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

DC vs. the other starting NBA Point Guards

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

  • #61
    Re: DC vs. the other starting NBA Point Guards

    Originally posted by BringJackBack View Post
    I've come to the conclusion long ago that Mackey is a troll with a purpose.. He will **** on our team when we do well or poor. He wasn't around after we have won games and he does not post anything unless we are losing. He makes situations seem much worse than they really are.. The first time he posted about the team was after the Miami game when posters were going ape ****..

    Not only is he cynical beyond repair, but he does not know how to distinguish fact from opinion, and he does not care about the Pacers at all... So he can **** on them with no remorse. He cares about Josh and that is why he has been here. Since we have made such a terrible decision to not retain him, he has continued to ridicule Foster, call Lou a pony tailed weirdo, and call Roy a pansy... I have Mackey on ignore so I won't get a response.
    You will get a response.

    I went on vacation from Christmas until the 3rd. It was a great trip, thanks for noticing my absence. Warms my heart.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: DC vs. the other starting NBA Point Guards

      Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
      I'd probably put Collison in the 15-20 range right now. He looked like a future All-Star talent when we acquired him, but he's been somewhat disappointing. He's a solid player, sure, but he's nothing more than solid.

      One important thing to remember: Collison has already proven he can put up big numbers on a sub-par team. Let's keep that in mind when looking at some of these statwhores.

      Brandon Jennings - Take away D.C.'s shooting touch and what do you get? Brandon Jennings. A shoot-first point guard who can't hit the broadside of a barn. That's a recipe for success. But, hey, he once score 55-points as a rookie, so he must be really good! So goes the thought process of people like Mackey.

      John Wall - Highly inefficient and massively turnover prone? Exactly what I'm looking for in a point guard! Empty numbers produce little W's. Washington's record since drafting Wall? 24-67. His basketball IQ probably qualifies him for the Special Olympics. Stephon Marbury, eat your heart out (not literally, Stephon...)

      D.J. Augustin - About on-par with D.C., but Collison's numbers are slightly better, and he has one less year of experience, so I gave him the edge. Also, despite their listings, D.C.'s actually a full 2" taller than Augustin (Collison's 6'1.5" in shoes, one of the few players taller than his listed height).

      Jameer Nelson - Basically, an older version of Augustin. Very similar production to Collison, but he's less than a month from turning 30 and is on a downswing, giving D.C. the edge.

      Mario Chalmers - Good backup, but starting material he's not. D.C.'s clearly superior, and anyone claiming otherwise is irrational.

      Mike Conley - He's a local kid, so there will be people here who swear he's destined for the Hall of Fame (he'll go in with the same class as McBob and E.J.), but the reality is he's been very mediocre. His production is inferior to Collison's, and he's had two extra seasons to develop.

      Raymond Felton - Has accomplished diddly-squat in his career. Lots of losing, very ho-hum numbers, and inefficient shooting (41% FG, 33% 3FG). He's probably already passed his peak.

      Jarrett Jack - Inferior to D.C. across the board. Not by a large margin, no, but inferior nonetheless. Significantly older + inferior production? No-brainer.

      Kyle Lowry - Right now he looks like a potential All-Star, sure, but seven measly games does not trump five seasons of mediocrity. I'd probably take him over D.C., but it's not a lock. Remember:Collison put up 19/9/4 with excellent shooting numbers in 37 starts as a rookie. Put him in Lowry's position (read: on a terrible where he can dominate the ball), and there's no reason he couldn't put up those numbers again.

      I agree with most of this with the exception of Kyle Lowry, John Wall, and Raymond Felton. Lowry is a MUCH better defensive player who also pushes the ball very well in transition. Raymond Felton played on A LOT of bad teams in Charolette, but he is also a tad better defensively while excelling at pushing the ball in transition and getting his team easy looks. John wall, though he's struggled through the first 8 games this year, was the number 1 pick for a reason. He is far and away more talented right now than DC could ever be. Does he need to work on his decision making? Sure. But would you rather play with Blatche, Young, and Lewis OR Hibbert, Granger, West?

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: DC vs. the other starting NBA Point Guards

        DC is being underrated too much. His stats may not be all-star caliber, but he's been solid and instrumental to the current 6-3 record. He has improved his defense with his ability to disrupt fastbreaks, has been distributing the ball better and has been showing on-court leadership. There are maybe 15-20 better PGs than him, but right now, he's been doing his job well overall and if he keeps on improving, he can probably bring better stats to show.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: DC vs. the other starting NBA Point Guards

          Damn some people are really sensitive in this blog, wow, is either you better be in our collective rose colored glasses side or else.
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: DC vs. the other starting NBA Point Guards

            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
            Now that you are bringing that last part up I would really like to know were our other players are compared to the rest of the league, Roy is probably the only one in the top 10 I would think.
            Hibbert- top 6 C
            Granger- top 10 SF
            Stephenson - Top 5 scrub lol

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: DC vs. the other starting NBA Point Guards

              Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
              Hibbert- top 6 C
              Granger- top 10 SF
              Stephenson - Top 5 scrub lol
              Top 5 scrub yeah I think is funny and I like Lance.
              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: DC vs. the other starting NBA Point Guards

