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

Jason Withlock going crazy on JMV (as "a fan")

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

  • #31
    Re: Jason Withlock going crazy on JMV (as "a fan")

    The draft is the main way to get guys like that, find a guy or two that you really like and trade up (trade pieces) to get the player(s) and let them play and succeed. Granger, Collison (if they get a PG which I hope), and Hans should be the main pieces shopped if they go this direction.

    Paul George right now is a B quality basketball player, but I think a lot of people learned that he's much closer to a C quality than an A quality at the moment. He is a terrible passer and ball handler, and was kind of exploited on defense by Wade the last couple games once they learned how to attack him. I think he's got the drive to reach that A level, it's just most likely going to take longer than people may want.
    "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

    ----------------- Reggie Miller

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Jason Withlock going crazy on JMV (as "a fan")

      Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
      Whitlock's points essentially boil down to "Indiana doesn't have good enough players to beat two of the top 5 guys in the game". I wish I got paid to make such obvious points. When Miami waxed Chicago last year in five, did he go on radio shows blabbering about how flawed Chicago's team was? Doubt it.
      I think Whitlock's point is that the Pacers are much further away from being contenders than losing 4 - 2 to Miami would indicate. As you said, Chicago lost to them last year in five - do you think the Pacers are closer to a title than Chicago?

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Jason Withlock going crazy on JMV (as "a fan")

        @cactus because casual fans want the instant gratification/results. causal fans don't realize building takes time

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Jason Withlock going crazy on JMV (as "a fan")

          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
          He is not a Chicago Bulls fans so he doesn't care about them, all he is saying if you listen to his podcast is not to buy on the hype regarding the Pacers, he is saying that we should not listen to the people that keeps saying that "we are a player away to contend", if you listen to the podcast I posted he answer must of those questions.

          What "hype"? Yeah, some national people were saying that we could win the series when it was 2-1, but that had little to do with us and everything to do with the fact that people were flipping out about the whole Lebron-Wade dynamic.

          We DID have the 5th best record in the NBA this year, we DID win a series, and we DID have a 2-1 lead on the Heat before losing in 6 games. That is better than both Boston and Chicago did against them last year, though to be fair, they did have Bosh last season. Regardless, I think everyone here knows where the Pacers stand. We aren't in the elite group of teams (Miami, SAS, OKC, Chicago with a healthy Rose), but we are in that next group. Who on this board or in general is saying that we are anything more than that?

          It's fine and correct to say that we currently can't beat a team like the Heat, Spurs, and Thunder. No one is a genius for pointing out such an obvious statement. But what Whitlock or no one else can answer is what could we have done over the past couple of years to get a player that could beat Lebron and Wade? The answer is virtually nothing. Guys like Durant don't just fall into your lap.
          Last edited by Sollozzo; 05-25-2012, 08:18 PM.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Jason Withlock going crazy on JMV (as "a fan")

            Originally posted by Cactus Jax View Post
            The draft is the main way to get guys like that, find a guy or two that you really like and trade up (trade pieces) to get the player(s) and let them play and succeed. Granger, Collison (if they get a PG which I hope), and Hans should be the main pieces shopped if they go this direction.

            Paul George right now is a B quality basketball player, but I think a lot of people learned that he's much closer to a C quality than an A quality at the moment. He is a terrible passer and ball handler, and was kind of exploited on defense by Wade the last couple games once they learned how to attack him. I think he's got the drive to reach that A level, it's just most likely going to take longer than people may want.
            Unfortunately, the best time to use the draft to find a star has passed. That's what the Pacers should have been concerned with while waiting for the Murphleavey fiasco to clear off the books. Instead they were worried about winning 36 games instead of 28.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Jason Withlock going crazy on JMV (as "a fan")

              Off season needs in order of priority:

              1. Point Guard, a true distribuator that can run a team and isnt a SG playing out of position
              2. Resign Roy
              3. It kills me to say this but I would try and move Hill and resign Barbosa. The offer we might have to match for Hill could be way over fair value
              4. Player that we can give the ball to and clear out and go iso one on one


              Whitlock is definitley a big bag of hot nothing , in my mind but he is right about a star/shot creator and PG needs to work on his passing (freakin genius that Whitlock /green)

              He was way to hard on West. I dont know about you guys but what bothered me the most in the series was our inability to get the ball into the Post. Miami consistently fronted Roy/West and we couldnt adjust.

              You know its a big mark when the best passer on your team is 7'2
              Sittin on top of the world!

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Jason Withlock going crazy on JMV (as "a fan")

                Originally posted by rm1369 View Post
                In the case of Tyler and Jrue Holiday he did. It doesn't necessarily fix the no star issue, but it may have fixed the PG situation. And Jrue is a month younger than Paul George. I'd say he has just as much a chance to be a star as George (who everyone pins there hopes on) does.
                I'd say that if Jrue Holiday was on this team rather than Hansbrough, we'd probably still be at home tonight. He's better than Hansbrough by a great distance, but he's not a superstar either.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Jason Withlock going crazy on JMV (as "a fan")

                  Whitlock and Skip Bayless need to have an MMA match and duel it out for the biggest sports dumbass with a place to share their opinion nationally. Glad I missed it.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Jason Withlock going crazy on JMV (as "a fan")

                    Originally posted by rm1369 View Post
                    Unfortunately, the best time to use the draft to find a star has passed. That's what the Pacers should have been concerned with while waiting for the Murphleavey fiasco to clear off the books. Instead they were worried about winning 36 games instead of 28.

