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

Paul George "Dunk Competition is a Joke."

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

  • #31
    Re: Paul George "Dunk Competition is a Joke."

    Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
    Evans' two-ball dunk was far and away the best dunk of the night. On that alone, I felt he should have won.

    George calling the contest a joke is just stupid. He knew what it was when he was campaigning for entry. Of course it's a joke. If he was out there for the purity of the competition he wouldn't have put on a stupid green costume and turned on black lights.
    I think he meant the fan voting part was the joke. I can't say he's wrong. Fans voting for All Star starters is a joke too.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Paul George "Dunk Competition is a Joke."

      Originally posted by CableKC View Post
      But to be fair....and I'm sure that I will get some "hate"....but if I wasn't a Pacers fan......I'd think that his comments sound like "sour grapes".
      Oh yeah, that's true. I do think that it sounds like sour grapes. The reality is that the Contest would still be a Joke even if Paul had won this.

      It was still a nice experience for PG, though. And in the end that's what matters. Our guys having fun and getting some respect for the work they've put up
      Originally posted by IrishPacer
      Empty vessels make the most noise.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Paul George "Dunk Competition is a Joke."

        Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
        Evans' two-ball dunk was far and away the best dunk of the night. On that alone, I felt he should have won.

        George calling the contest a joke is just stupid. He knew what it was when he was campaigning for entry. Of course it's a joke. If he was out there for the purity of the competition he wouldn't have put on a stupid green costume and turned on black lights.
        Except neither of his other two dunks would have advanced him to another round in previous dunk contest with judges.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Paul George "Dunk Competition is a Joke."

          I think the only joke he is talking about is the fan voting. I didn't even know of the fan voting until a few days before the weekend.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Paul George "Dunk Competition is a Joke."

            Javale McGee got screwed last year as well, with the judges. Its all about how outrageous / famous your props are, not the degree of difficulty or awesomeness. The dunk contest is a joke. We all know who won. He should be treated as such. He is King George. Crown him!
            Senior at the University of Louisville.
            Greenfield ---> The Ville

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Paul George "Dunk Competition is a Joke."

              At the end of the day Paul George will be dunking in the playoffs while Jeremy Evans is sitting on his couch watching.
              Larry Bird and Ryan Grigson- wasting the talents of Paul George and Andrew Luck

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Paul George "Dunk Competition is a Joke."

                Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                Evans' two-ball dunk was far and away the best dunk of the night. On that alone, I felt he should have won.
                No, it wasn't. Two-ball dunks are a dime a dozen. McGee dunked three last year and lost. Two is going backwards. The idea behind the dunk contest is advancing the art of the dunk. Evans took it backwards.

                And that was his best dunk. Jumping over Kevin Hart was stupid. The eye-cam dunk --- stupid.

                George had 3 extremely tough technical dunks... dunking over a 7'2" guy; the Vince jam with the lights off (I wish he had put on more glow stuff to see it better, but it was still a creative dunk), and the 3rd dunk was a very tough technical dunk. His only downfall was he didn't stick these dunks on the first try.

                Evans stuck his lame dunks on the first try, plus he was the underdog, plus he incorporated the lame comic of the hour into one of his dunks and voila --- you got your lame-o dunk contest winner, America.
                There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Paul George "Dunk Competition is a Joke."

                  Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                  No, it wasn't. Two-ball dunks are a dime a dozen. McGee dunked three last year and lost. Two is going backwards. The idea behind the dunk contest is advancing the art of the dunk. Evans took it backwards.
                  He alley-ooped two balls. That was the best dunk of the night. By far. Hell, the pass alone was impressive.

                  If Paul would have done the Hibbert dunk the first time, it would have been about as good but it took too many attempts. The glow-in-the-dark gimmick was a bad idea because you couldn't really see anything on TV. The sticker was just dumb. It was good the first time Dwight did it when he stuck it to the top of the board. Sticking one to the bottom corner, repeatedly, isn't.

                  I think fan voting is stupid too. But everyone knew that was the format. I don't have a problem with the competitors playing to that. And neither did Paul because he did it too.
                  "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                  -Lance Stephenson

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Paul George "Dunk Competition is a Joke."

                    Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                    He alley-ooped two balls. That was the best dunk of the night. By far. Hell, the pass alone was impressive.

                    If Paul would have done the Hibbert dunk the first time, it would have been about as good but it took too many attempts. The glow-in-the-dark gimmick was a bad idea because you couldn't really see anything on TV. The sticker was just dumb. It was good the first time Dwight did it when he stuck it to the top of the board. Sticking one to the bottom corner, repeatedly, isn't.

                    I think fan voting is stupid too. But everyone knew that was the format. I don't have a problem with the competitors playing to that. And neither did Paul because he did it too.

                    I agree with you for the most part. I think Evans had the dunk of the night, unfortunately. The pass was incredible and it looked really smooth.

