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

Pacers/Bucks Postgame Thread 1/5/13

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

  • #91
    Re: Pacers/Bucks Postgame Thread 1/5/13

    When Granger comes back, let's move Stephenson to the second unit and see what happens when we FREE LANCE.
    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Pacers/Bucks Postgame Thread 1/5/13

      I just really want people to relax on Lance and let it be. If you want him to be freed, who gets less burn? Is it that simple as to FREE them. It seems like more people want Lance to be freed than for the Pacers to win.

      Rant off/

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Pacers/Bucks Postgame Thread 1/5/13

        Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
        I just really want people to relax on Lance and let it be. If you want him to be freed, who gets less burn? Is it that simple as to FREE them. It seems like more people want Lance to be freed than for the Pacers to win.

        Rant off/
        What if Lance being freed leads to a lot more Pacer wins?

        P.S. Gerald Green, DJ and Ben get less burn, and Young gets a LOT less burn.
        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Pacers/Bucks Postgame Thread 1/5/13

          Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
          I just really want people to relax on Lance and let it be. If you want him to be freed, who gets less burn? Is it that simple as to FREE them. It seems like more people want Lance to be freed than for the Pacers to win.

          Rant off/
          While I have been decidedly unimpressed with Lance's "breakout" season, especially compared to the rest of the board, and think the idea of "freeing" him is more terrifying than exciting, Gerald Green getting less burn doesn't sound like a bad thing.
          "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

          -Lance Stephenson

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Pacers/Bucks Postgame Thread 1/5/13

            I don't get the Lance love. I see a good bench player and considering where they drafted him and where he's come in his career I'm pretty happy with that.

            But the idea that he's about to be the top player out there? I don't see anything close to that. I think right now he's playing within 10-20% of his max level. He can get a little more consistent, tighten up some TOs or general slop, maybe dial in his jumper for a tiny bit more reliability and that's about it.

            His fancier dribble attack moves often unfold a bit too slow for all the flash they show and end up coming to nothing. He's a great 2nd round pick and should continue to be a Travis Best level impact on the team going forward. Overall I can see him having more impact than Green has been, but as Beast mentions Green has a set of skills that really demands some amount of attention, and if he could get his jumper going again he'd crush people that closed out on him too hard.

            I like Lance's size, physicality and rebounding. But I also notice the impact of Green's hops both in rebounding and in defending the goal. He gets up and challenges people in both areas which results in tougher shots or rebounds kept alive for the Pacers to potentially grab, even if he isn't getting the block or rebound himself.

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Pacers/Bucks Postgame Thread 1/5/13

              Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
              I don't get the Lance love. I see a good bench player and considering where they drafted him and where he's come in his career I'm pretty happy with that.

              But the idea that he's about to be the top player out there? I don't see anything close to that. I think right now he's playing within 10-20% of his max level. He can get a little more consistent, tighten up some TOs or general slop, maybe dial in his jumper for a tiny bit more reliability and that's about it.

              His fancier dribble attack moves often unfold a bit too slow for all the flash they show and end up coming to nothing. He's a great 2nd round pick and should continue to be a Travis Best level impact on the team going forward. Overall I can see him having more impact than Green has been, but as Beast mentions Green has a set of skills that really demands some amount of attention, and if he could get his jumper going again he'd crush people that closed out on him too hard.

              I like Lance's size, physicality and rebounding. But I also notice the impact of Green's hops both in rebounding and in defending the goal. He gets up and challenges people in both areas which results in tougher shots or rebounds kept alive for the Pacers to potentially grab, even if he isn't getting the block or rebound himself.
              I agree. I think Lance has the type of game that some find fun to watch, and he looks like he has a ton of talent, I'm just not sure how much of it is functional. Lance has improved as a player because he has shot the ball better. A simple fundamental improvement. He's also learning how to function within an offense. He's doing what he needs to do to deserve time on the court. But the idea that he's going to be our second best player at some point, I just really don't see it.

              As someone who has been harsh on Lance, I don't want this to sound like a "bashing" post. He's impressed me this season. I didn't think he'd be capable of playing as well as he has. And he's impressed me by staying out of trouble. (more important) He's been a good role player. There's just disagreement over whether he'll be much better than that or not.

