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

Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

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

  • #16
    Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

    Originally posted by 3rdStrike View Post
    What is the expiration date on this lame excuse? 28? Should we wait six years to expect anything? You know how old Klay Thompson is? Twenty-two. Same age. Roasted him alive.

    TMac expectations were a combined product of his college play & his self-created hype, because he talks about being the man and getting to that superstar/elite scoring level. Don't blame people for expecting him to put some effort behind his words. In any case, scoring 0 is inexcusable from a starter, period. And to think, some people thought he had "turned the corner" after that fluke all-3's performance. Yuck.

    Zero points, zero effort. His new nickname should be NEX. As in, No EXpectations. Because from now on that's certainly what I'll have. You want to give a guy the benefit of the doubt, especially when he talks such a good talk. But at the end of the day you've got 18 yr olds who come in the league with a scorer's mentality (hint: more than jacking up threes), but this guy is playing like a backup with wasted height.

    I mean seriously, it's more than the lack of ability/desire to score. He's not even as effective as he should be defensively. Two years later and he's still regularly having the same mental lapses we saw from his rookie season.

    I'm not saying cut him, but I might be saying bench him when Granger comes back, because Lance is playing better on-ball and obviously better on offense.
    Well for starters, let's not act like the guy has done nothing. Over the course of his three years here, he has played very good defense and has shown that he has the skills to score the ball. He started on a team that had the 5th best record in the league last year.

    Yeah he had zero points and no effort last night. But just a week and a half ago he hit nine threes. Neither one of those extremes should be used to predict the type of player he'll be. The truth is somewhere in the middle.

    I don't know what the expiration date is on this "excuse". But after watching the NBA for years, I do know that very very very few players have hit their peak at age 22. It's an extremely young age anyway you slice it. Many rookies are that age. I don't think you really know what a player is until about age 25. I'm not saying that the dude is going to be dropping 25 a game in a couple of years. But I am saying that he should get stronger, more confident, more knowledgeable about he what he needs to do, etc etc.

    Isn't a lot of the stuff being said about Paul the same type of stuff that we used to say about Roy in his first couple of seasons? Roy had mental lapses in his third season too.
    Last edited by Sollozzo; 12-02-2012, 11:14 AM.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

      He has played very good defense.........sometimes. He's also had a lot of bad defense. He started on a team that had the 5th best record in the league...so did Darren Collison. Nobody is saying Paul George is going to average 0 ppg. But if he averages 12-13 ppg with Granger out (by jacking up threes and refusing to approach the basket or get to the line) and while the team is desperately sputtering then he will be deemed a disappointment by (almost) all.

      And where is Roy now? All those mental lapses added up to a career best 12.4 ppg in a contract year, and now he's a 7'2 starting center shooting 39%....who is still suffering from mental lapses.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

        Originally posted by 3rdStrike View Post
        He has played very good defense.........sometimes. He's also had a lot of bad defense. He started on a team that had the 5th best record in the league...so did Darren Collison. Nobody is saying Paul George is going to average 0 ppg. But if he averages 12-13 ppg with Granger out (by jacking up threes and refusing to approach the basket or get to the line) and while the team is desperately sputtering then he will be deemed a disappointment by (almost) all.

        And where is Roy now? All those mental lapses added up to a career best 12.4 ppg in a contract year, and now he's a 7'2 starting center shooting 39%....who is still suffering from mental lapses.
        Everything you say is true. All I'm saying is that I'd be surprised if he didn't improve over the next 2-3 seasons. Youth is a valid excuse in the NBA, IMHO. Most 22 year olds are going to struggle in the NBA at times.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

          He and Lance were my favorite players a year ago, so I admit the fan in me may overreact a bit when it comes to PG. I'm just worried about him plateauing early. Not sure we have a staff that is conducive to player development.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

            Originally posted by CableKC View Post

            I would have been happy with him just scoring 12 points.

            As you're alluding to those 12 points, they would have won the game.

            Sorry, but I thought PG's "D" was terrible. He was AWOL in this game. It's this type of tripe from PG that Peck's comment "his trade value will never be higher" has me really thinking about it.

            I've said from day ONE PG was drafted to replace BRush. As Peck stated It's obvious SF isn't his position nor is he Granger's future replacement. For those that still think PG is, they had better wake up and see the reality he isn't. Look for the Pacers to draft or trade for Granger's replacement as that replacement isn't currently on the Pacers roster.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

              Frustrating loss made moreso by Vogel's dumb substitutions.
              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


              • #22
                Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

                Originally posted by xtacy View Post
                i started to doubt it. i mean the rest of the league can't be stupid enough to trade for him, can they? imo we are stuck with him and that's depressing.

