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

Spurs' Gregg Popovich Named Coach of the Year (Frank Vogel 3rd)

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

  • #16
    Re: Spurs' Gregg Popovich Named Coach of the Year (Frank Vogel 3rd)

    I agree with Eleazar. In the recent past, the COY award has usually gone to a coach whose team made a big jump in regular season winning pct. Vogel fits that mold.

    I don't disagree that this year Pop and Thibs should be the top 2 contenders for COY, but it's certainly atypical for this award.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Spurs' Gregg Popovich Named Coach of the Year (Frank Vogel 3rd)

      Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
      I am being objective here, I'm just not overlooking the situations like you are.

      The Bulls didn't have the best record last year because of Rose, they had the best record because they had a great team from top to bottom. Even without Rose that team is every bit as complete as the Pacers and has a better bench. To expect them not to succeed even without Rose is underestimating their talent.

      You say Vogel just carried over what he started, but so did Thibs and Pops, but Thibs and Pops didn't start 2/3rds of the way through the season then have an extremely brief training camp. I doubt Vogel has even had the opportunity to install half of what those two were able to install.

      Then you have to consider team changes. The Bulls hardly changed, they added a veteran who is basically a better version of what they already had. Otherwise they had no major changes. The Spurs had some major changes, hell we helped them, but their veteran core was still the same. The Pacers though added 4 major pieces, and with the exception of Granger the core hold overs from last year are still on their rookie contracts.



      Calling it Best Coach of the Year is not redundant at all. It would just limit the pool of who could actually win it to the same few coaches every year. It would be like instead of calling it the MVP award calling it the Best Player of the Year. There is a reason why it is MVP and not BPOY. Calling it MVP extends its reach to players who might not be LeBron James, but mean a lot more to their teams success than LeBron does playing alongside Wade and Bosh. That is the important distinction here. Vogel may not be a better coach than those two, but to say he was less important to this teams success is underestimating the impact Vogel has had.

      I don't know if Vogel should have won over Pop of Thibs, but he was certainly deserving. Deserving to win doesn't always guarantee a win, or mean you deserve to win over the others.
      Wow.

      You exactly are overlooking the situations. When you say losing Rose-the league MVP-wasnt the reason for the teams success and the team is still good without him. Umm. Hello. Hes the teams leader and was the best player in the league. The team is built around him. He handles the ball the vast majority of the time. How did our team fare when Granger was out? And granger is neither the league mvp or does he play as nearly a major role on the Pacers as Rose does the Bulls. Its just silly to even try to argue that it wasnt a great coaching job to overcome the loss of a league MVP and still lead the team to the best record in the league. And all the voters proved that very thing. And to say that Bulls team without Rose is the most talented team in the league and thus only achieved what they shouldve is just downright ludicrous. And again the voters bore that truth out and recognized what an outstanding job Thibs did. I mean how did the Vogel-coached Pacers fare against the Bulls this year? And the spurs for that matter?

      And as for the argument regarding james and being the best. Well thats likely out the window as well. Because James very likely will win the MVP. And its pretty much like that every year. The best player that year generally wins the award. Its like youre trying to confuse things with abstract comments when in reality its very very simple.

      Frank is very deserving. Just not of being coach of the year. No shame in third. Quite to the contrary. But it wasnt the best coaching job this year. And its pretty obvious to all. To all that are halfway objective, anyway.
      The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Spurs' Gregg Popovich Named Coach of the Year (Frank Vogel 3rd)

        Whoever voted for Vinny Del Negro isn't very bright.
        Counting down the days untill DJ Augustin's contract expires.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Spurs' Gregg Popovich Named Coach of the Year (Frank Vogel 3rd)

          Stan Van Gundy should have gotten a few more votes for having to put up with Howard's crap all season!

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Spurs' Gregg Popovich Named Coach of the Year (Frank Vogel 3rd)

            Originally posted by wintermute View Post
            I agree with Eleazar. In the recent past, the COY award has usually gone to a coach whose team made a big jump in regular season winning pct. Vogel fits that mold.

            I don't disagree that this year Pop and Thibs should be the top 2 contenders for COY, but it's certainly atypical for this award.
            It's a travesmockery!!! I can see both sides of peoples viewpoint. Needless to say Coach Vogel did a great job keep the team motivated and hungry. I don't know if some of the execution problems are coaching or player problems.
            Probably a little of both considering the shortended season and so many new players.
            {o,o}
            |)__)
            -"-"-

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Spurs' Gregg Popovich Named Coach of the Year (Frank Vogel 3rd)

              Frank should have won because of all the injuries. West out for 10 games, Danny out for 2 weeks, the torn ACL of Hibbert, Hill suspended 5 games..

              Oh wait, the Pacers had a shockingly great season in regards to player availability. By saying Frank had to overcome a mountain it means only ONE THING - you think the players he has stink. Otherwise what obstacle did he overcome?


              I saw all these teams live this year and Pop 100% had the best COACHED team, the best strategy, the highest quality of team play. And the Bulls were 2nd. The Pacers at times were elite, but at other times they become disjointed and wandered around looking for a strategy. Frank is becoming a better coach. Right now he's living on "raw talent", which means he's living on his ability to MOTIVATE and support his players with a lighter level of strategy. When his playbook gets more advanced and he can get players to run a more advanced set of plays, THEN he'll be a strong #1 COY candidate.


