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

Uncle Buck speaks....

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

  • #46
    Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

    Originally posted by Sookie View Post
    Our chemistry is off, and you don't think there's any possibility of it being because the team lost an integral part of their personality?

    It's much more likely to be because of PG's huge ego that he's never before had? I don't buy it.
    I just don't think that he was a huge integral part of our personality anymore. I like the guy and I'm glad that he's doing well in LA, but the Pacers went to the ECF's without him last year and also had their red hot start to this season while he recovering from injury. I get that guys were still able to talk to him on the bench and in the locker room, but the point remains that the team figured out how to thrive without him on the basketball court. Thus, it's just hard for me to buy that their recent poor play is because of his absence. If he had been a key contributor on last year's ECF's team as well as the first two months of the season, then I'd be much more willing to buy into the theory. But IMHO, it just seems like a fallacy of believing that correlation implies causation. It's way too easy of an excuse to cover up for some serious basketball flaws in the current group.

    Yes, I do think that the biggest problem on the team right now is PG's out of control ego on the basketball court. It's happened very very very fast, but it's a major issue. Last year he had a breakout season, a phenomenal playoff run, and traded barbs with Lebron James in the ECF's. All off-season he heard that he was the next big up and coming thing in the NBA. Then he signs a massive contract and starts the first two months of this season on an absolute tear, and you could without question say with a straight face that he was the MVP of the league through the new year. Everyone was starting to say that he was joining the ranks of Durant and Lebron. It clearly got to his ego. For the last three months, he has consistently played as if he has to take over games like Durant for the Pacers to win. His selfish decisions on the court imply that he feels he has to constantly live up to that new top 5 player status. The problem is that when he fails, he tries to "make up" for it next time down with an even worse shot. The end result is three straight months of hideous shooting percentages. It's created a snowball effect that has just killed our offense. Look at what happens every time we have the last shot of the quarter. The other four Pacers just stand still while PG bricks some garbage ISO. I'm sick of watching that, and it's time for the coach to show some guts and step in.

    I miss the PG who played within the confines of team basketball and let the game come to him after we worked through our bigs. I don't like this entitled PG who has taken a selfish command of the offense and constantly whines to officials. And by PG having an "ego", I don't mean that he's acting like a prick or anything like that. I'm just saying that his play on the basketball court is that of a player who values himself way too highly. Guy plays as if he's Kobe Bryant, but he just doesn't have the game to back it up right now. If fans are sick of it, then I can only imagine what his teammates must feel.

    I think that is the main tangible issue affecting our team right now. I don't think they are stinking up the joint because they are upset about their pal being traded. I don't doubt that it depressed them for a little bit, but I think our current problems are because our starters don't have chemistry right now. You could have five Grangers sitting on the bench and it still wouldn't change that.
    Last edited by Sollozzo; 03-25-2014, 01:05 PM.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

      David West from this morning's Star print edition. "We look like Sh--".

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

        I was listening to Kravitz on the ride in this morning talking to Cowturd. While he admits that the "off the court activities" have been a major distraction, he also brought up how PG has to guard the other team's best player every night. Hell, we have had PG on other other team's point late in games to ensure wins.

        So he expends energy on both ends and is beat. But what can you do? I just can't imagine a steady diet of Lance on Bron (short stretches sure) because he just doesn't bring that kind of intensisty (ok, he gets lazy). And we really don't have anyone on the bench who is a "defensive" specialist to give our leading scorer a blow on the other end.

        So, given that, he has to give it up on the offensive end. Let other people do things.

        Let we used to do...

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

          and Noah is quoted as saying "I'm hyped, I'm hyped right now. This is great win" Noah's hyped?

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
            I don't think you can bench PG. I do think you can reign him in with stuff like the don't split doubles anymore, or things like that.

            Regarding Lance, there is no doubt IMO that he has stopped passing as much as he once did and he is definitely throwing more home run passes than he was earlier. He isn't balancing as well with the easy passes (this is an issue he had as a younger guy).

            Regarding *****ing to the refs, it's definitely one of those "But I saw Dad do it!" things with Paul and Lance. And the guy who started it was David And 1 West.

            Not so much a "benching" a a demotion for PG, but just a few days of rest and some time to possibly attend to some of his off court affairs, that's why I suggested Butler start in his place and not Turner. Just some time to take a few days away and regroup
            Sittin on top of the world!

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

              Following our playoff series loss to Chicago, Larry Bird's idea was to create a team with 5 solid starters that could combat the "super teams" that have been created throughout the league. He signed D.West, and traded for G.Hill, and ever since then we were a team in every sense of the word. We HAD to play together and with great chemistry both offensively and defensively in order to compete with the Miami Heat's of the world. We created a team environment where no single player was above the team, and everyone had a vital role within that team concept. We took pride in being the more aggressive, more physical, and more active team on the floor.

