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

If Ainge decides to blow Boston up, who (if anyone) do we want?

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

  • #31
    Re: If Ainge decides to blow Boston up, who (if anyone) do we want?

    Here's on option providing Danny get's back on the court. But, I'm not sure I would do it. I'd have to see Danny back playing and see how the team responds before making a decision I think. And this would help the Celts to continue a playoff push, which I don't like.

    If picks or other scrubs are needed so be it.

    Pacers get Rajon Rondo
    Celts get Tyreke Evans (RFA) and Francisco Garcia (team option)
    Kings get Danny Granger

    http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ahc65z7
    Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: If Ainge decides to blow Boston up, who (if anyone) do we want?

      Originally posted by croz24 View Post
      It could easily be argued that Green was at least as good as Granger prior to his health/heart issues. People can argue Granger's ppg average, but Green had to play 2nd and 3rd fiddle to Durant and Westbrook. Give Granger the 13fga Green was taking per game at OKC and you're looking at essentially the same player.
      Green has never ever been anywhere near a good NBA player like Granger. Dude is really bad and hurts his team when he is out there. His contract is beyond bad.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: If Ainge decides to blow Boston up, who (if anyone) do we want?

        Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
        Green has never ever been anywhere near a good NBA player like Granger. Dude is really bad and hurts his team when he is out there. His contract is beyond bad.
        When Green was playing for SEA/OKC, and thus prior to his health issues, your statement is far from accurate. The only difference even statistically between the two during those years is in Granger's ppg, due to the sheer volume of fg attempts as compared to Green.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: If Ainge decides to blow Boston up, who (if anyone) do we want?

          Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
          Green has never ever been anywhere near a good NBA player like Granger. Dude is really bad and hurts his team when he is out there. His contract is beyond bad.
          Not that I agree with Croz but aren't you the same "scout" that keeps saying that X player sucks and X player is good but must of the time you are wrong? "Greivis Vasquez is like Troy Murphy" lol

          Green is not as bad as you make him out to be, the guy previous to the hearth surgery was a pretty good player and one of the NBA up and coming players, yes he is not in the same area code Danny is but he is not garbage as you are making it sound either.
          Last edited by vnzla81; 01-31-2013, 08:32 PM.
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: If Ainge decides to blow Boston up, who (if anyone) do we want?

            Originally posted by croz24 View Post
            When Green was playing for SEA/OKC, and thus prior to his health issues, your statement is far from accurate. The only difference even statistically between the two during those years is in Granger's ppg, due to the sheer volume of fg attempts as compared to Green.
            And... their efficiency?
            "Danny Granger is one of the top players in the league. To move Danny, you better get a lot back." - Larry Bird

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: If Ainge decides to blow Boston up, who (if anyone) do we want?

              Originally posted by cgg View Post
              And... their efficiency?
              Not much disparity. Unless you consider a healthy Granger posting 42% shooting or worse each of the last 3 years efficient.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: If Ainge decides to blow Boston up, who (if anyone) do we want?

                Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                Not much disparity. Unless you consider a healthy Granger posting 42% shooting or worse each of the last 3 years efficient.
                You know that fg% doesn't take into account free throws and 3 pointers, right?
                "Danny Granger is one of the top players in the league. To move Danny, you better get a lot back." - Larry Bird

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: If Ainge decides to blow Boston up, who (if anyone) do we want?

                  Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                  Not much disparity. Unless you consider a healthy Granger posting 42% shooting or worse each of the last 3 years efficient.
                  He didn't shoot any worse than what PG is basically shooting this season. Not saying it's terribly efficient, but to make it seem like it's just so terribly inefficient, as you've made it seem quite often, is wrong.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: If Ainge decides to blow Boston up, who (if anyone) do we want?

                    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                    Not that I agree with Croz but aren't you the same "scout" that keeps saying that X player sucks and X player is good but must of the time you are wrong? "Greivis Vasquez is like Troy Murphy" lol

                    Green is not as bad as you make him out to be, the guy previous to the hearth surgery was a pretty good player and one of the NBA up and coming players, yes he is not in the same area code Danny is but he is not garbage as you are making it sound either.
                    typically vnz taking peoples words out of context and using hyperhole.

                    We can agree to disagree with Green all I know is I don't want him on my team and that's my opinion he is Monta Ellis esq in terms of being super overrated. You think Granger is bad defensively vzn? Watch Jeff Green play off bad defense

                    and stats back up that he hurts his team when he was on the court BTW. It isn't like I just made it up. I observed it with my eyes and then checked the advanced stats to make sure I wasn't just seeing things.

                    Grevis was a different story I hadn't watched him this year until Eric came back (i didnt make the comment about inflated #s until a week before Eric came back)and though he was probably just putting up better #s because Jack was gone.

                    about not watching players I havent watched TOR almost at all this year. I think I am going to go back and watch some Ed Davis tape the way they were talking about him it seems like he made a bigger improvement than Grevis. The Raps GM today said "Ed played his way into a trade" meaning he improved so much that he had value unlike the past 2 years so I want to see what all the fuss is about.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: If Ainge decides to blow Boston up, who (if anyone) do we want?

                      Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                      typically vnz taking peoples words out of context and using hyperhole.

                      We can agree to disagree with Green all I know is I don't want him on my team and that's my opinion he is Monta Ellis esq in terms of being super overrated. You think Granger is bad defensively vzn? Watch Jeff Green play off bad defense

                      and stats back up that he hurts his team when he was on the court BTW. It isn't like I just made it up. I observed it with my eyes and then checked the advanced stats to make sure I wasn't just seeing things.

