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

Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

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

  • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

    Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
    How about Cleveland bench Kyrie? Or Washington bench Wall. Portland can bench Lillard while we are at it too. Let's bench our best up and coming player!!!! That's what winning teams do!!!! End sarcasm
    Makes zero sense. Those teams do not have a quality backup for those positions, unlike the Pacers. The discussion is between two qualified, yet different players, not one qualified player and thin air.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

      Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
      Lance passing up shots? Are you serious? Lance ALWAYS shoots with confidence. He thinks he will make every shot he takes. He plays with the confidence. People say he can't shoot, yet he made several shots vs NY when our backs were against the wall
      1. Our backs weren't against the wall in game 6 as we were winning the series, playing at home, in a close game. Yes the knicks were mounting a serious comeback, but that comeback was predicated on crazy hot 3 point shooting. Yes Lance had a great, game, but most of his points even in this game were of the fast break, open court variety.

      2. Yes Lance shoots with confidence--but that doesn't mean he's a good shooter. He played far less efficient basketball during the playoffs than he did during the regular season. As the 5th option, he only 40% from the field, 28% from 3, and 58% from the FT line (on only 39 FTA or 2/gm) in the playoffs. He also scored in single digits in 11 of his 19 playoff games, and scored above 10 points 5 times.

      You constantly bring up game 6 against NY but rarely talk about the rest of the playoffs.

      http://www.basketball-reference.com/.../gamelog/2013/


      I hate to provide stats and facts to "downplay" Lance as a player, because I love the way he stepped it up last year.
      Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 09-18-2013, 03:36 PM.

      Comment


      • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

        Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
        I view it as a problem of overlap. Granger is a very good player. But his skills are similar to PG and even Hill. Lance brings a whole different skill set that played a big role, imo, on why we were a better team last year than the year before.
        I think this IS biggest point of contention regarding last season with respect to the two different camps. The Lance camp honest to god thinks Lance played a BIG role in why last season proved more successful than the prior one.

        From my perspective, the major reasons are, in no particular order -
        - a fully recovered West (compared to the prior season)
        - a significantly improved Hibbert's who held his ground defensively
        - a significantly improved George who proved ready to step to the forefront
        - a better functioning offense

        I see Lance as a player who stepped up and provided very serviceable minutes filling in for Granger in the starting lineup, especially defensively. He was nothing close to approaching remarkable on offense, but was adequate at best. Late in the season and in the playoffs, I was very impressed by his offensive rebounding. Although we didn't run a lot, I think Lance did a great job contributing to the break opportunities we did have.

        Purely from a statistical standpoint, Lance's rebounding contributions are amazing. His scoring however, is less than average, certainly not overwhelming.

        I guess we could say that Paul George did an exceptional job filling in for Danny at SF. On the other hand, Lance did merely an adequate job filling in for Paul George at SG.

        Comment


        • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

          Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
          How about Cleveland bench Kyrie? Or Washington bench Wall. Portland can bench Lillard while we are at it too. Let's bench our best up and coming player!!!! That's what winning teams do!!!! End sarcasm
          Coming from somebody who has believed since he was drafted that lance was going to be a special player, I still have to ask you one thing. What???

          For him to be our best up and coming player, he has to at least be a borderline best player at his position. Hill is better at both guard spots, George is better at both wing spots, and granger is at least a better SF. Sure, he's young, but Paul George is much better than him and was taken in the same round.

          Lance is in no way nearly as good as john wall or kyrie. There are some good arguments for lance over granger, but lance being a budding superstar is not one of them. 1 game where he takes over to the tune of roughly 20 points does not qualify as proof.
          Time for a new sig.

          Comment


          • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

            I would trade Lance for Isaiah Thomas.
            Start Danny and Thomas, then have Hill at the combo guard. Thomas is young, clutch, a distributor, a pesky defender, efficient, and he makes others better.

            Lance is good, but some act like he is god in flesh.

            Comment


            • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

              Mattie thinks Danny's more talented than Lance lol. Classic mattie

              Comment


              • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                Mattie thinks Danny's more talented than Lance lol. Classic mattie
                It's a lot easier to not get worse than it is to get better. Even if lance is more talented, in no way is it a black and w white deal.
                Time for a new sig.

                Comment


                • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                  Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                  Are you planning in buying the DeLorean to switch broken down Danny with "old Danny"? some of you need to realize that "old Danny" is probably gone .... Forever.
                  Well, you never liked Old Danny in the first place, so even if we get that guy back, I don't imagine you'll like him.

                  But just to be clear... what would it take to prove Danny was "back?"
                  This space for rent.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                    Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                    Well, you never liked Old Danny in the first place, so even if we get that guy back, I don't imagine you'll like him.

                    But just to be clear... what would it take to prove Danny was "back?"
                    Winning against Monta Ellis.

                    10 More days till training camp!

                    Comment


                    • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                      Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                      But just to be clear... what would it take to prove Danny was "back?"
                      If he makes it to the new year averaging roughly 25 MPG and about 15 PPG, then I'll start to be a believer. But I'm not going to be sold until I see him give consistent production throughout the entire regular season and then continue it through an absolutely grueling playoff run against super elite competition.

                      It should be pretty easy to objectively quantify if he's near his old self. There's no hiding anything. Last year it was obvious that he had no business being out there.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                        Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                        Last year it was obvious that he had no business being out there.
                        And, if you recall, we had countless threads like this one last year, arguing about when and to what level Danny would return.
                        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                        Comment


                        • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                          Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                          And, if you recall, we had countless threads like this one last year, arguing about when and to what level Danny would return.
                          Indeed. And I'm sure that the Lance-Danny debate will continue all season if Danny is able to play. But the debate over who plays will be miniscule compared to the intense debate we'll have next summer when we have to decide if we're keeping Lance or Danny. If both players are worth keeping, then we'll simply be unable to keep both....if that makes sense.

                          The good news is this: Regardless of what happens with Lance and Danny, our team is going to absolutely shred teams this season. We're going to be way too much for most teams to handle and should have a great shot at winning in the high 50's and maybe even 60. If PG and Hibbert translate their playoff performances to an entire season, then they are easily one of the best duos in the entire league. The West/Hill/Lance/Scola supporting cast will be nasty. And whatever Danny can give us will be icing on the cake. This team is absolutely stacked right now.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                            Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                            And, if you recall, we had countless threads like this one last year, arguing about when and to what level Danny would return.
                            I should also say that since he only played five games last year, people were able to chalk up his lack of effectiveness to "rust" and "working his way back after an injury". Those sorts of excuses can work for five games, but you can't use them for an entire season. If Danny looks poor for the first two or so months, then I think even the most hopeful of people will admit to the writing on the wall.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                              Old Danny, Young Danny, New Danny, Throwback Danny, New School Danny, NBA Champion Danny - there, I went ahead and used all the upcoming Danny nicknames.
                              "What you are witnessing right now is the old Danny Granger of old!!" - Chris Denari 01/01/2014

                              Comment


                              • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                                With a healthy Granger for the entire year...Scola...Copeland...Watson...and improvements from our young guys...we will be a load for anyone to beat. If half this stuff pans out and we avoid injuries, this will rival the best team we've ever had. I could see Paul shining his first ring next summer...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X