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

From a New User: Upgrade at Point Guard Needed!

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

  • #31
    Re: From a New User: Upgrade at Point Guard Needed!

    I had my doubts about Hill as a full time starter at PG at first. Not any more, I'm perfectly happy with Hill at the point for the long haul. Hill's smart, tough, very good defender, a leader and I trust him at the end of games. Looking at stats and only stats does not give you the whole story.

    Never cared much for Calderon, certainly would never even remotely think about trading Danny for him.
    "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: From a New User: Upgrade at Point Guard Needed!

      Originally posted by Pacer Fan View Post
      As I have said before, I believe Hill should be contending for 6th man of the year for years to come. All-Star...no way!
      and again, I hope Hill proves me wrong!
      Hill would make a great 6th man.

      I will agree that he's not the ideal PG and I agree adding Granger isn't going to help ball movement. So, I understand the OP point. But Jose Calderon doesn't make us better. His defense as others have stated is not good and that will not work with West and Hibbert who would find themselves in foul trouble.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: From a New User: Upgrade at Point Guard Needed!

        Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
        Who would be the list of players you would trade him for?
        Chris Paul
        Deron Williams
        Kyrie Irving
        Rondo
        Russel Westbrook
        Curry
        Holiday
        Parker
        Rose
        Lillard

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: From a New User: Upgrade at Point Guard Needed!

          Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
          Hill would make a great 6th man.

          I will agree that he's not the ideal PG and I agree adding Granger isn't going to help ball movement. So, I understand the OP point. But Jose Calderon doesn't make us better. His defense as others have stated is not good and that will not work with West and Hibbert who would find themselves in foul trouble.
          I don't want Jose either. Especially not for Danny!
          Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: From a New User: Upgrade at Point Guard Needed!

            Originally posted by Miller_time04 View Post
            Chris Paul
            Deron Williams
            Kyrie Irving
            Rondo
            Russel Westbrook
            Curry
            Holiday
            Parker
            Rose
            Lillard
            I would hope so. Some of those you would have to add PG and a couple of first rounders to get.....

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: From a New User: Upgrade at Point Guard Needed!

              George Hill's doing just fine.
              He's got some learning at the point guard position to do but he also knows that. In fact, he explicitly stated that after the Knicks game - he talked about how he was traditionally a 2 so moving Augustin to play alongside him late in the game made it feel more natural to him.
              That being said, he knows he's being asked to be in the 1 position now and said he's still learning, which I trust he will continue to do.
              For the time being, I'm more than content with him at the 1 and I do think he'll become a better PG.

              Remember, he's still got upside and he's really not that old.
              Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: From a New User: Upgrade at Point Guard Needed!

                i've been rather pleased with Hill this season. And i'm not ready to fully judge him until we get Danny back. The offense is pretty bad right now. We miss Danny, Roy is who knows what. If Roy were playing like he should be, Hill would probably be averaging another 2 more assists a game quite honestly. Roy is just missing a lot of gimmies. Its really hurting the offense, especially with no Granger. Is George Hill gonna be Chris Paul? Nope. Do i think we can get one of those elite point guards? Nope, not without giving up PG. And Calderon isn't enough for me to break up this core. Hill is far superior on the defensive end.

                Lets see what happens with the offense when Danny gels back into the rotation and if Roy comes around (big if at this point). Right now GH is the third scorer on the team imo. When Danny comes back he drops to #4. If Hibbert gets it around Hill then becomes the 5th option in the starting unit. I'm really curious to see how that works out and how it would change his play.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: From a New User: Upgrade at Point Guard Needed!

                  Originally posted by BornReady View Post
                  George Hill's doing just fine.
                  He's got some learning at the point guard position to do but he also knows that. In fact, he explicitly stated that after the Knicks game - he talked about how he was traditionally a 2 so moving Augustin to play alongside him late in the game made it feel more natural to him.
                  That being said, he knows he's being asked to be in the 1 position now and said he's still learning, which I trust he will continue to do.
                  For the time being, I'm more than content with him at the 1 and I do think he'll become a better PG.

