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

Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

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

  • #61
    Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
    I think most of us have spent more than enough time watching lots of players closely...many closer than Granger...to make these types of judgments. Do we criticize too much? IDK, but I do think it's quite subjective whether there has or has not been too much criticism.

    In any event, the people criticizing Granger in this thread do know what they are talking about. Let's separate whether people criticize too much and whether that criticism is accurate. I think it's pretty much on target.
    I'm not saying the criticisms are wrong. It was a stupid foul. But where are the threads criticizing the other players? There is certainly a "grass is always greener" effect when it comes to non Pacers. We don't watch them enough to notice these normal mistakes Danny makes. Every NBA player makes these mistakes. LeBron, the best player in the league, makes some of the most bonehead decision I have ever seen in clutch situations. As does Kobe.

    These mistakes are much more common than some people are making it seem.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

      Originally posted by Bball View Post
      Granger makes mental mistakes in games that are more frequent than a player of his stature should be making.
      So, ultimately it comes down to Granger's status. How good we think that Granger is?

      Personally, I always compared Granger to Luol Deng as a player and Andre Iguodala as his importance on his teams. And I've seen both of those players make those mistakes as well.

      So, Danny does not standout negatively in this department, imo.
      Originally posted by IrishPacer
      Empty vessels make the most noise.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

        Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
        So, ultimately it comes down to Granger's status. How good we think that Granger is?

        Personally, I always compared Granger to Luol Deng as a player and Andre Iguodala as his importance on his teams. And I've seen both of those players make those mistakes as well.

        So, Danny does not standout negatively in this department, imo.
        I disagree with both of those comparisons. They don't make as many stupid decisions. Igoudala is more fundamental. Just ask Coach K.
        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

          Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
          I disagree with both of those comparisons. They don't make as many stupid decisions. Igoudala is more fundamental. Just ask Coach K.
          A couple years ago, I really thought Deng made too many stupid mistakes. That's when he was the best player on the team. Now that Rose carries that responsibility, Deng's a more efficient player.

          I haven't watched Iggy enough to say for certain one way or the other. But the Coach K thing is a non-sequitur... Granger's playing a totally different style of ball than he was back then.
          This space for rent.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

            I think this comes down to one simple idea. Many of us want Danny to be more like Chauncey Billups in terms of discipline and control of his actions on the floor and less like Gilbert Arenas. I am not comparing Danny to either of these players. Just their decision-making.

            ...and no, I don't think Danny is the only or the worst #1 player in the league in terms of carelessness.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

              This whole argument is just flawed.

              First of all, anyone that thinks AI or Billups is anymore fundamentally sound than Danny simply hasnt watched either one of them play much or is having very selective memory. If you want to look at Danny or AI or Billups or any of the players in the league under a microscope, you will find that in the end they all make what turn out to be stupid plays.

              This is the NBA. You have some of the worlds best athletes almost on a nightly basis defying fundamentals and what should be the simple play and making plays that are simply amazing and eye-dropping....thats what we want and what we come to expect. If you want fundamentals watch Princeton play basketball.

              Fundamentally sound? Of course...ultimately boring? yes, after a while.

              Nerves, the human element and unbelievable physical talent is what draws us to the NBA. And while the movie Hoosiers is obviously a feel good story, its definitely not what the NBA is about.

              Its easy to second guess and criticize when players dont get the desired end result. But theyre not robots and therein lays a great deal of the attraction. There must be a sense of the unknowing. There must be the human element where guys will try things they shouldnt and may or may not fail. They have to be affected by nerves and we need to see them choke at times....again...its part of the attraction and makes us appreciate the greatness that much more when they succeed.

              Danny isnt perfect...none of the NBA players are....how often times is Lebron criticized and hes the best player on the planet. Does he do stupid things? of course...when they fail theyre stupid. Fans dont spend the money on the NBA to watch them play safe, fundamentally sound basketball....they just dont....anyone saying otherwise wouldnt really be an NBA fan. They would prefer college and some high school ball much better.
              The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

              Comment


              • #67
                What gets me is the blatant extremism used here...saying he either has to be completely disciplined or he is Gilbert arenas...so silly people it's like saying you are either in the tea party or a large liberal.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

                  This was basically a troll thread. ALL NBA players make mistakes. Granger is NOT a superstar, so we need to stop holding him to the standards of one.


