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

Point Guard Update.....

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

  • #46
    Re: Point Guard Update.....

    Lance is a playmaker. He makes passes and gets assists, as well as scores. He just isn't smart passing the ball in most instances, making ridiculous passes and getting away with them. When they work, they are great. But eventually teams will pick up on them.
    Senior at the University of Louisville.
    Greenfield ---> The Ville

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Point Guard Update.....

      Originally posted by Psyren View Post
      IMO, I only want to see Lance on the floor with Hill. He just looks comfortable when he has Hill next to him.
      IMHO

      I think Lance needs Foster on the floor. According to him, Foster really helps him on the court with piocks and where he should be on the floor

      I think its most important he plays with Jeff, especially if it means more nights like the onje against ATL
      Sittin on top of the world!

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Point Guard Update.....

        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
        Honestly, after reading the whole thread, it seems like some of you are still fighting the Lance is a shooting guard thing, even after our head coach has come out and said it.
        I think it is be queen people have gotten so used to SGs playing PG in the NBA that people have forgotten what a PG really is.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Point Guard Update.....

          Lance's future clearly lies at the point guard position, but I understand taking it slowly. Having him split play-making duties with a 6'2" combo-guard will ease the load for him.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Point Guard Update.....

            Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
            Lance's future clearly lies at the point guard position, but I understand taking it slowly. Having him split play-making duties with a 6'2" combo-guard will ease the load for him.
            According to who? Not the head coach of the team.


            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Point Guard Update.....

              Lance Stephenson, who scored a career-high 12 points against the Hawks, will continue to get playing time, but it will be mainly at shooting guard.
              That's Frank's quote, with my highlight for emphasis. He didn't say Lance is a SG and will only continue to be a SG. He said he will get most of his minutes at the SG position. I wonder what other position he will get PT at?

              Let's not transform what Frank said.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Point Guard Update.....

                Lance is as much of a point guard as Tyreke Evans, Westbrook, Rose, Monta, Curry and the rest of the other PG/G combos in the NBA, who cares what position he plays as long as he does a good job? as somebody else already mentioned, in reality this Pacers team doesn't really have a "pure point guard" they are all combo guards that play more like SG's than point guards anyway.
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Point Guard Update.....

                  Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                  IMHO

                  I think Lance needs Foster on the floor. According to him, Foster really helps him on the court with piocks and where he should be on the floor

                  I think its most important he plays with Jeff, especially if it means more nights like the onje against ATL
                  Foster does help Lance a lot Foster is the only great screen setter on the team and not Djones at SF. He needs a shooter at the SF he can dish to when open which Djones clearly isn't. Paul George or Granger both fit well with Lance and his weaknesses.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Point Guard Update.....

                    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                    According to who? Not the head coach of the team.
                    The guy who said Lance "demolished the Hawks," and had a better game than "stubby, non-athletic, turd of a player, AJ Price" has ever had in his NBA career.

                    Also, the same guy who mocked the 60+ win "mighty Cavs," of 2009-2010.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Point Guard Update.....

                      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                      According to who? Not the head coach of the team.
                      Huh? Then why is he playing him there at all? Wouldn't it make more sense to play him solely at SG then?

                      He is pretty much a rookie, he isn't gonna hand the starting spot to him today. But the fact that he is 21 and getting minutes there when we have viable options already in place is a pretty positive sign that the staff indeed DOES think he is the PG of the future.
                      "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Point Guard Update.....

                        Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                        Huh? Then why is he playing him there at all? Wouldn't it make more sense to play him solely at SG then?

                        He is pretty much a rookie, he isn't gonna hand the starting spot to him today. But the fact that he is 21 and getting minutes there when we have viable options already in place is a pretty positive sign that the staff indeed DOES think he is the PG of the future.
                        I think that's a pretty big stretch.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Point Guard Update.....

                          To play Devil's Advocate.....

                          I'm not sure if this has been brought up yet....but let's look at the other part of the equation.....how this affects GH and what the best role that GH should be when he is on the floor.

                          If the answer is that there is no difference to "who does what" on the floor when DC/GH/Lance share the floor...as in, it's irrelevant who is the actual "SG" or who is actually the "PG"....then it's a moot point as to whose the actual "PG" and "SG" and this change should not adversely affect the Guard rotation.

                          However, if the answer is that DC/GH/Lance/AJ should fill specific roles ( as in, one is the "PG" that is running the point/directing the flow of the offense and the other is the "SG" doing whatever SGs do ) when any of them are on the floor because of their skillsets.....then the question becomes.....is the Team putting GH in the best position to succeed and contribute to this Team when he is on the floor when he is paired up with either Lance or AJ?

