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

Lance.

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

  • #61
    Re: Lance.

    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
    Neither has OJ Simpson, but we all know the difference.

    Public perception is completely different than the court of law. I shouldn't have to point that out.
    FYI

    In September 2007, Simpson was arrested in Las Vegas, Nevada, and charged with numerous felonies, including armed robbery and kidnapping. In 2008 he was found guilty and sentenced to 33 years imprisonment, with a minimum of 9 years without parole. He is currently serving his sentence at the Lovelock Correctional Center in Lovelock, Nevada.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Lance.

      Originally posted by Larry Staverman View Post
      FYI

      In September 2007, Simpson was arrested in Las Vegas, Nevada, and charged with numerous felonies, including armed robbery and kidnapping. In 2008 he was found guilty and sentenced to 33 years imprisonment, with a minimum of 9 years without parole. He is currently serving his sentence at the Lovelock Correctional Center in Lovelock, Nevada.
      I know that, I was talking about him being found guilty of murder. That's what he's most notorious for.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Lance.

        Please stop. I am not a huge Lance fan, all I see is potential in him which people in the front office also see in the player. So, far he has done nothing to disprove such potential. He's young, only 2 years out of High School. Even Kobe, and KG took years to develop, and that was with consistent playing time.

        What I have a problem with is people constantly picking on his "alleged" actions. It's funny, people cite them as if they are facts, and then couch their biased opinion regarding him by saying "alleged." As far as I know, the fact is he was accused of touching a female in High school (her buttocks if I remember correctly). Though, I don't condone this...having grown up in southern Indiana gone to high school here, this was not something so un-heard off. I imagine, this is something that happens across the country in this age group and something that can only be fixed over time with more education.

        Then last summer there was the accusation that he "pushed his girlfried down the stairs and then slammed her head on the stairs" and again these charges were dropped. First, and I pointed this out when it first came to light, that such accusation/terms are very loaded and are almost never found in a medical report, though they may at times be found in an EMS report. Doctors, never put such things in the medical chart, precisely due to the fact such reports/stories are "alleged," and a physician knows that the medical chart is a legal document that can be brought into court and questioned. Hence, it is/should be based on fact only, not opinion.

        Secondly, we must remember that again these charges were dropped. Both of these cases took place in New York and in New York City, a place which is known for aggressive prosecution, especially regarding celebrity cases. Do not forget this is the same city/state which sent Plaxico Burress to jail for 2 years for shooting himself accidentally. So, the fact that the charges were dropped seems to, in my opinion, give Lance the benefit of the doubt.

        Again, we can and should debate his merits as a basketball player, but I think debating his "alleged" personal shortcomings as person is a bit overplayed. Just my opinion.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Lance.

          Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
          If you're a person who makes some mistakes in life, then you tend to get outcast by certain types. It's nothing new. People love to point fingers and make assumptions based off small bits of information. It's so easy, and people love easy. Even if it makes them look ignorant.

          Lance has come from a place that most people on this board would be scared to even drive through. And he has been surrounded by certain things that most have no clue about. And because of that there are some personality flaws with him. That doesn't mean he is a bad person at all. People have to be given a chance at redemption. Especially when they are as young as he is.

          But the thing that bothers me most is the crowd who pretends he isn't incredibly talented. Larry Bird disagrees. I'll take his opinion along with my own two eyes all day.



          Lance played PG all through HS, and won 4 state titles. He played SG one year at Cincy, hardly his whole life.
          and he has the NY State High school career scoring record
          Sittin on top of the world!

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Lance.

            Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
            Nobody said anything about race.

            Anyways, that's how cities are. A good neighborhood borders a bad neighborhood.

            Do you think Lance was running around Bay Ridge with Russians or the projects?
            possibly

            The reason I mentioned the issue in the first place is I have visited a lot of undersirable areas and NY to me at least, I feel much safer than a bad neighborhood in Chicago

            you are correct about the challenges Lance faced though
            Sittin on top of the world!

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Lance.

              Well to be fair I thik we can all agree Lance has had some "issues" in his past. I think more on a maturity note, than a "bad apple" note, if that makes sense

              I do think that to say someone came from a rough area, and use it as an excuse to break the law or do bad things is wrong

              but I also think to act as though someone who grew up in say southern indiana faces the same challenges or same issues as someone froma poorer neighboorhod does is niave
              Sittin on top of the world!

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Lance.

                Just because the charges were dropped doesn't mean he didn't do it. Charges are dropped for a number of reasons. Saying "well the charges were dropped" isn't a good defense of what happened.

                Say I get pulled over for a DUI and I go into the diversion program. I'm not formally charged with anything, so does that mean I wasn't driving drunk? Uh, no....

                Trouble seems to follow Lance. That gives a pretty strong indication that he has something to do with the problems. We can argue opinions over whether or not it's Lance's fault, none of us know the exact circumstances. But at the same time, Lance is easily replaceable, and it's in his best interest to remove himself from situations that could go bad, as much as possible.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Lance.

                  Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                  Just because the charges were dropped doesn't mean he didn't do it. Charges are dropped for a number of reasons. Saying "well the charges were dropped" isn't a good defense of what happened.

                  Say I get pulled over for a DUI and I go into the diversion program. I'm not formally charged with anything, so does that mean I wasn't driving drunk? Uh, no....

