at 38 don't look *that* much different than his entire career.

      It's just fun for me to think about. He's old... slow... can't jump. You compare him to new guys like Rose and Westbrook who are 500% more athletic, and he's out there just getting the job done for a championship contender and holding his own. He's defying logic, really. I like those stories.
      Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 05-24-2011, 11:48 AM.
      There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: You probly thought Jason Kidd was declining

        Hard to believe he's 38 I could see him retiring after this if they win it all.. if there's a lockout I can't imagine him coming back anyways.. might as well go out on a high note. I remember many thought Cuban was moronic to trade Devin Harris for Jason Kidd.

        I'm rooting for Dallas because I'd like Dirk to win a ring as I said in another thread wouldn't it be funny if the guy who went through numerous playoff failures and stayed with the same team through it all won it all?

        Maybe make some of these "superteams" think twice.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: You probly thought Jason Kidd was declining

          Jason Kidd is amazing. It's really a shame he wasn't a good shooter until the later part of his career. He can still defend too. Very smart player.

          I think it was on Mike & Mike this morning where they said that Kidd has put on a clinic on how to play the point guard position. I couldn't agree more.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: You probly thought Jason Kidd was declining

            And Kidd is just such a crafty defender too. He has been frustrating people all postseason.

            I think it would be cool for him to win a title in Dallas, the place where his career began.

            He should have won the 02 MVP when he transformed the Nets from cellar-dwellers to championship contenders.

            I can't believe he has been in the league since 1994. Christ, what a long career. That's one less year than Reggie played.

            This Mavs team has really grown on me. I wanted the Thunder to win last night because I wanted to see a 2-2 series. But this Mavs team of vets is so easy to root for. I really hope they take down the Heat.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: You probly thought Jason Kidd was declining

              Kidd's most elite skill, passing, also happens to be the basketball skill least dependent on athleticism. If he stays healthy, he could probably play well past 40 and just be a purely half court PG who can hit a spot up 3 and send the ball through an opening the size of a doughnut hole.


              Comment


              • #8
                Re: You probly thought Jason Kidd was declining

                Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
                Hard to believe he's 38 I could see him retiring after this if they win it all.. if there's a lockout I can't imagine him coming back anyways.. might as well go out on a high note. I remember many thought Cuban was moronic to trade Devin Harris for Jason Kidd.

                I'm rooting for Dallas because I'd like Dirk to win a ring as I said in another thread wouldn't it be funny if the guy who went through numerous playoff failures and stayed with the same team through it all won it all?

                Maybe make some of these "superteams" think twice.
                Dallas isn't one of these "superteams"?

                Jason Kidd? Shawn Marion? Tyson Chandler? Brendan Haywood? Peja Stojakovic?
                "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                -Lance Stephenson

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: You probly thought Jason Kidd was declining

                  Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                  Dallas isn't one of these "superteams"?

                  Jason Kidd? Shawn Marion? Tyson Chandler? Brendan Haywood? Peja Stojakovic?
                  Nah.... I think he's referring to a Big 3 team like Boston or Miami, or even LA. I wouldn't consider Marion/Kidd/Chandler/et all to be "super" like DWade and Bosh and LeBron. The Mavs are more like the Bulls with 1 workhorse superstar and a good supporting cast... except the Mavs don't put 80% of their offense through Dirk like the Bulls do with Rose. I think that's ultimately Chicago's fatal flaw... been saying it since before the playoffs started.
                  Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 05-24-2011, 12:46 PM.
                  There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: You probly thought Jason Kidd was declining

                    This is why I rank Kidd as the best PG of his generation, with Steve Nash at 2nd. Those guys are plainly the best in the business as PGs in the pros. They have these elite capabilities that most PGs right now don't have:

                    - Passing. Not those fancy passes or those acrobatic effects before the pass. They just have the perfect timing to pass the ball to somebody for easy shots.

                    - Floor General and Leadership as a PG. They are good at leading their team in setting up the plays that coaches wanted them to execute. You just see perfect execution of plays when they are on the floor orchestrating the offense.

                    - Court Vision. I have seen tons of their highlights. And you see something in common: they are giving the ball to players who have higher chances of shooting the ball, whether it's an entry pass to a big man, an alley-oop to a cutting wing, or to an open spot-up shooter.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: You probly thought Jason Kidd was declining

                      Kidd has always played the game "on the ground" but not sure I would have classified him as un-athletic. In his prime he was one of the fastest in the game with the ball in his hands, quick enough laterally to defend smaller match-ups and strong enough to defend larger ones.

                      On everything else I agree. It is amazing what he can accomplish at 38 and at a position that is not kind to aging players.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: You probly thought Jason Kidd was declining

                        Kidd and Nash are a dying bread. Most of the PGs playing now are just SGs with great handles. Probably why Chris Paul, imo, is still the best PG in the game. He's the only younger point that plays like those guys.

                        edit; i suppose williams fits that role too

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: You probly thought Jason Kidd was declining

                          Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                          But this Mavs team of vets is so easy to root for. I really hope they take down the Heat.
                          Agreed.

                          I have always liked the Mavs. I would LOVE to see this group win the title this year.

                          First you have Mark Cuban. Love him or hate him you have to give him credit for how he turned around that franchise.

                          Then you have Rick Carlise. I am still a big fan of his and if there is any coach in the league who deserves to win a ring, who hasn't, it's Rick.

                          Their players have all overcome a lot. Dirk and Jason Terry have been there a while. Dirk was often called "soft" and a poor performer in the clutch which is not the case.

                          Then you have guys like Jason Kidd, Shawn Marion, and Peja. All have been on some really good teams that made deep runs in the playoffs but just couldn't win it all.

                          I find Tyson Chandler to be a likeable player to watch too.

                          There really isn't anything about this Mavs team I don't like. It would be awesome to see them win it all. David Stern handing Mark Cuban the Larry O'Brien trophy would be priceless!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: You probly thought Jason Kidd was declining

                            Kidd is a HOF right? I guess Reggie didn't make it so I'm not sure.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: You probly thought Jason Kidd was declining

                              Didn't realize that Kidd was 38...wow.


                              Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X