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

Hawks/Pacers postgame

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

  • Re: Hawks/Pacers postgame

    I haven't read this thread yet, had to take a walk so pissed at how awful we are. Fact number 1 of max contracts: if your best reason for giving a max contract is: You have to do it. It's a bad contract. Period. You've already called it a bad contract. People never argued for Hibbert because he's a perennial all star first. They didn't argue for him because he's a dominant performer first. Sure, his fans would make those arguments EVENTUALLY, but the first argument was always, "you have to match." Interestingly the second argument was, "the community loves him!"

    Weird how neither of those arguments say anything about his basketball ability.

    Hibbert is really, really tall. He'll always make a defensive impact. He isn't a complete schlub. Never in his career has he shown that he won't vanish on offense. That he is capable of taking a game over. That he is dominant. Fact is, we overpaid, and that's going to hurt us a long time. Overpaid for Hill too, which will also hurt us - no one has ever given a good reason for rushing to sign a RFA to a 40M dollar offer competing against... no one. Oh well. It's spilled milk now, Granger is out and two of our next 3 best players are overpaid. Not sure we can even expect more than to hang around the 7-8 seed. If that.

    Comment


    • Re: Hawks/Pacers postgame

      Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
      Def coaching. The Pacers are where pgs go to die.
      i was looking at colison to see how he is doing and wow- he IS starting to look like the guy we traded for now that he is gone. putting up some impressive numbers. then augustin was doing well and then he comes here and now he is looking pretty bad. and i have noticed that although granger is out, p.g. has taken over the role of volume chucker. besides the 1st game where he didn't take a single 3, he has taken about 50% of his shots from downtown (not liking that much). at some point one must look at what system the coach is running (if there is one)
      i just don't see anything that looks like plays after timeouts were drawn up with any reason or purpose with what i keep seeing. either players routinely go rogue and ignore him or there isn't much of a real plan.
      i have joined the suspects of vogel. i am skeptical he can get the job done. he is going to have to impress me soon or i will be among those who would be fine to let him walk after this year.

      Comment


      • Re: Hawks/Pacers postgame

        Originally posted by clownskull View Post
        i was looking at colison to see how he is doing and wow- he IS starting to look like the guy we traded for now that he is gone. putting up some impressive numbers. then augustin was doing well and then he comes here and now he is looking pretty bad. and i have noticed that although granger is out, p.g. has taken over the role of volume chucker. besides the 1st game where he didn't take a single 3, he has taken about 50% of his shots from downtown (not liking that much). at some point one must look at what system the coach is running (if there is one)
        i just don't see anything that looks like plays after timeouts were drawn up with any reason or purpose with what i keep seeing. either players routinely go rogue and ignore him or there isn't much of a real plan.
        i have joined the suspects of vogel. i am skeptical he can get the job done. he is going to have to impress me soon or i will be among those who would be fine to let him walk after this year.
        Isn't Vogel just running a version of JOBs system...which proved to not work.
        First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

        Comment


        • Re: Hawks/Pacers postgame

          @MikeWellsNBA: Vogel rode Lance too long. He couldn't guard Korver off screens and definitely couldn't guard Teague. Shows lack of faith in bench


          Yep the bench that was upgraded ....
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • Re: Hawks/Pacers postgame

            You guys can focus on the bench all you want, but the dude we are paying max money just got us 9,7 and shot 33% from the field. So yeah....He also did this in 37 minutes which is really bad per minute production.


            Comment


            • Re: Hawks/Pacers postgame

              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
              @MikeWellsNBA: Vogel rode Lance too long. He couldn't guard Korver off screens and definitely couldn't guard Teague. Shows lack of faith in bench

              Yep the bench that was upgraded ....
              It also shows that he doesn't consider Lance one of the Bench guys that he doesn't have any faith in....which is a good thing.
              Last edited by CableKC; 11-07-2012, 11:54 PM.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • Re: Hawks/Pacers postgame

                The team looks lifeless. I feel sick after watching that game. I think it's going to be a very long season.

                Comment


                • Re: Hawks/Pacers postgame

                  Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                  I don't care if he's hurt, Danny is still the face of this franchise. Roy does not deserve that title.
                  There is no face of the franchise, and thus our primary problem over the last 8 years.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Hawks/Pacers postgame

                    I'm still being optimistic, even after the fourth quarter let down we all had to witness. This was a mental lapse tonight. Nothing more. Nothing less. Our offense stinks right now. Roy Hibbert is in a funk. But let me get one thing straight.. I'm absolutely thrilled, in love, and beyond impressed with our level of defense. I don't care what anyone says. I really don't. We didn't make a crucial stop tonight (poor communication between George and West), and we allowed them back in the game. But when can't hit the broad side of a barn with a 22, your defense will suffer. Specially in the 4th quarter. And honestly, our defense during that stretch wasn't absolutely terrible (Korver hit that 3 to put them within 3 with about 4 minutes to go.. they were still down 1 with about 1 minute left).

                    Maybe it's rust. Maybe it's coaching kinks. Maybe it's Granger gone. Maybe it's Roy Hibbert's funk. Maybe it's the new bench adjusting. Maybe it's the absence of a signee (ala Pietrus). Or maybe it's Paul George not asserting himself. Either way.. all you naysayers are going to be absolutely dumbfounded once this offense clicks to be paired with this defense we got going on.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Hawks/Pacers postgame

                      My god I haven't posted in almost a year, but everyone needs to back away from the cliff.