              Also IMO apart from those 3 teams you had maybe Memphis playing TEAM ball, maybe a little in Denver. Teams like MIA, LAL, LAC, BOS, ORL...they win on star power working off of simpler plays. Put two stars in a PnRoll and just let them break you down. The Spurs don't do that and neither do the Bulls. They attack, you stop it, they have a backup plan, you rotate to that, they switch into plan C, you shut that down, they go to plan D and "Who's this guy" gets a layup. Even the Pacers don't do that more than 50% of a game, at best. Not that deep.


              The key is Vogel was in the mix. But truth be told HE HAD THE ADVANTAGE over Pop and Tibs when it comes to COY voting - LOW TEAM EXPECTATIONS NATIONALLY. All he had to do was win games to impress people. Pop and Tibs had to crush it and do it with killer basketball to win COY because they were supposed to win. And again Frank had the MOST GAMES AVAILABLE from his top 8.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Spurs' Gregg Popovich Named Coach of the Year (Frank Vogel 3rd)

                I wouldn't go as far as to say Frank should have won it it, but I certainly would say an argument can be made.

                ...and I definitely agree with this:

                Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                I agree, but I do think Pop winning this award is more of a "career achievement" award. And I don't have a problem with that.

                But, if Frank had done what he did in Indiana, in say, New York..or Chicago..or LA..a more visible team, he would have won it.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Spurs' Gregg Popovich Named Coach of the Year (Frank Vogel 3rd)

                  Popovich did an incredible job in SA and I'm glad he won it. The right person got the award. I love that Thibs got second as well, as he did an excellent job as well. I hope some day Vogel can coach on the level of both of those guys.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Spurs' Gregg Popovich Named Coach of the Year (Frank Vogel 3rd)

                    I am really surprised that Thibs didn't win it.. I would have voted for him.. Nonetheless I'm excited Pop won it instead.

                    The Spurs are and have been the most underrated team in the league for years now.. Who ever talks about them?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Spurs' Gregg Popovich Named Coach of the Year (Frank Vogel 3rd)

                      Did anyone see the ceremony where the Admiral and Duncan were presenting the trophy to Popovich? Popovich gave more of a "Eh, I got one of these already...anyone want to hold this?" type of reaction.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Spurs' Gregg Popovich Named Coach of the Year (Frank Vogel 3rd)

                        I thought he was trying to be humble and hand the award over to other members of his staff in a "they deserve this as much as me" gesture. That's how I interpreted it. Either way he deserved it imo.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Spurs' Gregg Popovich Named Coach of the Year (Frank Vogel 3rd)

                          Originally posted by DemonHunter1105 View Post
                          I thought he was trying to be humble and hand the award over to other members of his staff in a "they deserve this as much as me" gesture. That's how I interpreted it. Either way he deserved it imo.
                          I can see that....I'll just say that my first impression when I saw it. I agree with you....he does appear to be a humble guy and I could see him being that type of Coach when it comes to winning COTY.
                          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Spurs' Gregg Popovich Named Coach of the Year (Frank Vogel 3rd)

                            Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                            Wow.

                            You exactly are overlooking the situations. When you say losing Rose-the league MVP-wasnt the reason for the teams success and the team is still good without him. Umm. Hello. Hes the teams leader and was the best player in the league. The team is built around him. He handles the ball the vast majority of the time. How did our team fare when Granger was out? And granger is neither the league mvp or does he play as nearly a major role on the Pacers as Rose does the Bulls. Its just silly to even try to argue that it wasnt a great coaching job to overcome the loss of a league MVP and still lead the team to the best record in the league. And all the voters proved that very thing. And to say that Bulls team without Rose is the most talented team in the league and thus only achieved what they shouldve is just downright ludicrous. And again the voters bore that truth out and recognized what an outstanding job Thibs did. I mean how did the Vogel-coached Pacers fare against the Bulls this year? And the spurs for that matter?
                            Your acting like Rose was out the whole season and, that I said the Bulls would still be the best team without him, or that I said he didn't do a great job. My argument was never an argument against either Pop or Thibs, it was only an argument for Vogel and was to get people to realize he was every bit as deserving as Pop or Thibs, because people have seemed to stop appreciating how little practice time Vogel has had with this team, and how difficult that can make it, especially when the majority of the core team is still on their rookie contracts. The hurdles that Vogel had to overcome to get this team to where it is where just as high as any hurdle that Pop or Thibs had.

                            I am being very objective with my approach, I just include continuity and veteran players within my field of view. Vogel has it easy on injuries, but he had to deal with far less continuity and a lack of veteran turnover. It is also easy to argue that both the Spurs and Bulls have more talent than the Pacers. To say the job he did was not deserving of being COY is the only absurd thing that has gone on in this thread.

                            Like I said before that doesn't mean Pop and Thibs didn't deserve to win either, and when it comes down to it if there are multiple people worthy of winning it one of two things is most likely to happen, the new guy is going to win or the guy who has proven himself over the course of his career is going to win. This time it was the proven commodity that won, and I have no problem with that. I do have a problem with people downplaying how well Vogel did just because he had one thing go in his advantage that the other coaches didn't when the other coaches had many other aspects in their advantage that Vogel did not have.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X