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

Is it too early to call Jimmer a bust?

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

  • #31
    Re: Is it too early to call Jimmer a bust?

    Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
    Not true at all. There are a lot of people who bash Lance every chance they get. I could name them, but anyone with over 55 posts knows who they are.
    And I could quote posts that are simply hyperbolic about Lance with people raving about Lance hitting a simple jumper.

    Understand something. That's not a war in which two sides participate (the pro-Lance and the anti-Lance one). That's an internet forum about the Pacers whereas most posters post their views on how the Pacers are doing and how they are going to get better. A lot of posters just don't take a side in this feud. They have said both good and bad things about Lance. It depends to how he is playing. Don't expect this crowd to bash Lance for going 1/5 or 0/4 but don't expect them to rave about him after scoring 12 points either.
    Originally posted by IrishPacer
    Empty vessels make the most noise.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Is it too early to call Jimmer a bust?

      Originally posted by Kstat View Post
      Because you can't compare Jimmer's issues with Lance's. They aren't in the same ballpark. They aren't even the same sport.
      Here we go again. Kstat, I am talking purely about basketball. If you can't separate the two, then that's on you bro. I personally don't like to pretend I have any clue what Lance is like morally. And I also choose not to use professional athletes to prove my moral good standing. I trust the people in charge of the team who know him to judge that aspect of him. You know..... because they actually know him on a personal level.

      Jimmer has already played more minutes than Lance (and he's older), so if Lance can get labeled as a bust then Jimmer can too, and that is all I said.

      And the reaction I got just proves the point I was making. If you weren't a bunch of haters you wouldn't care about my post what so ever.
      "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Is it too early to call Jimmer a bust?

        ...and here we go again with the head in the sand...

        I'm not even referring to moral issues. I'm referring to his immaturity issues not even related to his earlier legal troubles. His play on the floor I think has been judged pretty fairly.

        Also, responding with "disagreeing with me only proves I'm right" is a poor way to win an argument

        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Is it too early to call Jimmer a bust?

          Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
          And I could quote posts that are simply hyperbolic about Lance with people raving about Lance hitting a simple jumper.

          Understand something. That's not a war in which two sides participate (the pro-Lance and the anti-Lance one). That's an internet forum about the Pacers whereas most posters post their views on how the Pacers are doing and how they are going to get better. A lot of posters just don't take a side in this feud. They have said both good and bad things about Lance. It depends to how he is playing. Don't expect this crowd to bash Lance for going 1/5 or 0/4 but don't expect them to rave about him after scoring 12 points either.
          Ok, do it. Or just keep pulling things out of your butt. Your call.
          "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Is it too early to call Jimmer a bust?

            Originally posted by CreekShow View Post
            No its not. So so glad Pacers didnt even have a chance to draft this scrub.
            What's the matter? Jimmer steal your girl or something?

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Is it too early to call Jimmer a bust?

              Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
              Jimmer has already played more minutes than Lance (and he's older), so if Lance can get labeled as a bust then Jimmer can too, and that is all I said.
              I never said that Lance can be labeled as a bust, for the record.

              Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
              Ok, do it. Or just keep pulling things out of your butt. Your call.
              Sure. Wait a minute to assemble the posts from that Atlanta and Boston games.
              Originally posted by IrishPacer
              Empty vessels make the most noise.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Is it too early to call Jimmer a bust?

                Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                ...and here we go again with the head in the sand...

                I'm not even referring to moral issues. I'm referring to his immaturity issues not even related to his earlier legal troubles.
                Wow. What does this have to do with my post Kstat. I don't have my head in the sand, I have just already heard this BS. You don't know Lance Stephenson. And that's all that needs to be said. What he does on the court is the only thing we all have knowledge of. So lets keep it to that.

                BTW, Nuntius, pay close attention to Kstat. He is exactly what I'm talking about. He's bringing up immaturity issues from last season, just because I was semi supportive of Lance. That's a hater if I ever seen one.

                Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                I never said that Lance can be labeled as a bust, for the record.



                Sure. Wait a minute to assemble the posts from that Atlanta and Boston games.
                O I C, just giving Lance props on a good game is out of line. My bad, I misunderstood.
                "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Is it too early to call Jimmer a bust?

                  Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                  What's the consensus on Gordon Hayward? I haven't watched him, but I ran across his numbers last night and they weren't what I'd expect. Anything I should know, from people who have actually seen him?
                  Smart player, good bench guy getting starts and sometimes starter minutes. This is cause Jazz is weak at the 3 since AK-47 is no longer there(Great for Gordon). He covers the floor, set screens, rotates very well, all around smart player.

                  Defense is a little weak. He seems to avoid contact on both sides of the floor, sometimes for the good tho, Example, he may pull up on a fast break for a short jump shot, instead of taken to the hole to draw a foul, there again he may finish strong with a dunk. He reads the floor and player(s) spacing at a veteran level BB IQ that a lot of vets will never have. He will take a charge, but I haven't seen him fail at it much. Another words, he makes sure he has position before doing it or he let's them by or he just fouls them. Blocking shots has not been in his game much, yet.

                  The best thing I can say about him is he totally plays within himself, he rarely hurts the team.

                  The worst thing I'd say is he could stand to be more aggressive on both ends of the floor, but he has been showing improvement as of late.

                  He will retire with a long career in the NBA. As a starter will be up to him on how hard he wants to work at it on a physical aspect.

