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

Which Pacers will get the most criticism next year?

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

  • #46
    Re: Which Pacers will get the most criticism next year?

    Hibbert will be under the spotlight now with his large contract. The Pacers had no choice but to give Hibbert the contract and make the gamble that he would continue to get better. If he doesn't continue the year to year improvement that he's shown then it will be a major disappointment. If he goes on one of his cold streaks then there will be a lot of criticism pointed his way.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Which Pacers will get the most criticism next year?

      Originally posted by Pacer Fan View Post
      Good possiblity on our thinking of average, but I do believe that One can be above average and not make the All Stars but once if not at all in their career. If any of those 3 can get there, over the hump if you will, it would be Holiday imo.
      He's both the youngest nd most talented out of the bunch.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Which Pacers will get the most criticism next year?

        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
        Too bad "Who ever Vnzla picks" isn't an option for the poll.
        Like always

        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Which Pacers will get the most criticism next year?

          Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
          I don't expect Paul George to improve as long as he's still stuck in the backcourt. Yeah, he's good enough to have on the court even when he's out of position, but he's not a top-half-of-the-league starter at SG.

          I expect Granger to get less criticism if the opportunity to trade him for Gordon is truly past. Yeah, he's a #2 option, but he's not trade bait to get a #1 option, and if he is trade bait for a #1 option, who is the #2 option.

          I expect George Hill to be better with a full-time commitment to PG.

          I expect that Hibbert will be unlucky winner of this prize. It comes with the contract. Roy will probably be my favorite player on the team either way, but expectations have risen.
          Why is Paul George not a SG? You are who you can guard and he can guard SG's, SF's are more of a problem.

          I think Paul rates higher in the league at SG than at SF. You have Kobe, Wade, J. Johnson, Harden besides that Paul arguably is right after those guys. At SF that list is much longer ahead of Paul.
          "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Which Pacers will get the most criticism next year?

            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
            Like always

            I find this ironic because haters hate on you because of your level of hate...
            Nothing in life worth having comes easy.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Which Pacers will get the most criticism next year?

              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
              It looks to me that the reason why what you are suggesting doesn't happen is that many see the Pacers starters through their blue and gold glasses, it's easier to criticize the last guy that nobody cares about off the bench than a guy who has a big fan base because of area55, or the "new Tmac", or the "all star who's numbers are down because he is taking one for the team", etc.
              By the same token, though, some people seem to equate flaws with completely sucking. The reaction to being argued with comes out as "oh, so I guess you can't criticize *player's name here*", which ends up coming across as "if I don't like the guy, he's the worst in the league, and if you argue with that you must think he's the best in the league."

              With few exceptions on the extreme - and there will always be those exceptions so don't tar everyone with the same brush - people are willing to criticize and discuss the flaws of the starters. They just aren't willing to say "*player* has flaws, let's trade him for a grilled cheese sandwich and a Coke before everyone in the league realizes how bad he is."

              There's a huge range from LeBron to Joe Schmo, it isn't that every player not LeBron is a total failure.
              BillS

              A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
              Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Which Pacers will get the most criticism next year?

                Who will deservedly will get the most hate?- Hansbrough. For much of the year he hurt more than helped in his time on the court

                Who will undeservedly will get the most hate? Granger. According to some he is the reason we haven't been NBA champions 8 times out of the past 9 years.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Which Pacers will get the most criticism next year?

                  Originally posted by Hoop View Post
                  Why is Paul George not a SG? You are who you can guard and he can guard SG's, SF's are more of a problem.

                  I think Paul rates higher in the league at SG than at SF. You have Kobe, Wade, J. Johnson, Harden besides that Paul arguably is right after those guys. At SF that list is much longer ahead of Paul.
                  I think his defense on the wing is overrated. Yes, he's got length but quick guards can get around him. While recovering to bother a shot after you've been burned off the dribble is a nice recovery, it is also bad defense that required the recovery. That doesn't get you accolades for your defensive play in my book. Keep your man in front of you.

