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

The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

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

  • Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

    Originally posted by idioteque View Post
    I wish Plumlee the best, but it will be interesting to see what happens when he's well-scouted.
    I haven't watched any of his games....but is he getting Foster-like scoring opportunities ( put backs, offensive rebounding scoring, alley-oops...basically what you'd expect from an Offensively challenged Big Man that is super athletic )?

    or

    Is he scoring in the low post where Plays are being run for him and he's scoring on his own ( where he is actually displaying some offensive skill )?

    My guess is that he's getting his scoring off the former and not the latter.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    Comment


    • Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

      Originally posted by CableKC View Post
      Assets are always useful.

      A 1st could have been used to move Mahinmi or Copeland's contract to help move their contracts so that we can re-sign Lance.

      I still think that Copeland is a useful role Player, he will help us if we ever needed to go Small Ball while spreading the floor and I believe that he will find his 3pt stroke. But given that we have Scola and OJ/Solo at the Wings, if the Bird is able to work his magic and somehow trade him for an Expiring contract...I'd be okay with that.

      This doesn't mean that I don't think that Copeland is garbage and that he can't contribute....I just think that he's redundant now with Scola on the Team ( as the primary Backup PF ) and OJ/Solo on the roster. To me, he's the only Player that I think is expendable.
      Right, I agree with all that. Just saying while I may not necessarily agree with it I can see the logic behind us not valuing a late 1st rounder the same way most teams would given our unique circumstances. For example, say we get the 24th pick, I think if we got offered pick 31 for it straight up we'd do it on draft night.

      Comment


      • Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

        Originally posted by CableKC View Post
        I haven't watched any of his games....but is he getting Foster-like scoring opportunities ( put backs, offensive rebounding scoring, alley-oops...basically what you'd expect from an Offensively challenged Big Man that is super athletic )?

        or

        Is he scoring in the low post where Plays are being run for him and he's scoring on his own ( where he is actually displaying some offensive skill )?

        My guess is that he's getting his scoring off the former and not the latter.
        He is doing everything, actually. Alley-oops, put backs, hooks, drives, you name it. Heck, he even hit a 18 foot baseline jumper in his first game. I have been particularly impressed with his running right hand hook. He didn't have that move in Summer League and it looks really smooth.
        Originally posted by IrishPacer
        Empty vessels make the most noise.

        Comment


        • Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

          Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
          For example, say we get the 24th pick, I think if we got offered pick 31 for it straight up we'd do it on draft night.
          I also think that we'd do it.
          Originally posted by IrishPacer
          Empty vessels make the most noise.

          Comment


          • Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
            Assets are always useful.

            A 1st could have been used to move Mahinmi or Copeland's contract to help move their contracts so that we can re-sign Lance.

            I still think that Copeland is a useful role Player, he will help us if we ever needed to go Small Ball while spreading the floor and I believe that he will find his 3pt stroke. But given that we have Scola and OJ/Solo at the Wings, if the Bird is able to work his magic and somehow trade him for an Expiring contract...I'd be okay with that.

            This doesn't mean that I don't think that Copeland is garbage and that he can't contribute....I just think that he's redundant now with Scola on the Team ( as the primary Backup PF ) and OJ/Solo on the roster. To me, he's the only Player that I think is expendable.
            If need be I don't think it'll be too hard to move Copeland without a first round pick. He has a skill that people want and he's only gonna have one year at $3 million left. I can think of a few teams where he would be a great fit. Mahinmi we need at backup center and I don't see him getting traded.

            Comment


            • Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

              Haralabos Voulgaris tweeted this today.









              It's interesting, I've never seen someone that down on Scola. I was excited when we got him which probably colored my view on how much we gave up. We won't have a verdict until we see how he plays for a full season, how Plumlee turns out and what happens with the Pacers first round pick.
              Last edited by King Tuts Tomb; 11-02-2013, 05:48 AM.

              Comment


              • Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

                Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
                Haralabos Voulgaris tweeted this today.
                So the Pacers gave up a first rounder (protected) + Plumlee for Scola? Not gonna win ‘ships making trades like that.
                — Haralabos Voulgaris (@haralabob) November 2, 2013

                @WHester So taking on a bottom 5 PF (and thats being nice) in Scola gives you depth how?
                — Haralabos Voulgaris (@haralabob) November 2, 2013




                It's interesting, I've never seen someone that down on Scola. I was excited when we got him which probably colored my view on how much we gave up. We won't have a verdict until we see how he plays for a full season, how Plumlee turns out and what happens with the Pacers first round pick.
                We also dumped Gerald Green's contract.

                Comment


                • Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

                  What Phoenix does with our first-round pick is irrelevant from our perspective. Whether they draft an All-Star or a bust with the pick doesn't change its value. To say otherwise is illogical. Think about it this way: A dollar is worth a dollar. If somebody happens to use that dollar to buy a $100,000,000 winning Powerball ticket, then kudos to them, but that doesn't change the fact that a dollar is worth a dollar, nothing more, nothing less.

                  As for this Voulgaris clown, the fact that he not only calls Scola a bottom-five power forward, but then plays it off as if he's being overly fair, pretty much confirms he's a troll.

                  Comment


                  • Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

                    Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                    What Phoenix does with our first-round pick is irrelevant from our perspective. Whether they draft an All-Star or a bust with the pick doesn't change its value. To say otherwise is illogical. Think about it this way: A dollar is worth a dollar. If somebody happens to use that dollar to buy a $100,000,000 winning Powerball ticket, then kudos to them, but that doesn't change the fact that a dollar is worth a dollar, nothing more, nothing less.
                    A dollar is a bad analogy because it's worth the same amount today, tomorrow and next year. The value of that draft pick fluctuates. If Paul George breaks his leg, Scola is a bust and we win 45 games and lose a mid first round pick then we didn't get value for that pick. If we win 65 games and it's the 30th pick in the draft then it's not so bad.

