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

Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

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

  • #61
    Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

    Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
    If you are referring to the Banter in the trade thread....well I'm not sure I ever had a point that Granger is a better player this year than Turner. I just didn't like the trade. And much of the Banter over there was about why the trade was made, not the player we got back from the trade. You people are grasping for anything to throw in my face.

    I'm definitely not 100% sold on Turner due to the situation he came from, his numbers that everyone drooled over came on a terrible team, playing at a faster pace than this Pacer team will play at, and its pretty well documented that he isn't a great defensive player. So its a pretty solid point to question how good Turner will be on this team as the 6th man.

    Dude had a good game, but lets not fool ourselfs into thinking that line up is going to be successful against elite teams in the playoffs. They couldn't run any offense with it. Defensively it wasn't great but they were able to overcome it because it was against the Celtics. Maybe they get it together, but my point was only that line isn't going to cut it against the leagues best.

    Evan Turner was awesome on defense tonight. Honestly, the defense of a Turner/Stephenson/George lineup is going to be pretty damn good. The general consensus was that he was a solid defender, but the detractors of the trade didn't want to argue that, they just wanted to assume he was horrible.
    There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

      I thought it was pretty obvious that Turner was looking to control the play and look for his shot. But he did it so often that it seemed obvious Vogel was telling him to do it. When Lance gets iso happy and Vogel doesn't want it, he gets yanked. Turner was generating pretty good shots, but at the end of the fourth it seemed like he was tired and so Lance and PG closed for us.

      He was on fire today, it was a good day to test out how well he could handle the primary ballhandling duties for us.
      Time for a new sig.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

        Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
        He was hitting them. Any time Evan Turner shoots 8/14, you really can't criticize his shot taking. You obviously aren't used to his offensive style, but he scores a lot of his points off of the bounce. He is not a great catch and shoot scorer, but he is definitely capable of creating his own shot. To be honest, I'm not sure there's a better solo shot creator on the roster at this point. Maybe Lance?
        I'd say Evan is the better at creating his own shot. Lance tends to over dribble, while Evan is much smoother in doing so. PG is pretty damn good at it this season. Especially when his mid range game is going, which it seems he has gotten it back post ASG. Turner creates space for his mid range game while PG uses his size and length to hit those mid range shots so its hard to say who is better at creating the looks.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

          Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
          He was hitting them. Any time Evan Turner shoots 8/14, you really can't criticize his shot taking. You obviously aren't used to his offensive style, but he scores a lot of his points off of the bounce. He is not a great catch and shoot scorer, but he is definitely capable of creating his own shot. To be honest, I'm not sure there's a better solo shot creator on the roster at this point. Maybe Lance?
          WHA?? Now you moving the goal post on his shot taking. I was only referring the last 6-7 minutes of the game when he took over at point. He went 1-4, and took some terrible shots, and had the ball in his hand the entire possession.
          You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

            Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
            Evan Turner was awesome on defense tonight. Honestly, the defense of a Turner/Stephenson/George lineup is going to be pretty damn good. The general consensus was that he was a solid defender, but the detractors of the trade didn't want to argue that, they just wanted to assume he was horrible.
            With small ball play Paul,Lance,Evan and George Hill. Hibbert at center.
            {o,o}
            |)__)
            -"-"-

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

              Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
              WHA?? Now you moving the goal post on his shot taking. I was only referring the last 6-7 minutes of the game when he took over at point. He went 1-4, and took some terrible shots, and had the ball in his hand the entire possession.
              except he didn't take terrible shots. The one miss was right at the rim, he just left it short. The other two were 10 foot jumpers, which he had been sinking all game long.

              You are the only one who felt Turner was playing like this. That alone speaks volumes about what actually happened.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

                Originally posted by owl View Post
                With small ball play Paul,Lance,Evan and George Hill. Hibbert at center.
                I will go on record right now saying I absolutely HATE this idea. Unless we are in strange foul trouble, I see absolutely no reason to ever play this line up.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

                  Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                  WHA?? Now you moving the goal post on his shot taking. I was only referring the last 6-7 minutes of the game when he took over at point. He went 1-4, and took some terrible shots, and had the ball in his hand the entire possession.
                  The shots were not bad imho. He just came up a little short. Evan is a nice cure for the Pacer offense when it gets stagnant. He can create
                  his own shot and is aware enough to find an open man.
                  I am not sure we will ever see a more talented Pacer team.
                  {o,o}
                  |)__)
                  -"-"-

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

                    Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                    I'd say Evan is the better at creating his own shot. Lance tends to over dribble, while Evan is much smoother in doing so. PG is pretty damn good at it this season. Especially when his mid range game is going, which it seems he has gotten it back post ASG. Turner creates space for his mid range game while PG uses his size and length to hit those mid range shots so its hard to say who is better at creating the looks.
                    if there is a crack in Miamis defense outside of a lack of size it's that midrange jumper when the ball gets swung around after they do a hard double team. I think having Turner will prove really valuable come playoff time and he has already played against the Heat in the playoffs and proved that he can hit that shot over Lebron and Wade.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

                      Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                      I will go on record right now saying I absolutely HATE this idea. Unless we are in strange foul trouble, I see absolutely no reason to ever play this line up.

                      It's an interesting idea, but I think you have to put Mahinmi in that lineup, because its definitely geared toward a more up pace offense. I don't really like the idea of PG playing the 4 though, he just isn''t strong enough.
                      There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

                        Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                        WHA?? Now you moving the goal post on his shot taking. I was only referring the last 6-7 minutes of the game when he took over at point. He went 1-4, and took some terrible shots, and had the ball in his hand the entire possession.
                        1/4 is such a small sample size. If he makes one more shot, he's shooting 50%. That's a really dumb example. He took one forced shot, that I didn't think was good, that was it. If Granger shoots 1/4, you come in and compliment him on how he played elite defense, and we just need to give him time to get his legs underneath him.
                        There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

                          I like what Turner brings. Something unique in scoring.
                          {o,o}
                          |)__)
                          -"-"-

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

                            Attempting to guard three aggressive wings at the same time will be a challenge for anyone. I really like Turner running the point.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

                              Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
                              It's an interesting idea, but I think you have to put Mahinmi in that lineup, because its definitely geared toward a more up pace offense. I don't really like the idea of PG playing the 4 though, he just isn''t strong enough.
                              I never would use that lineup except in very unique situations. Maybe in a catch up situation or the opponent has a small PF like Miami.
                              {o,o}
                              |)__)
                              -"-"-

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

                                Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                                You are the only one who felt Turner was playing like this. That alone speaks volumes about what actually happened.
                                LOL! There are like 10 people actively posting in this thread right now and half of them are arguing with me. So i'm the only one of out like 5 people. Thats alot of volume alright.

                                Hey everyone is jumping off the bridge right now, that fact that you aren't just proves you are wrong!
                                You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X