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

Vogel-had-no-choice-but-to-bench-gerald-green/Mike Wells

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

  • #61
    Re: Vogel-had-no-choice-but-to-bench-gerald-green/Mike Wells

    Its good to see that Vogel is open to doing this sort of thing. It would be wonderful if Green picked up his game because of it, but I also like what I see in Orlando.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Vogel-had-no-choice-but-to-bench-gerald-green/Mike Wells

      Originally posted by docpaul View Post
      I think we're in a bit of a tough spot with Green, because his shot has become so unreliable, and everyone's lost trust in him.

      If the team trusted his shot, they could (and should) draw up specific plays for him in the half court that set him up for catch-and-shoot opportunities. As it stands, he's often forced to react to a team offensive concept, which at first caused him to hesitate and look uneasy, and more recently has caused him to have an early trigger finger that results in him jacking up lots of ugly shots early in the clock.

      We have to do a total reset on him, IMO.

      Yup.

      He's been absolutely terrible to this point, and he's the type of guy where a few bad performances snowball and kill his confidence, and then the lack of confidence makes him look even more awkward on the court and force up even shittier shots.

      Go ask Nets fans what they think of Green, they'll tell you he didn't seem like he was lost on the court, didn't make a bunch of dumb mistakes, and obviously shot the ball really well there. Even defensively, he was a really effective on ball defender last season, to the point that the Nets switched him onto Kyrie Irving in a game to try and cool him off (he did a damned good job too). He's capable of a lot more than he's shown here so far.

      But a lot has changed since last season. New offense, a system that didn't get him involved as much more than a spot up shooter, and a confidence level that I'm sure is at an all time low. He needs to find a way to hit reset and get his head straight, perhaps some time on the bench will help, I guess we'll find out one way or another.

      A Gerald Green fan who now finds himself rooting for the Suns.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Vogel-had-no-choice-but-to-bench-gerald-green/Mike Wells

        We are paying him what, a little over 3 million annually? Some of you act as though he's supposed to have a fundamentally sound game as Tim Duncan. Pacers brought him here to be a dynamic scorer off the bench and add some athleticsm to our wings. So far, he hasn't been able to shoot but that may come around. I think the issues of no basketball IQ are overblown, especially if Granger comes back healthy. We just need him to be a scoring spark in a bench role, not be the focal point on the court.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Vogel-had-no-choice-but-to-bench-gerald-green/Mike Wells

          Watched a ton of his 3 point attempts on Synergy. Most of them are wide open. Not sure why people say he takes a ton of bad shots.
          "Danny Granger is one of the top players in the league. To move Danny, you better get a lot back." - Larry Bird

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Vogel-had-no-choice-but-to-bench-gerald-green/Mike Wells

            Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
            Those Cuban remarks are pretty damning. I wonder if Pacer scouts and management do something as simple as Google the guy's past articles and read up on someone they intend to spend millions on?

            He was an incredible shooter last year. Hitting open shots is something that should translate from a bad team to a playoff team.

            Signing Gerald Green was a good idea. Let's stop acting like this was some boneheaded move by management just because he forgot how to shoot.

            Originally posted by cgg View Post
            Watched a ton of his 3 point attempts on Synergy. Most of them are wide open. Not sure why people say he takes a ton of bad shots.
            If Roy Hibbert was shooting wide open three pointers would they be considered bad shots? When you're shooting as poorly as he is, you need to cut down on the three pointers.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Vogel-had-no-choice-but-to-bench-gerald-green/Mike Wells

              Woah he's out of the rotation now.

              RT @MikeWellsNBA Gerald Green is headed to the bench out of the rotation for the time being. Rookie O.J. Johnson will get more minutes on the wing.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Vogel-had-no-choice-but-to-bench-gerald-green/Mike Wells

                Green isn't playing well. He needed to for the sake of the team
                Smothered Chicken!

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Vogel-had-no-choice-but-to-bench-gerald-green/Mike Wells

                  Originally posted by Goyle View Post
                  Woah he's out of the rotation now.

                  RT @MikeWellsNBA Gerald Green is headed to the bench out of the rotation for the time being. Rookie O.J. Johnson will get more minutes on the wing.
                  I refuse to believe that he just forgot how to shoot. It's obvious to me that his ankle has to be affecting it. He needs to sit until it's better.
                  "Danny Granger is one of the top players in the league. To move Danny, you better get a lot back." - Larry Bird

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Vogel-had-no-choice-but-to-bench-gerald-green/Mike Wells

                    Originally posted by Goyle View Post
                    He was an incredible shooter last year. Hitting open shots is something that should translate from a bad team to a playoff team.

                    Signing Gerald Green was a good idea. Let's stop acting like this was some boneheaded move by management just because he forgot how to shoot.

                    Cuban's comments weren't about his ability to shoot. They were about his inability to "get it." There's plenty of shooters who get it. Why would TPTB want one who doesn't?
                    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Vogel-had-no-choice-but-to-bench-gerald-green/Mike Wells

                      Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                      Cuban's comments weren't about his ability to shoot. They were about his inability to "get it." There's plenty of shooters who get it. Why would TPTB want one who doesn't?
                      Because they usually cost more than 3 mill.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Vogel-had-no-choice-but-to-bench-gerald-green/Mike Wells

                        Originally posted by Goyle View Post
                        Woah he's out of the rotation now.

                        RT @MikeWellsNBA Gerald Green is headed to the bench out of the rotation for the time being. Rookie O.J. Johnson will get more minutes on the wing.

                        Needed to happen.

                        I don't dislike Gerald, and as a member of the Pacers I really want him to turn it around, same as I felt about DJ.

                        But he has been a complete and 100% negative every second he's been on the floor almost the entire year.

                        We can't let a shooter who cannot shoot (or defend) stay on the court when we're fighting to win our division and climb the standings.

                        Good for you Frank, my man-love for you grows yet again.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Vogel-had-no-choice-but-to-bench-gerald-green/Mike Wells

                          Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                          Cuban's comments weren't about his ability to shoot. They were about his inability to "get it." There's plenty of shooters who get it. Why would TPTB want one who doesn't?
                          Because it looked like he finally got it last year? I'll stand by Green being a good IDEA no matter what. Lights out shooter with his athleticism should have fit in perfectly for our bench. He's been awful, and I'm excited as hell to see OJ getting his minutes.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Thank you!!!

                            I hope this benching has the same effect with Gerald that it had with DJ
                            Stop quoting people I have on ignore!

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Vogel-had-no-choice-but-to-bench-gerald-green/Mike Wells

                              Originally posted by billbradley View Post
                              Because they usually cost more than 3 mill.
                              Really? Niche shooters who can do nothing else? (That's the convo here -- assuming he doesn't "get it" with anything else.)
                              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Vogel-had-no-choice-but-to-bench-gerald-green/Mike Wells

                                Originally posted by cgg View Post
                                I refuse to believe that he just forgot how to shoot. It's obvious to me that his ankle has to be affecting it. He needs to sit until it's better.
                                Ankle might be playing a role, but I'd bet just about anything it's almost all in his head at this point.


                                The Cuban stuff is getting blown up too big here too. Carlisle and the rest of the Mavs roster had nothing but good things to say about Green, and again, the Nets' staff will undoubtedly tell you that Green "got it" last year. Is Cuban's opinion of Green 4 years ago more valid than the entire Nets organization's opinion of him less than 1 year ago for some reason?

                                A Gerald Green fan who now finds himself rooting for the Suns.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X