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

What are your thoughts after two games without Lance?

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

  • #46
    Re: What are your thoughts after two games without Lance?

    Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
    You know, you're right. Wade and LeBron were clearly holding back to make things appear more fair for the Pacers.

    They did what they had to do. If pressed, they would have done just a little more. Super stars are like that........ ...

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: What are your thoughts after two games without Lance?

      Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
      Not on purpose. It's just human nature to procrastinate, but then act when one must.

      Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
      They did what they had to do. If pressed, they would have done just a little more. Super stars are like that........ ...
      I would accept the procrastination argument if it were an assignment, work order, or chore to do. But it's a basketball game. And I was talking about the games they were winning after the 2-1 Pacers lead, when both Wade and LeBron got unbelievable hot at the same time. And carried it through the playoffs. There may have been a point where they were giving subpar effort or were focusing on the wrong things. But the moment Spoelstra got through to them they were giving their full effort the rest of the way. There was no "well we gave this much effort and we were losing, so let's increase the effort level by a marginal amount." It was everything. And effort-wise, I would argue it was 100% the entire series.

      Superstar or not, people don't function that way. It may appear that way because their best effort is so much better than everybody else's. But just like everybody else, when they give everything they've got, it is everything they've got. The results of that effort are phenomenal, and in fact were. THey were historic.
      Time for a new sig.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: What are your thoughts after two games without Lance?

        For the record, the Pacers were up 61-51 in the third quarter of game four at home (2-1 in the series) before Miami went on that insane run. We were very, very close. This wasn't toying or procrastinating. They almost lost that game.

        We might not have won another game that series, beaten Boston, or OKC. But we were very close to being up 3-1 in the Miami series.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: What are your thoughts after two games without Lance?

          Crazy talk!!!! Why are we changing history? Are you guys serious with this?

          The Heat were not toying with us. They weren't waiting to get serious. Wade was injuried early in the series. Lebron finally became a man. It took the Pacers taking it to them for the King to finally live up to the name. It should not take away from what we did. Battier was playing killer defense on a tired West. Vogel would not get the ball in the post.
          The bench sucked marbles.
          Did you guys forget this series?

          We had a shot to beat them.
          And who says it can't happen again? I think it is more unlikely this year because the Heat are so much better than last year. But weird things happen in this league.

          So you want to tank the season for the limited possibility of Lance being our Messiah? Crazy Talk

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: What are your thoughts after two games without Lance?

            Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
            I respect the viewpoint, but my own view is that Bron and DWade were toying with us and cranked up the mojo when they had to. With the improvements you name, they would have just stepped up a little earlier.
            Were you watching the same series as everyone else? DWade just quit in frustration because he couldn't do jack **** against Paul in games 2 and 3. Wade's only saving grace was them figuring out that Paul could not get through a pick. They had to change their offensive strategy to beat us, if they didn't we were going to beat them in 5 games. It wasn't Bron and Wade who beat us but it was Spolestra out coaching Vogel.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: What are your thoughts after two games without Lance?

              Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
              Were you watching the same series as everyone else? DWade just quit in frustration because he couldn't do jack **** against Paul in games 2 and 3. Wade's only saving grace was them figuring out that Paul could not get through a pick. They had to change their offensive strategy to beat us, if they didn't we were going to beat them in 5 games. It wasn't Bron and Wade who beat us but it was Spolestra out coaching Vogel.
              I agree with this. Spoelstra's coaching was really overlooked on this one. They won the series (and the finals as a whole) because Spo adjusted his strategies in every game whenever they are losing.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: What are your thoughts after two games without Lance?

                I miss Lance. GG isn't getting it done.

                Unless "it" is jacking up threes.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: What are your thoughts after two games without Lance?

                  Lance is valuable cause he creates. He is also a one man fastbreak, if the other team misses and we got the rebound give it to Lance and he is gone! Thats why i really like Lance because he can create for himself and for others. Passing is also natural to him

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: What are your thoughts after two games without Lance?

                    My opinion is that Lance is better than Gerald Green and Sam Young at pretty much every facet of the game. However he is not, IMHO, in the same league as Paul George and Danny Granger.

                    The minute Danny is healthy, Lance should go to the bench and take over the offense. He'd be the 6th man this team has been missing all year.
                    Last edited by naptownmenace; 12-17-2012, 12:25 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: What are your thoughts after two games without Lance?

                      My thoughts without Lance was we need him in the game for some times for scoring and his improving defense. I have thought since he has started that our bench will really improve with Lance coming off with energy and a scorer's mentality that will make our bench settle into their roles once Danny is back. I was a Lance doubter going into the season, but I think that with his maturity and improved decision making turned me over to really liking the kid.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: What are your thoughts after two games without Lance?

                        Lance shouldn't start when Granger comes back but Vogel needs to get him some experience and have him finishing some games in the regular season.