                      Grevis was a different story I hadn't watched him this year until Eric came back (i didnt make the comment about inflated #s until a week before Eric came back)and though he was probably just putting up better #s because Jack was gone.

                      about not watching players I havent watched TOR almost at all this year. I think I am going to go back and watch some Ed Davis tape the way they were talking about him it seems like he made a bigger improvement than Grevis. The Raps GM today said "Ed played his way into a trade" meaning he improved so much that he had value unlike the past 2 years so I want to see what all the fuss is about.
                      Typical pacers4ever thinking he knows everything, yeah everybody is garbage until you say other wise lol
                      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: If Ainge decides to blow Boston up, who (if anyone) do we want?

                        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                        Anthem loves to ridicule people all the time
                        What's that? I haven't ridiculed any person on this board for years. I've taken shots at ideas, absolutely. It's a message board. That's what you do. But if you can point me to a personal attack I've made since the Rediculous thread, then I'll apologize for it right now.

                        Originally posted by vnzla
                        but when you call his bs out he doesn't own it.
                        Do you really think that's true? I know I've been wrong. When you post as much as I have over the past decade, I'm sure there's plenty of places where I'm really wrong. Heck, just this week I posted (after bumping an old thread) how wrong I was about JJ Redick. The whole idea behind the Monthly Prediction thread is that we can make public predictions and then go back and see how accurate they are. Join us! You're a smart guy; maybe you'll be the most accurate this month!

                        I absolutely invite you to "call my BS." That's what a message board is FOR. The best thing about the internet is that it never forgets. So go back and grab threads where I've said ridiculously wrong things, and I'll admit I was wrong. For the most part, though, that's not what you do. You don't tend to bring back old threads so we can see the arguments in context. Instead, you just toss off dismissive one-liners like "Well you think Granger's a better player than Melo" and then get puzzled why I'm not "owning it."

                        You would be SO much more effective in making your case if you'd get into the habit of quoting or posting a link.

                        Why bring those old threads back if is not to make fun of Croz24? and I get accused of been a troll....
                        In all honesty, I'd forgotten until I went back and read the thread who it was that was advocating for Jeff Green. I'd have posted the thread no matter what. Heck, I bumped a thread by a guy named "WetBob" for general consumption. Do I have a man-crush on him too?
                        This space for rent.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: If Ainge decides to blow Boston up, who (if anyone) do we want?

                          Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                          It could easily be argued that Green was at least as good as Granger prior to his health/heart issues. People can argue Granger's ppg average, but Green had to play 2nd and 3rd fiddle to Durant and Westbrook. Give Granger the 13fga Green was taking per game at OKC and you're looking at essentially the same player.
                          Come on dude. What exactly is Jeff Green good at?

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: If Ainge decides to blow Boston up, who (if anyone) do we want?

                            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                            Typical pacers4ever thinking he knows everything, yeah everybody is garbage until you say other wise lol
                            Dude, what the hell?

                            I know you have a problem with Anthem but since when did you have a problem with P4E? C'mon man he's a good guy who knows his stuff. He's not a homer not even close so that shouldn't be an issue for you either.

                            Seriously man you really want to rethink the way your headed. I'm saying that as a friend on here, don't be baited into fighting with everybody it's not worth it. He didn't say anything here that should have you this riled up.


                            Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: If Ainge decides to blow Boston up, who (if anyone) do we want?

                              I dont want a single player from Boston honestly. Maybe Sullinger to take Hansbrough's spot? Garnett and Pierce are too old and too expensive. Rondo is the one piece they will hold onto. Plus he will be out for a long time so trading for him now is a terrible idea.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: If Ainge decides to blow Boston up, who (if anyone) do we want?

                                Originally posted by cgg View Post
                                You know that fg% doesn't take into account free throws and 3 pointers, right?
                                It doesn't take into account free throws, no. Yes, it does take into account 3pters. It's an overall measure of effectiveness and the likelihood of a player's shot going in. Accounting for free throws and 3s the way you want to does nothing but prioritize volume shooting from the outside. Granger has been a solid 3 point shooter, which has helped in some of the "efficiency" measures you want to look at. But within the confines of the game, the last guy you'd want being your primary scorer is a player who can either only hit from the outside or get to the foul line. Such a poor fg% shows a lack of overall variety in a players offensive repertoire, and that's the case with Granger...

                                As for Green, of course I wouldn't want him now that he's had his heart issues. when Green was in SEA/OKC he was a near identical player to Granger in terms of style of play. Here's Granger and Green's first three years numbers (which is around the time that post was made), keeping in mind Green was the #3 option while Granger was the #1 option by year 3:

                                Granger
                                7.5ppg 4.9rpg 1.2apg 0.7spg 0.8bpg 46.2% 32.3% 77.7%
                                13.9ppg 4.6rpg 1.4apg 0.8spg 0.7bpg 45.9% 38.2% 80.3%
                                19.6ppg 4.9rpg 2.1apg 1.2spg 1.1bpg 44.6% 40.4% 87.8%

                                Green
                                10.5ppg 4.7rpg 1.5apg 0.6spg 0.6bpg 42.7% 27.6% 74.4%
                                16.5ppg 6.7rpg 2.0apg 1.0spg 0.4bpg 44.6% 38.9% 78.8%
                                15.1ppg 6.0rpg 1.0apg 1.3spg 0.9bpg 45.3% 33.3% 74.0%
                                Last edited by croz24; 02-01-2013, 12:30 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X