                  Remember, he's still got upside and he's really not that old.
                  As the team is constructed right now, I totally agree. I wouldn't want to trade a starter to try and improve Hill's position and then just bring Hill off the bench. That doesn't make much sense. However, in the future, I do think that may end up being an option as far as Hill combo off the bench and being 6th man contention. He could play big minutes doing so and it would allow less rotation and possibly better chemistry as a team come playoff time!
                  Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: From a New User: Upgrade at Point Guard Needed!

                    Originally posted by Pacer Fan View Post
                    As the team is constructed right now, I totally agree. I wouldn't want to trade a starter to try and improve Hill's position and then just bring Hill off the bench. That doesn't make much sense. However, in the future, I do think that may end up being an option as far as Hill combo off the bench and being 6th man contention. He could play big minutes doing so and it would allow less rotation and possibly better chemistry as a team come playoff time!
                    Kind of like a Terry type role? I like the sound of that
                    Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: From a New User: Upgrade at Point Guard Needed!

                      Wow, I like this board's activity.

                      So many responses, so little time to respond in kind.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: From a New User: Upgrade at Point Guard Needed!

                        Originally posted by Randolph_HorseLips View Post

                        The Pacers are 28th in the NBA in team assists. 28th! Only the Cavs and Bobcats are worse. As much as I like this team, the problem I see is that we just may be the worst passing team in the NBA. We have TOO MANY shoot-first players. I'm fine with David West and Paul George taking this role, but when guys like George Hill, Green, and even Hansborough play like passing is never an option, then I fear we have a problem. What is the perhaps the last thing such a team needs? A shoot-first point guard like George Hill.



                        I like this team at the 4 of the 5 starting positions, but I feel like George Hill gets too much of a pass, perhaps for being a local boy. For the sake of chemistry, I would like to see DJ get the starting job for awhile.

                        Or how about Danny Granger for Jose Calderon? Would Toronto do it?

                        We need fewer shooters and better floor generals!!!

                        1. It's the system. The Pacers have the 2nd lowest offensive efficiency in the NBA. We saw what having a slow offense did to Steve Nash those first few games w/ Mike Brown.
                        2. For the sake of chemistry, you'd bench our starting point guard who has helped the team to the #3 spot in the East for a guy shooting 32% (side note: I like Augustin)? That makes no sense.
                        3. Granger is worth more than Jose Calderon, and I'm hardly a cheerleader for Granger.
                        4. We don't have enough pure shooters. We've got enough guys that can handle the rock now that Lance has proven himself as a starter. This is the void that Granger fills.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: From a New User: Upgrade at Point Guard Needed!

                          Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
                          I agree with defense but do you really think Hill is in another class than Calderon? I have had a chance to watch the Raptors a little bit and I'd say Calderon is a better floor general than Hill. Positives with the negatives I guess.
                          I know what Pop said about Hill. I have also seen how Hill delivers at the end of games. That is enough for me.


                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: From a New User: Upgrade at Point Guard Needed!

                            Yeah, Calderon's offensive numbers are like the shiny bauble at the bottom of the claw machine. They stand out but at the end of the day his warts on the defensive end just makes him another trinket. I'd fear that we'd get burned constantly at the point of attack. The thought of West and Hibbert scrambling to protect the rim to cover Calderon's man just gives me cold chills. Much rather have Hill's defense than Calderon's offensive numbers. As others have said... For this team, Hill is good enough.
                            Last edited by Roaming Gnome; 01-14-2013, 08:38 PM.
                            ...Still "flying casual"
                            @roaminggnome74

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: From a New User: Upgrade at Point Guard Needed!

                              Would not consider it at all, unless we are getting a lottery pick from Toronto.

                              This is where PER misleads people. Calderon is efficient, not productive, there's a big difference. Jose has a nice FG% and Assist/Turnover ratio which bloats his PER, but that's all he does. He can't create his own shot, and is a speed bump on defense.

                              He'd be a nice 25 minute guy on a team that can hide him on defense (us), but that's about it.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: From a New User: Upgrade at Point Guard Needed!

                                Can we please just find a way to acquire an all star player or even better superstar at every position already so everyone would stop finding ways to improve/criticize this team!!!

                                We need a GM who can make this happen.. theres gotta be someone on Pacers Digest that can do a better job than Larry Bird or Donnie Walsh!!!

                                I vote Boomer for GM

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X