                    It's not about who they draft, it's a question of did we get proper value out of our assets.

                    As for this Voulgaris clown, the fact that he not only calls Scola a bottom-five power forward, but then plays it off as if he's being overly fair, pretty much confirms he's a troll.
                    Well he's also a clown that makes millions of dollar betting on basketball through advanced statistics.

                    Comment


                    • Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

                      Maybe so, but he's a clown nonetheless.

                      Edit: After researching this circus clown troll to confirm that he is, indeed, a circus clown troll (confirmed), I've also realized that his brilliance, at least when it comes to comprehending the game of basketball, is quite overblown.

                      First of all, his original fortune was made by exploiting a loophole in the betting system, namely the distribution of points per each half. Fair enough, but that's not indicative of an NBA guru. Once that exploit was fixed, his skills became (shockingly) mediocre. Realizing his own mediocrity, and in a state of desperation, he went out and found a zit-faced math prodigy to do the heavy lifting for him; someone to make sense of (correctly interpret) the data, devise money-making methods off of it, etc., and then giving him a cut off the winnings for his troubles.

                      I'll give the guy credit for stooping to dubious ethics to satisfy his money lust, but as far as being some sort of a guru when it comes to NBA analysis and predictions, you can color me completely and utterly unimpressed.

                      I'll take Larry Bird and company's proven track record of making the right moves to build a successful NBA team over anything this low-rent John Hollinger has to say.
                      Last edited by Lance George; 11-02-2013, 08:56 AM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

                        Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                        Maybe so, but he's a clown nonetheless.

                        Edit: After researching this circus clown troll to confirm that he is, indeed, a circus clown troll (confirmed), I've also realized that his brilliance, at least when it comes to comprehending the game of basketball, is quite overblown.

                        First of all, his original fortune was made by exploiting a loophole in the betting system, namely the distribution of points per each half. Fair enough, but that's not indicative of an NBA guru. Once that exploit was fixed, his skills became (shockingly) mediocre. Realizing his own mediocrity, and in a state of desperation, he went out and found a zit-faced math prodigy to do the heavy lifting for him; someone to make sense of (correctly interpret) the data, devise money-making methods off of it, etc., and then giving him a cut off the winnings for his troubles.

                        I'll give the guy credit for stooping to dubious ethics to satisfy his money lust, but as far as being some sort of a guru when it comes to NBA analysis and predictions, you can color me completely and utterly unimpressed.

                        I'll take Larry Bird and company's proven track record of making the right moves to build a successful NBA team over anything this low-rent John Hollinger has to say.
                        Sports bettors make money by exploiting the blind spots and misconceptions of the casino and the public. That's like saying a blackjack player is exploiting a loophole by staying on 17.

                        I don't really have any interest in going back and forth on Voulgaris so you can knock on him all you want, I don't have a personal stake in the guy. But he is a really interesting twitter follow and a fun character with a lot of contrarian views on basketball that I love to hear even when I disagree with it. Anyone interested should check out this interview with TrueHoop where he breaks down how he collects data and how he interprets it (edit: forgot to mention this was from 08 so it's before a lot of the VU cameras and recent trends in analytics). He's also been on Bill Simmons podcast a few times.

                        I'm still happy with the Scola trade at this point but I don't feel threatened if someone has a view to the contrary.

                        Edit: Also, what's with the sig? Unnecessarily antagonistic in my opinion.
                        Last edited by King Tuts Tomb; 11-02-2013, 09:32 AM.

                        Comment


                        • Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

                          Just so you know, rookie Rudy Gobert of the Utah Jazz was not happy with his play last night.

                          https://twitter.com/rudygobert15/sta...04217122115584

                          Comment


                          • Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

                            Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
                            Haralabos Voulgaris tweeted this today.









                            It's interesting, I've never seen someone that down on Scola. I was excited when we got him which probably colored my view on how much we gave up. We won't have a verdict until we see how he plays for a full season, how Plumlee turns out and what happens with the Pacers first round pick.
                            He loves to use numbers so maybe Scola doesn't have good stats on whatever s*** he is using, this guy is the same clown that made fun of me in the beginning of the playoffs for saying that Memphis needed Rudy Gay, he told me that Prince was much better lol, of course Memphis got destroyed and he did not answer my tweets when he was proven wrong haha.
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

                              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                              He loves to use numbers so maybe Scola doesn't have good stats on whatever s*** he is using, this guy is the same clown that made fun of me in the beginning of the playoffs for saying that Memphis needed Rudy Gay, he told me that Prince was much better lol, of course Memphis got destroyed and he did not answer my tweets when he was proven wrong haha.
                              Got destroyed? They made it to the Western Conference Finals.

                              And I'd rather have Prince for 2 years, $14.9 million than Rudy Gay at 2 years, $37.2 million.

                              Comment


                              • Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

                                Originally posted by shags View Post
                                Got destroyed? They made it to the Western Conference Finals.

                                And I'd rather have Prince for 2 years, $14.9 million than Rudy Gay at 2 years, $37.2 million.
                                Sure they made it to the Western conference finals but how many games they won? and sure Rudy Gay makes a lot of money but there is not way in hell I'm going to say that I rather have old can't do nothing Prince over Rudy Gay hell no.

                                Memphis has Gay instead of old Prince and they are in the finals, I mean Prince was so great that he was replaced many times by Pondexter.
                                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X