              That said, he has been, by far the best of the non Hill/George at the guard position. Green and DJ have been somewhere between pretty bad and abysmal for a majority of the season. Reducing their minutes isn't the worst thing in the world. And with Lance playing pretty decent, its an easy decision.
              Last edited by Sookie; 01-07-2013, 04:59 PM.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Pacers/Bucks Postgame Thread 1/5/13

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                I don't get the Lance love. I see a good bench player and considering where they drafted him and where he's come in his career I'm pretty happy with that.

                But the idea that he's about to be the top player out there? I don't see anything close to that. I think right now he's playing within 10-20% of his max level. He can get a little more consistent, tighten up some TOs or general slop, maybe dial in his jumper for a tiny bit more reliability and that's about it.
                Come on, Nap, that's just not reasonable. I agree that he's not going to be the top player out there; I'm fine with that. But the idea that he's 90% of the player he's going to be? You really think he's that close to being a finished product right now? Heck, he's still improving game-by-game. You don't think he's going to improve more in the next offseason?
                This space for rent.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Pacers/Bucks Postgame Thread 1/5/13

                  Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                  The problem is that I'm not sure our starting lineup's offense is good enough to be playing games like that.

                  Granger would be a help off the bench and in the starting lineup. Because he's Danny Granger.

                  I'm also hoping that when Danny gets back, we can run a 3 guard rotation with Lance/Hill/George. I'm not a fan of Lance at PG, but I'm really not a fan of DJ playing so I'm willing to try that experiment. Kind of hard to do when you start Lance.

                  I also think Roy and West likely need a 3 point shooter out there.
                  Yeah, Roy and West need a 3 point shooter, I agree. And I also agree that our starting line up's offense is not good enough. So, you're probably right
                  Originally posted by IrishPacer
                  Empty vessels make the most noise.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Pacers/Bucks Postgame Thread 1/5/13

                    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                    I don't get the Lance love. I see a good bench player and considering where they drafted him and where he's come in his career I'm pretty happy with that.

                    But the idea that he's about to be the top player out there? I don't see anything close to that. I think right now he's playing within 10-20% of his max level. He can get a little more consistent, tighten up some TOs or general slop, maybe dial in his jumper for a tiny bit more reliability and that's about it.

                    His fancier dribble attack moves often unfold a bit too slow for all the flash they show and end up coming to nothing. He's a great 2nd round pick and should continue to be a Travis Best level impact on the team going forward. Overall I can see him having more impact than Green has been, but as Beast mentions Green has a set of skills that really demands some amount of attention, and if he could get his jumper going again he'd crush people that closed out on him too hard.

                    I like Lance's size, physicality and rebounding. But I also notice the impact of Green's hops both in rebounding and in defending the goal. He gets up and challenges people in both areas which results in tougher shots or rebounds kept alive for the Pacers to potentially grab, even if he isn't getting the block or rebound himself.
                    I liked Green's dunk against the Cavs, but for all that athleticism, he's not much better than Flight White. He can shoot a little, but otherwise he really has no idea how to play basketball. Yes he jumps and gets up around the rim, but ask the man to pass the ball or run a play and you are out of luck. His defense on Paul Pierce was comical. Nothin' there.

                    OTOH, Lance Stephenson has more natural basketball ability in his pinky at the age of 22 as Gerald Green is ever going to have in his entire body. As others have mentioned, Lance has been improving game by game. Gerald is already in Lance's rear view mirror.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers/Bucks Postgame Thread 1/5/13

                      Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                      Don't confine your thoughts to this season only, think ahead to next season.

                      If the Pacers don't re-sign DWest this off season, then Mahinmi and Hansbrough are your PF. Mozgov b/u 5. Mozgov's 3 mil is nothing compared to what DWest could have been paid.

                      If Dwest is signed and Tyler isn't a Pacer next year, then Mahinmi is the b/u PF. Mozgov b/u 5. Tyler's salary becomes Mozgov's salary next season.

                      In both scenario's Mozgov covers the b/u 5 at a 3 mil salary.

                      PLumjam can be brought along slowly, so that it wouldn't be necessary to re-sign Mozgov for the 14-15 season as Plumjam can cover the b/u 5.