                  Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

                    Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                    This was basically a troll thread. ALL NBA players make mistakes. Granger is NOT a superstar, so we need to stop holding him to the standards of one.
                    Exactly, following the logic of this thread, every player in the NBA who isn't Tim Duncan is Gilbert Arenas or Javale McGee

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

                      Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                      I disagree with both of those comparisons. They don't make as many stupid decisions. Igoudala is more fundamental. Just ask Coach K.
                      I'm sorry, but thats just not true. I have seen Iggy make bonehead play after bonehead play at the end of games. Usually its on the offensive end. He really isn't a guy you want to go to at the end of games.

                      And Deng benefits so much from playing next to one of the best players in the league. He just gets put into a great spot. He is able to focus fully on defense while Rose does his thing on offense. Granger doesn't have that luxury.

                      And about Billups, that guy was great his first 6 years in the league right? I mean he only played on 4 teams in that time span after being the number 3 pick in the draft. Oh wait, he was pretty much an after thought until he got a team that he really gelled with.

                      Fact is Danny has won us more games than he has lost us. And I don't think its even close in that regard.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

                        Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                        I disagree with both of those comparisons. They don't make as many stupid decisions. Igoudala is more fundamental. Just ask Coach K.
                        Coach K is not the gospel. I clearly remember him in the 2006 WC in Saitama extensively benching Howard (who only played 10 or 12 minutes) in order to have Elton Brand or Chris Bosh at the Center position against Greece which simply resulted in Schortsianitis dominating the point because Brand and Bosh could not guard a 345 lbs guy. Really, how he could think that guys who are below or close to 250 lbs and primarily play as PFs guard a truck who weights 345 lbs?

                        I know that Coach K is a great coach but let's not pretend that he is infallible.
                        Originally posted by IrishPacer
                        Empty vessels make the most noise.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

                          You take the good.
                          You take the bad.
                          You take em all.
                          And there you have, the facts of life, the facts of life.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

                            Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                            Just ask Coach K.
                            As they say in the country, "A hit dog howls."
                            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

                              Originally posted by Banta View Post
                              I think you are not really making a valid comparison between fans who understand the game and players who participate in it. The analyst has the luxury of watching from the sofa or the stands, which offers undeniable advantages regarding assessing the action. Further, there is an enormous difference between observing the action and participating in it. For example, I can observe that Obama sucks at his job as POTUS, but that does not mean I could perform as well or better at that job.

                              When Danny starts shooting 35 times per game or commiting an excessive number of turnovers or routinely fouling out or clearly playing outside the offense or showing no hustle, then come back to this conversation. Or, I suppose, when someone here makes an NBA roster...
                              Using that logic, my coaches/front office personal who coached future NBA players should not have an opinion because they did not play/work at the NBA level?

                              While I agree we have the luxory or watching and criticizing without being in that situation, I disagree that people should stay quiet unless they make an NBA roster. Sorry, I dont agree with that at all.

                              Working/playing pro in any field certainilly helps you relate, and it is a skill set that I do not think should be ignored, but I do not think you can reate "genius" to athlete simply because they play, or "idiot" to fan because they do have never played D1 or NBA ball.

                              As I said in my last post, I think this notion that "You post on a message board so you can not have a negative opinion on a NBA player" is as crazy as the polar opposite "You post on a message board so you know everything about everything and have no problem telling people how you are right and they are wrong".

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

                                Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                                A couple years ago, I really thought Deng made too many stupid mistakes. That's when he was the best player on the team. Now that Rose carries that responsibility, Deng's a more efficient player.

                                I haven't watched Iggy enough to say for certain one way or the other. But the Coach K thing is a non-sequitur... Granger's playing a totally different style of ball than he was back then.
                                A key point was made here. Some of this is IMO pressure Danny puts on himself, and that could be taken care of with talent added around him (where he can play batman)

                                FWIW, I still love Danny. Good with the bad

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X