                I put DC 10th -11th in the league as long as he continues his play he has shown this year. There are some so called stars *cough Wall cough* that is supposedly better, yet he sure doesn't show it on the floor.
                Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: DC vs. the other starting NBA Point Guards

                  Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                  I agree with most of this with the exception of Kyle Lowry, John Wall, and Raymond Felton. Lowry is a MUCH better defensive player who also pushes the ball very well in transition. Raymond Felton played on A LOT of bad teams in Charolette, but he is also a tad better defensively while excelling at pushing the ball in transition and getting his team easy looks. John wall, though he's struggled through the first 8 games this year, was the number 1 pick for a reason. He is far and away more talented right now than DC could ever be. Does he need to work on his decision making? Sure. But would you rather play with Blatche, Young, and Lewis OR Hibbert, Granger, West?
                  In Wall's case, his main problem is not he's not that great of a floor general yet, as evidenced by his number of turnovers. And his style of play is more on carrying the scoring load than facilitate the offense. And his inefficiencies in scoring is one of the reasons their losing. Not saying he's an inferior PG to DC, but as a PG he's a disappointment. A high-caliber PG makes a team full of scrubs at least decent.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: DC vs. the other starting NBA Point Guards

                    Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
                    I didn't miss the point; I disagreed with the logic behind it. If teams were only as good as their weakest link, then Miami wouldn't have made it to the Finals with a PG rotation of Chalmers, Arroyo and Bibby. The Lakers wouldn't have won with Derek Fisher at point. If Paul George were better, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Likewise if Danny Granger were on Durant's level, or Roy Hibbert on Dwight Howard's. It doesn't seem fair to single out Collison.

                    Would we really be a better team with Rodney Stuckey? Does Jrue Holliday make us a championship-caliber team? Is Raymond Felton the missing piece to an NBA dynasty?
                    i agree that it is unfair to blame DC for the pacers issues. if paul george was kobe and danny granger was KD, then it wouldn't matter. but since they aren't, it does. to make the ECF, you have to have superior talent in a couple/three guys [like miami] or lots of really good guys [lakers]. i get that.

                    but the pacers do not have a top 10 guy, much less 2 or three of them. that means they need more guys that are top 10 at their position to make up for the lack of a star player. the pacers are not going to the ECF with 3 above average guys and a couple of below average guys. they need everyone to be above average to make up for no one being special.

                    FWIW, i see danny and david as top 10 guys at their position. roy is looking like he is joining those two. paul, lance, DC, tyler and GH are not there yet. right now they are just guys. if the pacers are going to contend, they need to get much better. maybe they will, i hope so.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: DC vs. the other starting NBA Point Guards

                      I need to change my vote... I'm with Mackey on this. There is only 1 or 2 from his list that I think are worse.

                      It is a position we really need to upgrade. I think DC is the perfect back up for us.

                      DC is playing better so far this year, but even if he reaches his potential I don't think we can win a championship, let alone a playoff series against an elite team with him.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: DC vs. the other starting NBA Point Guards

                        I agree about keeping Jarrett Jack that was a mistake letting him go.

                        also people saying Augustine isn't better needs to watch him play. He plays the game the right way and is really efficient at the position.
                        Last edited by pacer4ever; 01-11-2012, 12:56 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: DC vs. the other starting NBA Point Guards

                          Can someone name a team that had/has someone as good as Darren Collison as their backup point guard? Preferably one where the backup isn't a rookie.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: DC vs. the other starting NBA Point Guards

                            I voted 21-25 and thats a bit harsh but the poll didn't factor in age and salary which are very important to a team like the Pacers.

                            DC gets crapped on a lot around here but I don't think he is as bad as a lot of people make him out to be. Like Kemo and others have said I think he needs more time and regardless I think the Pacers should take a pg in this years draft.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: DC vs. the other starting NBA Point Guards

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                              Mackey you make a good point (although I too would disagree with a few of your choices) But the overall point and the real question is whether Collison is good enough to be our starting point guard. Good enough to be a starting point guard on a championship caliber team?

                              The answer to that question IMO is clearly a big no. I have always believed in order to be a championship caliber team you need a dynamic perimeter player. It can be a point guard, it can be a shooting guard it can be a small forward, but it has to be on the perimeter.

                              We do not have that and I am sure Granger is not it, and I am not confident that Paul George can develop into that type of player.
                              Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seem that what you're saying is not that Collison isn't good enough, but that one of the three (Collison, George or Granger) isn't good enough right now for the Pacers to win a championship. If I'm reading that right, doesn't it then follow that, without improving from where he is now, Collison could be the starting point guard on a championship team?

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: DC vs. the other starting NBA Point Guards

                                Originally posted by Winner View Post
                                I would even take Holiday and Nash off of that list too. I think at the end of the year, Jrue and Darren's stats will almost be the same and Darren runs the offense better. And, Nash is really old.
                                Jrue Holiday is one of the best pg defenders DC is not. People seem to forget basketball is a 2 way game.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X