                      You bring in Mozgov this season as b/u insurance to a possible injury to Hibbert, or this coming off season for the foresaid reasons. If Mozgov is secured, it would apt to be this off season. I doubt it ever happens, but it wouldn't hurt my feelings if it did. He's never going to beat out McGee for the b/u 5 spot, so Denver can afford to trade him. I'd just as soon see him in a Pacers uni than a competing team's uni. JMOAA
                      Hmm, I never really thought this through. I can certainly agree with this line of thinking.

                      But he's expiring this season. If we bring him in, we'll probably have to pay him if we want to keep him.
                      Originally posted by IrishPacer
                      Empty vessels make the most noise.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers/Bucks Postgame Thread 1/5/13

                        Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                        Yes he jumps and gets up around the rim, but ask the man to pass the ball or run a play and you are out of luck.
                        Green really shouldn't be asked to pass the ball or run a play. That's not a part of his strengths. You have to use a player on his strengths.

                        Lance is a more all-around player. And that's why I think that he can improve and become a quite good starter in this league
                        Originally posted by IrishPacer
                        Empty vessels make the most noise.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers/Bucks Postgame Thread 1/5/13

                          My question is this. When Danny comes back to the starting lineup, how is Lance going to be freed? He won't get more minutes. He will be on the court with George or Danny. So to be freed are we saying that he gets more plays called for him? What type of plays? Does he get more attempts than he is getting now? How?

                          I really don't see "freeing" Lance makes us that much better than we already are. I like Lance. I like him defensively more than any wing not named Paul in fact. The dude gets in heavy rotation and it still isn't enough. We have to "free" him more? Its like his strengths are immortalized while his weaknesses are more overlooked than clothes at Mardi Gras. And I again think he is a good player this year. But the man crush is crazy hyped at this point. McKeyFan it seems like that is all you want to talk about. Why not some Vogel love? PG? Hill?

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers/Bucks Postgame Thread 1/5/13

                            Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
                            The dude gets in heavy rotation and it still isn't enough. We have to "free" him more?
                            Lance is currently used as the 5th starter. And that's the correct role for him at the moment, imo.

                            When people refer to "freeing" him they probably want to see him as a 6th man. Coming off the bench and handling the ball, creating things and taking attempts. They want to see how he performs as a go-to option.
                            Originally posted by IrishPacer
                            Empty vessels make the most noise.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers/Bucks Postgame Thread 1/5/13

                              Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                              Hmm, I never really thought this through. I can certainly agree with this line of thinking.

                              But he's expiring this season. If we bring him in, we'll probably have to pay him if we want to keep him.

                              I thought he was signed next year too, but when looking at Shamsports next season is a QO. That makes my scenario chaff in the wind.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers/Bucks Postgame Thread 1/5/13

                                Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
                                My question is this. When Danny comes back to the starting lineup, how is Lance going to be freed? He won't get more minutes. He will be on the court with George or Danny. So to be freed are we saying that he gets more plays called for him? What type of plays? Does he get more attempts than he is getting now? How?

                                I really don't see "freeing" Lance makes us that much better than we already are. I like Lance. I like him defensively more than any wing not named Paul in fact. The dude gets in heavy rotation and it still isn't enough. We have to "free" him more? Its like his strengths are immortalized while his weaknesses are more overlooked than clothes at Mardi Gras. And I again think he is a good player this year. But the man crush is crazy hyped at this point. McKeyFan it seems like that is all you want to talk about. Why not some Vogel love? PG? Hill?
                                Nuntius explained it. Freeing Lance means let him run the offense. No, "Heavy rotation minutes" is not enough because much of the time he is standing in the corner.

                                Realistically, the way to get him some minutes running the offense is to put him in the second unit.

                                Offensively, I see Paul's ceiling as being as good as Danny Granger. He is a far better defender, so PG could be a significantly better all-around player than Danny. But Paul is not the answer to our years long logjam at the offensive end--a super creator who can take us a long way in the postseason. Lance has the potential to be that person, and I want him freed to take advantage of the possibility.

                                I know I'm a voice crying in the wilderness. Me and Larry. It can be lonely sometimes.
                                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X