                      The team's best player is out and almost half the players on the roster are new. NEWS FLASH look at how the Lakers and thunder are playing right now. Look at even how Miami played when they first got the big three together. When teams make a lot of moves they tend to start off fairly slow.

                      Are there some valid points being made here, sure, but you are all overreacting like we're playing for Cody Zeller or something. Look it is obvious to me that we overpaid Roy, Vogel isn't showing much offensive strategy, and Lance has probably earned a starting or more significant role than he started with.

                      But the bench? Are you guys kidding me!? Lou was horrendous when he first got here, Barbosa couldn't play any defense, and Collison didn't realize half the time that there were other people on the fast break with him, plus he couldn't guard a pick and roll if his life depended on it. Don't get me started on Dahntay. He was the best Pacemate at Bankerslife and that was about all he was worth.

                      All I'm getting at is you at least have to give a team 25 games or so to see what they have. At this point do things look iffy? Yeah that's fair, but it really isn't going to get any worse and there have definitely been some positives to build from. Even in the Spurs game they cut a huge lead down going into the half.

                      Goosefraba my fellow PDers, I promise you things will get better and the team should be fighting for the 4-6 seed.
                      follow me on twitter: @Shear1989

                      Comment


                      • Re: Hawks/Pacers postgame

                        i agree that we have been getting out coached!!! Vogel is a nice guy, but doesnt make adjustments very well and horrible X's and O's

                        Comment


                        • Re: Hawks/Pacers postgame

                          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                          Honestly, I don't have any idea why Augustin is so bad here in Indy but pretty decent on the Bobcats. The Bobcats Starting Lineup can't be any worse then the Pacers 2nd unit
                          He was pretty bad in Charlotte too, despite his stats. It's still early, but on a fundamental level we had a pretty bad offseason. If our bench keeps playing like this it would be one of our worst offseasons ever but I think we'll come around.

                          We'll eventually play better but we're bad right now. Hibbert improved so much on his moves that I think he'll have his best season, despite this terribly slow start. I know he was offended over the offseason by a reporter asking him if he was out of shape, but I have to wonder now. He looks really out of shape. I know he highly publicized his MMA workouts, and there's really no replacement for actual games, but this looks like the worst shape he's been in since year 2.

                          I've had my Sam Young fix. I'm ready to see Lance in with the starters, who all played better when Lance was in the mix.

                          George Hill shoots way, way, way too many three pointers. He's a really good shooter but he's too talented with his mid-range to let it go to waste. It doesn't appear as exaggerated because he's a wing player, but it's just as frustrating as watching Josh Smith of years past jack up a bunch of threes when he's clearly a much better player inside the arc.

                          We'll get better pretty soon, but everyones' reasoning for freaking out right now is justified.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Hawks/Pacers postgame

                            Originally posted by rock747 View Post
                            Why is everyone going after Vogel?! It's obvious the team was downgraded by the front office. It's been evident since the first 3 games. we all thought this after the moves happened intially but the Pacer's propaganda made us believe otherwise. We didn't want to spend money to get better... OJ Mayo, Courtney Lee etc. We made small town moves and we get **** results.


                            Larry birds not coming back to this ****...
                            because our offense sucks and it's vogel's fault. he wouldn't be able to draw a play even if his life depends on it.

                            Originally posted by presto123 View Post
                            I can still see posters in a few months saying........"be patient.......it's only been 50 games". LOL
                            definitely.

                            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                            By the way what are the Pacers going to do with all those long term contracts if it doesn't work out? are we gonna have to wait until they expired?
                            i don't think we have other option. with the way they play i don't see a team getting them.

                            Originally posted by Dece View Post
                            I haven't read this thread yet, had to take a walk so pissed at how awful we are. Fact number 1 of max contracts: if your best reason for giving a max contract is: You have to do it. It's a bad contract. Period. You've already called it a bad contract. People never argued for Hibbert because he's a perennial all star first. They didn't argue for him because he's a dominant performer first. Sure, his fans would make those arguments EVENTUALLY, but the first argument was always, "you have to match." Interestingly the second argument was, "the community loves him!"

                            Weird how neither of those arguments say anything about his basketball ability.

                            Hibbert is really, really tall. He'll always make a defensive impact. He isn't a complete schlub. Never in his career has he shown that he won't vanish on offense. That he is capable of taking a game over. That he is dominant. Fact is, we overpaid, and that's going to hurt us a long time. Overpaid for Hill too, which will also hurt us - no one has ever given a good reason for rushing to sign a RFA to a 40M dollar offer competing against... no one. Oh well. It's spilled milk now, Granger is out and two of our next 3 best players are overpaid. Not sure we can even expect more than to hang around the 7-8 seed. If that.
                            so true.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Hawks/Pacers postgame

                              Gerald Green makes the most stupid passes. Meh!

                              Comment


                              • Re: Hawks/Pacers postgame

                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                Trust me I've been saying the same thing for a long time, my thinking at the time was that I thought they were opening space for a guy like Brand or Scola and as we know nothing happened
                                I agree with this post per se, but am I wrong in saying that Scola and Brand actually would replace two players that are actually performing for us--West and Hans?
                                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X