                    Paul's "sticker" dunk was a damn good dunk, though. He put the sticker in the lower right corner, yet still managed to complete the motions and throw it down hard on the other side. I think the shenanigans with the sticker might have actually cost him. If he would have just smacked the glass on one side and dunked on the other it probably would have been less "corny."

                    The #PGAfterDark dunk was nice too, but you couldn't really tell with the lights off. I still think Paul had the best set of dunks, but had too many misses.
                    Passion. Pride. Patience. Pacers

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Paul George "Dunk Competition is a Joke."

                      Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
                      Kevin Hart is very funny. Dane Cook is funny too. I don't understand why people have to hate on comedians once they reach a star level. Should be happy for them. My favorite comedian though is Patton Oswalt; that dude is hilarious. I mean, I love to laugh, so if there was a comedian that all he did was make faces, but was very good at it, I'd probably like them too. Now that I think of it, that sounded like Jim Carey...and he is funny! Just hasn't been recently.

                      The guy with the puppets...not funny.
                      I think it is an internet thing. It is the 'cool' to hate on everything that is popular. When Dane was at the top of his game most people I meet in every day either loved him or it was not their cup of tea. Now you get on the internet and people reviled him.

                      It is the same thing in the world of movies, music, and videogames.

                      I did not need PG to tell me the dunk contest was a joke. It has become way to much about the show instead of the actual dunk. Also having guys like Lebron, Dwight, and others pass on it kills the contest.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Paul George "Dunk Competition is a Joke."

                        It's just a dumb thing for Paul to say.

                        He says he thinks the big name guys need to be in it, but he actively campaigned to get in. Is he a big name guy? Not by any stretch of the imagination.

                        Had he won, I'm guessing it wouldn't have been any kind of joke. Paul wouldn't have thought it was a joke. The posters here wouldn't have thought it was a joke. But he lost, so a joke it is.
                        Last edited by Mackey_Rose; 02-28-2012, 01:45 PM. Reason: Freudian slip.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Paul George "Dunk Competition is a Joke."

                          The voting is definitely a joke, so I'll definitely agree.

                          However, it does sound like some sour grapes to me as well.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Paul George "Dunk Competition is a Joke."

                            The REAL joke, is that the guy who handed Evans his trophy was this guy .... he should have ran off with that ****.



                            Last edited by xBulletproof; 02-28-2012, 01:49 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Paul George "Dunk Competition is a Joke."

                              I'm just gonna post my thoughts on the dunk contest and Paul George in bullet format ala' Peck.
                              • There was no clear cut winner in this dunk contest. Every dunker was pretty bad. I actually thought the voting results seemed pretty accurate. I still would prefer judges.
                              • PG is complaining about props. Yet 2/3 of his dunks were very prop-heavy. Rolling a set of lights out onto the court? How many stickers of Bird did he have?
                              • Note that PG did not actually do the sticker dunk. He was out of stickers on the attempt he made and just slapped the backboard instead. That still an incredible dunk. But the fact he had pasted Bird's face all over the backboard beforehand kinda ruined it.
                              • Evans two ball over Hayward dunk won him the contest. That was easily the best dunk of the night. His other two were absolute crap though.
                              • As much as it pains me to say, Budinger probably had the second best dunk of the night: the P. Diddy dunk. Yes all the theatrics were retarded, but the actual dunk itself was very impressive. Catching the lob one-handed from a stranger (without any rehearsals I'm assuming). More importantly he did it on his first try.
                              • PG probably had the best overall trio of dunks. The problem is he needed WAY too many attempts. Taking that many attempts kills your chances. He should have lowered the difficulty a little. If he didn't have the lobs from D. Jones in the first dunk or the Bird stickers, he probably could have done those dunks on his first try. Then he would have won.
                              • I disagree with the notion the dunk competition is dead because everything has already been done. Or that this is justification for all the props. Fans do not remember every single dunk ever done. I would be all for seeing some of the classics redone, just as long as they are executed well. This ties into my next comment...
                              • People want to see incredible feats of athleticism. This is what made the old dunk contests great, not props and celebrities. Put some of those dunks in the AS game from Westbrook or Lebron into the dunk contest and it would be a hit again. No props necessary.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Paul George "Dunk Competition is a Joke."

                                Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                                Had he won, I'm guessing it wouldn't have been any kind of joke. Paul wouldn't have thought it was a joke. The posters here wouldn't have thought it was a joke. But he lost, so a joke it is.
                                Just quoting myself:

                                Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                                Oh yeah, that's true. I do think that it sounds like sour grapes. The reality is that the Contest would still be a Joke even if Paul had won this.
                                The grass is not always greener on the other side, mate

                                EDIT:

                                Mr.ThunderMakeR is 100% right. The missed dunks point is completely valid. That's why Paul and Derrick Williams went 3rd and 4th respectively. The failed attempts killed their chances.
                                Last edited by Nuntius; 02-28-2012, 02:43 PM.
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X