                  And his lack of handles. Its compounded that Danny has similar weakness and Danny is definitely closer to PF than SG. We're playing two SFs but one of them must be called the SG I suppose.

                  The difference between SG and SF are thin, but Paul would be a better player if he were defending the opponent's bigger wing and handling the ball less, meaning if he was playing alongside somebody with less length/ more quickness and better handles. Meaning if he was playing alongside a SG.

                  Would the hypothetical Gordon-George tandem (hypothetical meaning "healthy Gordon", oxymoron that it is) be better than George-Granger? I think yes. Would Gordon-Granger be even better... sure, but a small market team can't afford that.

                  George-Granger is not sending shockwaves around the league. We're potentially a top-six team in the league because of the Hibbert-West-Granger front court, not the backcourt (although as I said above I think George Hill will silence some of the criticism when he spends the whole season just focusing on PG), and not the George-Granger wing tandem.

                  If there is still room to improve the starting lineup, its on the wing. And I'm not automatically saying you have to move George to accomplish that because if you move Granger for a legit #1 option at SG then Paul George gives you a really nice SF.

                  Just my , of course.
                  Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                  Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                  Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                  Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                  And life itself, rushing over me
                  Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                  Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Which Pacers will get the most criticism next year?

                    =BillS;1489902]By the same token, though, some people seem to equate flaws with completely sucking. The reaction to being argued with comes out as "oh, so I guess you can't criticize *player's name here*", which ends up coming across as "if I don't like the guy, he's the worst in the league, and if you argue with that you must think he's the best in the league."
                    Well this is PD for you, if you criticize a player you are just a hater and hate the team.


                    With few exceptions on the extreme - and there will always be those exceptions so don't tar everyone with the same brush - people are willing to criticize and discuss the flaws of the starters.
                    Some people are willing to do that and by some people I mean a low percentage of people here.

                    They just aren't willing to say "*player* has flaws, let's trade him for a grilled cheese sandwich and a Coke before everyone in the league realizes how bad he is."
                    Nobody is saying to trade somebody for a bag of cheetos that is the point many here are missing and yes sometimes you can trade a player before his value goes down the toilet, just look at the previous Pacers examples ,the Pacers are known for keeping players too damn long, JO, Dunleavy, Troy, Ford, Tinsley, Foster, etc.

                    There's a huge range from LeBron to Joe Schmo, it isn't that every player not LeBron is a total failure.
                    And nobody is asking for Lebron and if they are find me that post.
                    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Which Pacers will get the most criticism next year?

                      Originally posted by Hoop View Post
                      Why is Paul George not a SG? You are who you can guard and he can guard SG's, SF's are more of a problem.

                      I think Paul rates higher in the league at SG than at SF. You have Kobe, Wade, J. Johnson, Harden besides that Paul arguably is right after those guys. At SF that list is much longer ahead of Paul.
                      Just curious, what's your SF list?

                      I would have to add Monte Ellis, Eric Gordon, Manu Ginobili on your SG list without a doubt.

                      My SF list would be Lebron James, Kevin Durant, Carmelo Anthony, Rudy Gay, Danny Granger, Paul Pierce and AI.

                      I think both position are stacked about the same.

                      I use to think Paul's lateral quickness was to slow to stay with the SG's of the league until last season. He improved quite a bit from his rookie year and proved he can guard the 2 by just being smarter and not over committing. So, I was a big believer that he was playing out of position his rookie year. I wouldn't want to see him play SF with the expense of losing Danny. Danny and Paul are one of the best combo's in the league.
                      Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Which Pacers will get the most criticism next year?

                        Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                        I think his defense on the wing is overrated. Yes, he's got length but quick guards can get around him. While recovering to bother a shot after you've been burned off the dribble is a nice recovery, it is also bad defense that required the recovery. That doesn't get you accolades for your defensive play in my book. Keep your man in front of you.