                        Come playoff time when the 4th quarter defensive intensity amps up and the play gets physical his ability to get his own shot, draw fouls and get to places on the floor where he can create for others will be very valuable.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: What are your thoughts after two games without Lance?

                          A lot of good reasons have been given for why we miss Lance, and I'd like to add one: His attitude. The guy doesn't back down, gets fired up, and goes after the other team. Without Granger we really don't have anyone that can handle the ball with that killer mentality (West has it, but you have to set him up a bit more).

                          I absolutely love it when you can see Lance getting fired up, then grabbing a rebound and pushing it up the floor right at his defender.

                          Honestly, I'm just happy that he's become such a valuable part of our team, as he has always seemed to be a wildcard. I started becoming a Lance fan after he nearly had his head ripped off in the Miami series by dip**** Dexter Pittman, and completely kept his cool. I'm happy that he's now playing a bit more under control, within the offense, and really isn't forcing anything. Unfortunately, his shot is off, but he isn't forcing up bad shots.

                          Count me in the "miss him" group, but I'm confident that Young can cover that 2 spot til he returns.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: What are your thoughts after two games without Lance?

                            Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                            Dead last? I don't know about that. Not with the way Paul's playing.
                            So in the last few games we've moved out of the cellar? Maybe. Paul's been good, and that helps. But without Granger, the rest of our wings are Stephenson, Green and Young. Name some that are worse? I can't think of a wing combo in the league that makes me say, "Hey, glad we've got Paul George and Lance over that combo!" Maybe you can, but I can't.

                            Our team is starting to win games with regularity because of the contributions we're getting from the "1" and "4" at both ends of the court, and the "5" defensively (maybe those guys will start hitting shots soon?). Not the wing.
                            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


                            • #59
                              Re: What are your thoughts after two games without Lance?

                              Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                              I can't think of a wing combo in the league that makes me say, "Hey, glad we've got Paul George and Lance over that combo!" Maybe you can, but I can't.
                              Hmm. You're right, it's harder than I thought. I'll admit I haven't watched hardly any non-Pacers ball this season, but I'd have to expect that all of these combos are at least close. I'll admit up front that I'm working from the Hoopshype depth charts, which I know are notoriously inaccurate. So if I give up some street cred by not knowing the starting wings of all 30 teams, at least I can admit that up front and get it out of the way. With that being said, I'd start the discussion around:

                              Sixers, with Evan Turner and Jason Richarsdon?
                              Raptors, with DeRozan and Pietrus?
                              Cavs, with Waiters and Gee?
                              Pistons, with Knight and Prince?
                              Bucks, with Ellis and Mbah a Moute?
                              Bobcats, with Ben Gordon and Gerald Henderson?
                              Magic, with Afflalo and Turkoglu?
                              Wizards, with Crawford and Ariza?
                              Hornets, with Xavier Henry and Ryan Anderson?
                              Blazers, with Wes Mathews and Nic Batum?
                              Jazz, with Randy Foye and Gordon Hayward?
                              Warriors, with Klay Thompson and Harrison Barnes?
                              Pheonix Suns, with Shannon Brown and Michael Beasley?

                              That's 13 teams. So if I give you 3 right off the bat (Wow, Anthem, how could you not know that players X, Y, and Z are blowing up this year?), that's still ten teams with worse starting wings than us. If so, that means we're not even in the bottom third. Saying "we've got the absolute worst wing rotation in the league, and will until Danny comes back" means that you don't think any of these are even close. Would you trade Paul George and Lance Stephenson for Shannon Brown and Michael Beasley? Would that net us more wins? How about Klay Thompson and Harrison Barnes? Randy Foye and Gordon Hayward? All three of those are an easy "No" for me, but I admit it's possible I'm biased.

                              Thoughts?
                              Last edited by Anthem; 12-18-2012, 12:12 AM.
                              This space for rent.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: What are your thoughts after two games without Lance?

                                I get what you're saying.

                                5 games ago, those were absolutely the right teams to be comparing our wings to. Now Paul George has helped his case quite a bit but I'm taking a longer-term view.

                                I don't think our wings are helping us much. In fact, I think our wings are making it harder for Hill, West and Hibbert, our three best and most important players, to do their things.

                                Again, Paul George has been completely different since that Chicago game, so the trend is definitely up.

                                But good gracious, they started from "the only place to go is up." And not that long ago.

                                I think from the outside looking in that the Pacers' current wing situation, with our without Lance, is not striking fear throughout the league. It is probably barely registered on the respect meter. Yes, people are going to start to notice Paul George (and once they start scouting him as a larger component of the offense, it will be interesting to see how that impacts his continued development.) But its not like HE'S getting much help from the other wing spot either.

                                We're set at 1, 4 and 5. Remember how we talk about how it should be easier to get quality wings than points, C's, or PFs? Well, we've done the hard part but we only have two quality wings on the payroll, and one of them is out for most of the season.
                                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

                                Working...
                                X