                  I would love to have Hayward working the 2 and 3 for us off the bench right now.

                  Hope this helps!
                  Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Is it too early to call Jimmer a bust?

                    Originally posted by Hibbert View Post
                    What's the matter? Jimmer steal your girl or something?
                    You must have never seen Jimmers lady. I wish I had a girl that looked like that

                    Edit: Plus George Hill >>> Jimmer
                    Last edited by CreekShow; 01-21-2012, 05:31 PM.
                    I Bleed Blue

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Is it too early to call Jimmer a bust?

                      Originally posted by BrownBearCoffee View Post
                      This. I think Jimmer would be good in San Antonio or even here if he could accept not having the ball for the majority of the time. I think he would be deadly off of Roy and DWest screens.
                      Shouldnt we wait to call him a bust? He probably is in the wrong system because he is not experienced playing off the ball. He is a ball dominate player. We might be able to use him because he can shoot. Nobody on our team is a real shooter.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Is it too early to call Jimmer a bust?

                        Originally posted by Taterhead View Post


                        O I C, just giving Lance props on a good game is out of line. My bad, I misunderstood.
                        hm...defensive much?

                        You realize your own paranoid rants are coming off worse than the people you accuse of "hating," right?

                        Who calls a 2nd round pick a "bust," anyway? Has anyone ever used that term to describe Lance?

                        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Is it too early to call Jimmer a bust?

                          Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                          ...an excuse needs to be made for someone who's pro career is less than a month old?

                          Which Pacer first round pick have we given up on in less than a month? Don't worry, I'll wait....
                          http://www.basketball-reference.com/...haskisc01.html

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Is it too early to call Jimmer a bust?

                            I do recall there being a "we" in there, somewhere....

                            Besides, Haskin I believe had injury problems.
                            Last edited by Kstat; 01-21-2012, 05:43 PM.

                            It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                            Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                            Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                            NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Is it too early to call Jimmer a bust?

                              Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                              I do recall there being a "we" in there, somewhere....

                              Besides, Haskin I believe had injury problems.
                              It was in jest really, I agree with your argument.

                              But I did give up on Haskin when they called his name and, as the 14th pick in the draft, he wasn't even at the draft!

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Is it too early to call Jimmer a bust?

                                Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                                BTW, Nuntius, pay close attention to Kstat. He is exactly what I'm talking about. He's bringing up immaturity issues from last season, just because I was semi supportive of Lance. That's a hater if I ever seen one.
                                1) For all I know, he could be referring to his immaturity on the court which led him playing at 1000 MPH in the first 5 games that led to go 0/9. Personally, I wouldn't judge him over such a small sample but it didn't help to make a good impression to me as someone who is watching his first serious year of Pacers basketball.

                                2) Even if he is a hater (which is not something I conclude from his posts but anyway), it has nothing to do with what I said earlier. Frankly, I don't get the impression that the forum is filled with Lance haters.

                                Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                                O I C, just giving Lance props on a good game is out of line. My bad, I misunderstood.
                                Giving Lance credit in a good game is not out of line. I've given him props in the last 5 games because he was able to play within his head. I have dedicated a lot of lines for Stephenson in my Indiana Pacers corner in a Greek basketball forum and the latest ones were pretty positive about his play.

                                However, the following were quite over the line.

                                Let me re-post:


                                Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                                Lance Stephenson is leading the team in +/- at +9. He's simply unstoppable out there; a one-man wrecking crew. I propose that Demolition Man become his new nickname. Teams shudder in fear whenever he steps on the court. A.J. Price sits back─from the end of the bench, naturally─and watches in awe.
                                This was after the second Celtics game when Lance 2 points (on 1/3), 2 assists, 1 rebound and 1 block.

                                Also, watch how this poster exploits this opportunity to bash on another player on our roster, namely A.J. Price.

                                Now watch the above being talked about ad absurdum after his great performance against the Hawks:

                                Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                                Has stubby, nonathletic, 25-year-old A.J. Price ever had an NBA game as good as Lance's game last night?

                                Lance may not be there yet, but he at least has the physical tools and the skills to develop into something worthwhile. A.J. Price not only flat-out sucks, he has nothing to make me believe he'll ever be anything more than what he currently is.

                                Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                                How many of those games came while shooting over 70% from the field, while also combining for 8+ assists and rebounds?

                                Fun Fact of the Day: Despite pretending to be a point guard and shooting a horrific 35.6% from the field, A.J. Price still managed to finish second on the team in FGA per-minute last year. He was also fourth in assists-per-minute.

                                Who was #1 in assists-per-minute, you ask? Some 20-year-old punk rookie named Lance Stephenson.

                                Price's upside is mediocre third-stringer. Lance's downside is decent backup.
                                Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                                "You should probably go look at this small sample-size two-years-ago where A.J. Price managed not to embarrass himself and ignore the rest of his career where he has."

                                I'll get right on that...
                                See what I'm talking about? Over-stating one player's performance and bashing another player in the same time.

                                Personally, I choose not to take a side on the Price vs Stephenson debate. I've liked them both in some games and in some other games I thought they were detrimental for the team. In the end, we won anyway so I was happy.

                                PS: This may seem like I'm calling the quoted poster out. It's nothing like that as I have nothing against the guy. I couldn't have anything against him anyway as we have never interacted. It's just that those posts of him struck me quite bad.
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X