                  Trouble seems to follow Lance. That gives a pretty strong indication that he has something to do with the problems. We can argue opinions over whether or not it's Lance's fault, none of us know the exact circumstances. But at the same time, Lance is easily replaceable, and it's in his best interest to remove himself from situations that could go bad, as much as possible.
                  and just because the "public opinion" is he did it, doesn not make it factual

                  In Lances case I feel extreemly confident in saying if there was physical evidence discoverred by the physician at the time the girlfriend was treated, I can not see anyway Lance would have the charges droped, in fact I believe NY state law would demand a trial

                  but some people will formulate an opinoin, regardless of the outcome of the case

                  Also what has he really done that was that bad

                  The first charge in highschool was that he aledgedly grabed a girls butt. seriously? not defending the action but I think most heterosexual young boys have grabed a girls but before

                  The issue with the girlfriend, in my opinion was blown way out of proportion

                  the other things were alledged runins with coaches
                  Sittin on top of the world!

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Lance.

                    Public perception equals reality, regardless if it's the truth or not. You don't have to like it, or think that it should. That doesn't matter. You have to work within the system in place, and that's the system in place.
                    Last edited by Since86; 06-17-2011, 01:25 PM.
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Lance.

                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      Public perception equals reality, regardless if it's the truth or not. You don't have to like it, or think that it should. That doesn't matter. You have to work within the system in place, and that's the system in place.
                      I dont necessarily agree with that statement

                      unless you mean that if the public perception is made up , than the reality is that is how said person is viewed
                      Sittin on top of the world!

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Lance.

                        Originally posted by Larry Staverman View Post
                        FYI

                        In September 2007, Simpson was arrested in Las Vegas, Nevada, and charged with numerous felonies, including armed robbery and kidnapping, but he was really convicted for murder
                        Sorry it was a Seth Meyers line from SNL a few seasons ago, I couldn't resist.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Lance.

                          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                          Just because the charges were dropped doesn't mean he didn't do it. Charges are dropped for a number of reasons. Saying "well the charges were dropped" isn't a good defense of what happened.

                          Say I get pulled over for a DUI and I go into the diversion program. I'm not formally charged with anything, so does that mean I wasn't driving drunk? Uh, no....

                          Trouble seems to follow Lance. That gives a pretty strong indication that he has something to do with the problems. We can argue opinions over whether or not it's Lance's fault, none of us know the exact circumstances. But at the same time, Lance is easily replaceable, and it's in his best interest to remove himself from situations that could go bad, as much as possible.
                          All I mean by his environment is that he is more likely to struggle with anger issues, and things of that nature. I'm not making excuses for Lance, all his problems are his own. But, I am not one of these people who sees everything as a cut and dry moral issue. There is more to it than that. He didn't just wake up one day and decide to have a violent temper or a sexual issue towards women. At the end of the day I think if he truly wants to be a solid human being, then he needs an environment for once that supports him in that aspect. I don't think he has ever had that before.

                          I also don't feel like 6'5" PG's who can score and pass the way he can are easily replaceable. I think Lance is the most naturally talented PG the Pacers have ever had.

                          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                          Public perception equals reality, regardless if it's the truth or not. You don't have to like it, or think that it should. That doesn't matter. You have to work within the system in place, and that's the system in place.
                          That's what I call being a sheep, IMO. Public perception changes.
                          Last edited by Taterhead; 06-17-2011, 02:02 PM.
                          "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Lance.

                            Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                            I also don't feel like 6'5" PG's who can score and pass the way he can are easily replaceable. I think Lance is the most naturally talented PG the Pacers have ever had.
                            I knew I should have added another line.

                            Lance is easily replaceable, until he actually does something with his talent. As of right now, he's just a 3rd string PG and not much more.


                            Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                            That's what I call being a sheep, IMO.
                            I don't like it either, but that's how the world works. But yes, public perception can change. Just not easily.

                            EDIT: And I don't think he needs an environment to help him change. Domestic abuse, or whatever other illegal/immoral/unethical action you can think of doesn't know differences in income or race or religion.

                            Good people come out of the ghetto's, they come out of Beverly Hills. Bad people also come out of both.

                            It has to do with how you want to live your life, and if you're strong enough to make the right decisions in the moment.

                            You always have a choice.
                            Last edited by Since86; 06-17-2011, 02:13 PM.
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Lance.

                              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                              I knew I should have added another line.

                              Lance is easily replaceable, until he actually does something with his talent. As of right now, he's just a 3rd string PG and not much more.




                              I don't like it either, but that's how the world works. But yes, public perception can change. Just not easily.

                              EDIT: And I don't think he needs an environment to help him change. Domestic abuse, or whatever other illegal/immoral/unethical action you can think of doesn't know differences in income or race or religion.

                              Good people come out of the ghetto's, they come out of Beverly Hills. Bad people also come out of both.

                              It has to do with how you want to live your life, and if you're strong enough to make the right decisions in the moment.

                              You always have a choice.
                              I don't disagree. I just wanna give the kid a chance, that's all. He is one of the lowest paid guys on the team and he is under contract for 1 more guaranteed year. I don't see the big deal with allowing him more time to show some progress. If he disrupts the locker room, then he heads to Ft. Wayne for a stretch.

                              I would a lot rather have Lance sitting on the end of the bench than Adam Morrison or Robert Swift. As a 15th man, I don't think you can do any better than a kid like Lance. And who knows maybe you will have a 6'5" PG" who can flat out ball. At least that is my hope.
                              "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Lance.

                                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                                Just because the charges were dropped doesn't mean he didn't do it. Charges are dropped for a number of reasons. Saying "well the charges were dropped" isn't a good defense of what happened.

                                Absolutely! He is every bit as guilty as those Duke Lacrosse players.

                                It's not the results of the case that matters it's the severity of the charges that matters.

                                Would you mind posting a copy of the investigative report that you've read? I'd like to nail Lance also!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X