                          In other words....IF it matters ( to a certain degree ) what role that each Player plays, GH is much better at being the SG then being a PG that is "running the point and directing the flow of the offense" and GH will be the "de facto" PG on the floor when he is paired up with Lance as the SG.......is Vogel putting this Team in the best position to win games?

                          The reason I ask all of this is because I do not know who the answer is to fill whatever role that we are looking to fill out the Guard rotation....AJ or Lance.....all I care about is putting the best lineup on the floor that will fit what Vogel wants to do.
                          Last edited by CableKC; 01-13-2012, 04:46 PM.
                          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                            According to who? Not the head coach of the team.
                            Did it occur to you that Lance might be getting more minutes at the 2 because the team needs better production from the backup shoot guard position. G. Hill may be looking to take all of the backup pg minutes. DJ has been playing SF a lot. You just assume that this meant anything negative abouts lances ability to play PG. It might just be about what is best for the team.

                            Sent from my Galaxy Nexus

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Point Guard Update.....

                              The dude is a combo guard. Just like rest of our point guards like others have already pointed out. Hill is a combo and I don't think he does very well at all setting up the offense. When he plays next to Lance I think it works because he is basically splitting point guard duties with Lance, regardless of what their listed position is.

                              AJ may be the most natural point guard on this team, but I still consider him a combo guard. Collison is a combo guard but he also runs the offense the best out of all of them at this point.

                              I wish I would have never entered this discussion because it has been beat to death, but I don't see the obsession with labeling him one or the other. It is clear when he is one the floor, he plays both, regardless of his listed position.

                              I'm just glad the tune of the forum has changed from Lance is a thug criminal who will never be good enough to be in the NBA, to a promising young, hard working talent with all the room for growth in the world.

                              The idea for the future I believe is to have two combo guards on the floor at the same time, evidenced by the Hill trade. At all times in all of our line-ups we have two guys who play both the point guard and shooting guard roles outside of the starters. They are combo guards. So they are both. And they play both. Labeling them doesn't change the fact that when on the floor, even though he may not bring the ball up, Lance is both a shooting guard and a point guard. He will play on the ball and off the ball, just like Hill. They are basically interchangeable.

                              And regardless of our view on this, I think we can all finally agree Stephenson taking minutes away from DJones can only be a good thing. DJones is the biggest black hole I've ever witnessed. At least Tyler has proven he can score at damn near an elite level in the post and is slowly becoming a better passer. DJones is a black hole and the dude has never proven he can score at near an elite level and I've never seen him make the effort to become a better passer like it is clear Tyler is trying to become. DJones gets the ball, thinks he is Kobe (though he does look like his little brother) and throws up terrible momentum killing shots.
                              Last edited by Midcoasted; 01-13-2012, 04:54 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Point Guard Update.....

                                Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                                The dude is a combo guard. Just like rest of our point guards like others have already pointed out. Hill is a combo and I don't think he does very well at all setting up the offense. When he plays next to Lance I think it works because he is basically splitting point guard duties with Lance, regardless of what their listed position is.

                                AJ may be the most natural point guard on this team, but I still consider him a combo guard. Collison is a combo guard but he also runs the offense the best out of all of them at this point.
                                I wish I would have never entered this discussion because it has been beat to death, but I don't see the obsession with labeling him one or the other. It is clear when he is one the floor, he plays both, regardless of his listed position.

                                I'm just glad the tune of the forum has changed from Lance is a thug criminal who will never be good enough to be in the NBA, to a promising young, hard working talent with all the room for growth in the world.

                                The idea for the future I believe is to have two combo guards on the floor at the same time, evidenced by the Hill trade. At all times in all of our line-ups we have two guys who play both the point guard and shooting guard roles. They are combo guards. So they are both. And they play both. Labeling them doesn't change the fact that when on the floor, even though he may not bring the ball up, Lance is both a shooting guard and a point guard. He will play on the ball and off the ball, just like Hill. They are basically interchangeable.
                                I highlighted the part that I find relevant. How important is it to have someone that can properly "setup the offense while directing the flow of the offense"?

                                If this is important, then isn't it better to have the better Guard options filling that role when they are on the floor?

                                When DC is on the floor....he's the best Player to do this. The question then centers around whether GH, Lance or AJ is next best suited to "setup the offense while directing the flow of the offense" when they are on the floor.
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X