                    If only we would have tanked and lost more games in 2009-10. Instead of getting George at 10, with a lower pick we could have instead drafted John Wall, Evan Turner, Derrick Favors, Wesley Johnson, DeMarcus Cousins, Ekpe Udoh, Greg Monroe, Al Farouq Aminu, or Gordon Hayward! Just imagine the shape our franchise would be in if only we had tanked and gotten one of those guys with a higher pick. Miami would be no match for us!

                    Sure, a couple of those guys are better than George. But none of them are so great that we would be penciled in for the Finals if they were on our roster. And several of them are worse. This was the year that people advocated tanking, and the fact is that even if we had done it, there is no guarantee that we would have gotten a better player than Paul. What if we pick 6th and draft Udoh?

                    What those who advocate tanking fail to consider is that 1) Not many drafts have many guys worth tanking for and 2) Having the worst record doesn't guarantee you will get the top pick, or even the second pick (just ask Boston). This isn't the NFL.
                    Last edited by Sollozzo; 05-25-2012, 06:42 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Jason Withlock going crazy on JMV (as "a fan")

                      Originally posted by rm1369 View Post
                      I think Whitlock's point is that the Pacers are much further away from being contenders than losing 4 - 2 to Miami would indicate. As you said, Chicago lost to them last year in five - do you think the Pacers are closer to a title than Chicago?
                      I think, to be fair, the Pacers aren't the ones saying they're only one player away. Even Larry said he didn't expect their performance this year. But I'd also say that some people are making it seem like we're just a step above the Charlotte Bobcats, only we caught better breaks.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Jason Withlock going crazy on JMV (as "a fan")

                        Nothing the Pacers could have done would have beat Miami Last round - never mind that that is not anyone's argument. The argument is......... Ohhh never mind, I'll let you continue to build your straw man - no point in even discussing it.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Jason Withlock going crazy on JMV (as "a fan")

                          Pacers are indeed a looong way away from winning a title if they chose to keep this team as is.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Jason Withlock going crazy on JMV (as "a fan")

                            Originally posted by QuickRelease View Post
                            I'd say that if Jrue Holiday was on this team rather than Hansbrough, we'd probably still be at home tonight. He's better than Hansbrough by a great distance, but he's not a superstar either.
                            I agree and have never said different. I'm in no way disappointed the Pacers didn't beat Miami. No matter how they rebuilt they wouldn't be ready for championship contention.

                            Although I will say that second to star power, lack of quality PG play is the biggest reason they didn't beat Miami.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Jason Withlock going crazy on JMV (as "a fan")

                              Originally posted by rm1369 View Post
                              Nothing the Pacers could have done would have beat Miami Last round - never mind that that is not anyone's argument. The argument is......... Ohhh never mind, I'll let you continue to build your straw man - no point in even discussing it.

                              Not a straw man, just a hint of sarcasm. The point is this: If you are going to say that we should have tanked then it must be pointed out that *overall*, the players taken before Paul George in 2010 would not have made this team much better. Sure, we could have ended up with Monroe. But we could have also ended up with Udoh or Aminu. The 2010 draft is most relevant here because 09-10 was the season in which everyone was advocating for tanking. In reality, it likely would have gained us nothing. Not a straw man at all. You can't advocate for tanking in the abstract while ignoring the actual drafts themselves.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Jason Withlock going crazy on JMV (as "a fan")

                                Originally posted by beast23 View Post
                                I didn't listen to Whitlock, but let's take a look at some of the comments he has made.

                                Paul George needs to handle the ball better. Well, okay. If there are a few things that I could improve about PG's game, it would be much, much better ball-handling, a willingness (and courage) to drive the ball more frequently with that improved ball-handling, better shot selection, and an improved ability to make his way through screens while on defense. I also believe another 10-15 pounds of muscle on his frame would not be a bad thing. I don't think these things are anything more than any of us would say about PG, assuming that we are willing to take an honest look at him.

                                As for the series, what would have won it for us. Taking better care of the ball, another good interior defender capable of picking up slashers and blocking shots, better rebounding and perimeter players capable of better delivering the ball into West and Hibbert. If we had all of those things, I don't care if Wade and James went for 70 and one of Miller or Chalmers had a good game, Miami would be watching us in the EC finals, not playing in them.

                                So, what do we do? Eric Gordon accomplishes none of the above needs, absolutely nada.

                                Williams or Nash does provide a player capable of better delivering the ball to our bigs. But we needs to determine the best fit and what the reasonable cost might be. I think either player would also help with our turnover problems.

                                A shot blocker and a better rebounding big man for the starting unit or off the bench? Got any ideas?
                                I agree with most of the post, but disagree about Gordon. He could help this team. Unless we can land a star PG that can dominate the ball while at the same time being a threat to score, we're gonna need more than a pointing PG and a defensive big.

                                Let's assume we can land Andre Miller and trade Granger for a healthy Gordon. That would balance the roster out and make us a better team. We'd have a player that can deliver the ball where it needs to be with Andre. Gordon would give us the go to scorer, ball handler, and another pick & roll player that we desperately need.

                                I think sliding George down to SF and getting better ball handlers/passers to play along side him would help take his game to the next level, he'd get easier transition baskets, he wouldn't have to chase smaller/quicker players around screens, he could concentrate on rebounding more because he'd play closer to the rim ( he's our best and most instinctive rebounder). He's by far our most talented player, he's just too passive, and I don't see him changing that mindset with the veteran front court we have. If we leave him at SG I'm affraid he'll never develop into the player we thought he could be.

                                As far as the backup or starting athletic big man that can defend the pick & roll, I absolutely agree. We need this regardless. I love me some D. West, but he just cant do it. Anyone know if there's someone in the draft we can get that could help? If we can land a starting PG, we have Collison and Handsbro we could deal to move up in the draft.

                                I look forward to the off season, and I hope Bird stays. A lot of important decisions need to be made, and I hope he's the one making them.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X