                        And his lack of handles. Its compounded that Danny has similar weakness and Danny is definitely closer to PF than SG. We're playing two SFs but one of them must be called the SG I suppose.

                        The difference between SG and SF are thin, but Paul would be a better player if he were defending the opponent's bigger wing and handling the ball less, meaning if he was playing alongside somebody with less length/ more quickness and better handles. Meaning if he was playing alongside a SG.

                        Would the hypothetical Gordon-George tandem (hypothetical meaning "healthy Gordon", oxymoron that it is) be better than George-Granger? I think yes. Would Gordon-Granger be even better... sure, but a small market team can't afford that.

                        George-Granger is not sending shockwaves around the league. We're potentially a top-six team in the league because of the Hibbert-West-Granger front court, not the backcourt (although as I said above I think George Hill will silence some of the criticism when he spends the whole season just focusing on PG), and not the George-Granger wing tandem.

                        If there is still room to improve the starting lineup, its on the wing. And I'm not automatically saying you have to move George to accomplish that because if you move Granger for a legit #1 option at SG then Paul George gives you a really nice SF.

                        Just my , of course.
                        Who is your SG you would trade Danny for? So Paul can move to the 3.
                        Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Which Pacers will get the most criticism next year?

                          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                          Some people are willing to do that and by some people I mean a low percentage of people here.
                          I think you are overreacting. A low percentage of people agree with you on everything, but that's true of all of us. I think there are actually very few people who refuse to discuss flaws in the starters - I think they just don't find them as egregious as you do, nor do they think your suggested replacements are without similar flaws (or at least flaws in other areas that would produce the same problems).
                          BillS

                          A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                          Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Which Pacers will get the most criticism next year?

                            Originally posted by BillS View Post
                            I think you are overreacting. A low percentage of people agree with you on everything, but that's true of all of us. I think there are actually very few people who refuse to discuss flaws in the starters - I think they just don't find them as egregious as you do, nor do they think your suggested replacements are without similar flaws (or at least flaws in other areas that would produce the same problems).
                            They don't find them as egregious as I do because they just refuse to criticize the starters not matter what, how many threads are open about them talking about the last man of the bench? how many threads are open about Lance, Mcbob, Tyler and any other bench player? I bet is way more than the threads that talk about the starters flaws if there are any threads talking about the startes flaws and I'm not even sure about that.
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Which Pacers will get the most criticism next year?

                              Originally posted by Pacer Fan View Post
                              Just curious, what's your SF list?

                              I would have to add Monte Ellis, Eric Gordon, Manu Ginobili on your SG list without a doubt.

                              My SF list would be Lebron James, Kevin Durant, Carmelo Anthony, Rudy Gay, Danny Granger, Paul Pierce and AI.

                              I think both position are stacked about the same.

                              I use to think Paul's lateral quickness was to slow to stay with the SG's of the league until last season. He improved quite a bit from his rookie year and proved he can guard the 2 by just being smarter and not over committing. So, I was a big believer that he was playing out of position his rookie year. I wouldn't want to see him play SF with the expense of losing Danny. Danny and Paul are one of the best combo's in the league.
                              Monte, I don't like small SG's, IMO he's just not that great, certainly wouldn't trade PG for him. I left off Gordon, He IS better than Paul, but til he actually plays an entire season, I won't trade PG for him. Manu is great, but age wise, I'd have to go with Paul. So I still believe Paul ranks fairly high on the SG list. My SF list is about the same as yours.

                              I agree NBA SG and SF positions are both very good, but IMO SF is the much better deeper position in the NBA. But, when it comes right down to it, they are all wings so what does the label ready matter.
                              "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Which Pacers will get the most criticism next year?

                                Interesting to see the results, I thought it would clearly be Hill, seems like most already have a excellent view of Danny and what he will do, Roy is a big that produces, I doubt that most think he will just take off now that he has his new contract. PG possibly, but I feel people will be patient with him.
                                Why so SERIOUS

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X