                Look at the bright side... at least the Pacers didn't draft Wes Johnson at #4 or Cole Aldrich #11 who was one pick behind Paul George. It could have been worse!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

                  Originally posted by 3rdStrike View Post
                  He and Lance were my favorite players a year ago, so I admit the fan in me may overreact a bit when it comes to PG. I'm just worried about him plateauing early. Not sure we have a staff that is conducive to player development.
                  This. I'm not blaming the offense entirely, but it's not a great offense to be developing young wings in. We ask our wings to stand around the perimeter and shoot 3's when our bigs kick it out, and that's what they do. Granger never would have developed into the player he is today if had to play in this offense early in his career.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

                    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                    Isn't a lot of the stuff being said about Paul the same type of stuff that we used to say about Roy in his first couple of seasons? Roy had mental lapses in his third season too.

                    The next player the Pacers draft, whoever it is, has to be stronger mentally. I've b****** about how much Hill got paid, but I've NEVER complained about his mental attitude or lack of mental toughness. I'd rather have the toughness in a lesser quality player than have another Mr. Softee with All World Potential. Potential only gets you so far in this league. Prime example is Gerald Green. Mental toughness can overcome less athleticism. I don't need to see highlite reel dunks or live by the 3 pt shot. I want to see scoring from inside, mid-range, and outside. I want to see the attitude you can't stop me from what I want to do. Paul George doesn't have that type of attitude, and I don't envision seeing he'll develop one either.

                    One of the reasons I've been a Jerritt Jack fan is he's a mentally tough player. Last nites game from Jack is just why I felt Bird dropped the ball and made a humongous blunder not re-signing Jack.
                    Last edited by Justin Tyme; 12-02-2012, 12:13 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

                      Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                      I'm not ready to give up on Paul George. He's still just a 22 year old third year player.
                      said this before and gonna say it again. his problem is lack of mental toughness and that killer instinct. it has nothing to do with age. you either have it or don't.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

                        Originally posted by xtacy View Post
                        said this before and gonna say it again. his problem is lack of mental toughness and that killer instinct. it has nothing to do with age. you either have it or don't.
                        Does Andre Iguodala have killer instinct?

                        Maybe you need killer instinct if you're going to be a top banana but we know that Paul won't be that. Just like Roy doesn't really need to score that much. With Danny, West, and Hill we just need Roy and Paul to be complementary players.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

                          Idk how I feel about this whole age excuse. PG has been in the league, receiving consistent minutes since the second half of his first yr. Yes he's improved, but it's been steady, smaller improvements. It's not the fact that he doesn't score 20ppg that pisses ppl off, it's the fact that he has times where he plays like he doesn't care. Thompson is the same age and has been in the league a yr less than PG, and he doesn't seem to be struggling to look to shoot or score.

                          Many of the better players in this league are extremely young. SO I don't buy the "it's because he's young" bit. His defense has been inconsistent this year as well. More than a few players have scored on Paul pretty easily. If he's not playing good defense, then at this point he's an average to below average starter, because his J is inconsistent, he can't create his own shot, and he can often times be lazy.

                          We dont fully know what we have in PG at this point, but if he's going to continue to be so inconsistent, he needs to be on a short leash in the same way that Lance is. Lance's inconsistent play stems from being too aggressive, Paul is the opposite.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

                            Originally posted by xtacy View Post
                            i started to doubt it. i mean the rest of the league can't be stupid enough to trade for him, can they? imo we are stuck with him and that's depressing.
                            They are still stupid enough to trade for him. They will attribute his struggles to everything else but him. Be it the abysmal Pacers offense or the presence of Danny. People will still want to trade for him 'till his 5th year at least because he is simply so young and so athletic.
                            Originally posted by IrishPacer
                            Empty vessels make the most noise.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

                              Funny how the Danny Grangers fan club members and Danny Granger excuse makers are the ones that want to trade Paul George because "is enough of excuse making" lol, yeah let's trade the guy with the must potential and let's keep Danny and West for the future because "they are guys that play like old mans so they should be able to play for at least 5 more years" .....


                              At this point I'm hoping they trade him for another "old man game" type of player to see what this same people are going to say when Paul George is kicking a$$ on another team and the Pacers are in rebuilding mode once again.
                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

                                For some constructive criticism of PG, besides the obvious stuff (shoot more but less from outside, get to the line): When he whiffs a shot he almost always has poor form. A shot doesn't have to be pretty to be effective (Reggie was the master of the off-balance, awkward but deadly shot), but he's got plenty of time and still rushes it.

                                He takes one or two inside fadeaways per game. I've said it before, but this is a shot he needs to take more often, but mixing in a pump-fake. He's still shooting close to 0% on the season on those shots, but it's because he doesn't finish with form so the shots always hit the front of the rim. This gets me to wondering why a 6'10 guy would rush a fadeaway against defenders who are almost invariably shorter than he is (and thus have almost no chance to block the shot). The answer, I think, is the same reason he doesn't take the ball to the basket: He is very scared of contact.

                                Why he's so scared of contact, I don't know. Maybe he feels like his body can't handle it, but if that's the case he needs to hit the weights (which was suggested by several posters in the offseason). I think it's crazy when people say he can't be an elite scorer. He absolutely can, the physical tools and ability to shoot from outside are there. Whether he will or not is another story, and one that depends on what he wants to be.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X