              Fast forward a few years, a few all star berths, an all NBA berth, and a bunch of attention love and praise, from the press, and things are a little different. Now we are (viewed) as a team with a legitimate superstar (PG), and we have another player who has the talent and mind-set that promotes individuality on the court (Lance). I'm not pointing blame specifically at those two, but I feel that the status of both players is the biggest change we have seen in the team the past two years. When roles change so drastically, it can cause ripples in chemistry--which is what I think we've seen with this team recently.

              The biggest question is, can we get that chemistry back? Can we get that togetherness back? It seems the longer the season goes on, the more we see a break within the team. It wouldn't shock me to see some changes made this off season.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                Danny Granger gave up his prime years on a crap team (with Jim O'brien..I mean seriously..) because of the promise Larry Bird made to him. That they were going to build a great team around him.

                When the time came, we traded him because it benefited the organization.

                You can play the "it's business" card. And as a Pacer's fan, not a players fan, it's completely understandable. And the decision was a logical one on Larry's part. Doesn't make it right.

                But that's not how the guys are going to see it. What was Roy's comment "I don't want to talk about it.."

                Our young guys are going to play inconsistently, no matter how good they are. The vets are going to get annoyed with them, because vets get annoyed at young guys making mistakes. I think that's a normal part of the growth of the team. And I'm not even saying trading Danny is the issue. I'm just saying, that if there is a larger issue that isn't simply a valley in a long season..it's not PG or Lance having a big head. It's not Vogel suddenly being unable to coach. It's what happened to Danny. Do not mess with the chemistry on a championship level team. Period.

                Although I agree with most of your post , I do beg to differ on the bolded part. I dont think Danny "gave up" his prime years. Danny was under contract and really had no other choice but to play with the team he had. Also I believe that there were some questions Bird alluded to about Danny's off season work ethic. I will be the first one to admit that I didn't want Danny traded, and felt he wasn't given enough help or time (he seems to be doing pretty well with LA Clippers)
                Sittin on top of the world!

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                  Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                  Our chemistry is off, and you don't think there's any possibility of it being because the team lost an integral part of their personality?

                  It's much more likely to be because of PG's huge ego that he's never before had? I don't buy it.
                  nah, they were playing like this before Granger was ever traded. George has been shooting like crap since January. He's been averaging more turnovers since then as well. PG has been taking worse shots more than anything. He was shooting 47% in 2013. Come 2014, he's shooting 39.6%. Y'all wanna call Granger a chucker? PG is worse.

                  Lance went downhill with the start of the whole ASG snub. His last double digit assist game was the last game of January. Since then he has averaged 3.5apg. George Hill is averaging over 4apg in that time. Everyone on this board agrees that Lance is a better creator than Hill, yet he's not creating as well over the last two months. Lance had at least 1 assist in every game he played until the last 2 games against Chicago. Even in that 27 assist outburst from the Pacers, Lance didn't have a single one. Chris Copeland even had an assist in that game.

                  Roy has been bad too. But here's the thing, offensively we weren't looking at Roy to be a staple. So while Roy's shooting percentage has went from 50% to 43.8%, he's literally only hitting one shot less a game. He's also taking one shot less per game. He hasn't been rebounding as well, Lance, PG and West are all rebounding at a higher rate. So yes, Roy's numbers are down, but West's numbers skyrocketed offensively and both PG and Lance started taking down 2+ more boards a game.

                  I see a lot of, stop featuring Roy in the post and go to West more. In general I agree. West is the better offensive player. But he still needs his touches. While PG and Lance need less. Yeah, when PG shoots 48% again, I'm ok with him taking 17-18 shots a game. But when he's hitting 40%? Nope. Pass the ball.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                    I just have next to no sympathy for a guy like Hibbert pouting about losing Granger. Funny how Hibbert didn't seem too big on nostalgia, loyalty, and friendship when he was ready to board a plane to Portland so he could make all of that jack. Hey, I don't begrudge him for wanting to take the money and I would have done the exact same thing, but I'm not going to have any sympathy for him when he acts all mopey about losing Granger. Playing with Granger wasn't very high on his priority list when he was about to be a highly paid Trail Blazer. Guys like Hibbert, PG, West, and Hill need to understand that their obscenely high salaries are why the Pacers got into a position where they had to make some difficult choices.

                    ...
                    This! I'm STILL mad about Bird trading away Granger. I'm personally loyal to Granger for the time he's stuck it out with us. (And yes, he was getting paid well, but he could have requested a trade and just about any team would have taken him at that salary if he wanted to give up on Indiana.) But the rest of the team has no room to complain about it. Because of the salaries that they are not currently living up to, the Pacers had no feasible way to bring Danny back unless Danny was willing to take the vet minimum to stay. And I don't think that would be doing Danny any favors. If Danny was really that important, then the starters should have renegotiated their salaries to be able to keep him. If not, then he can't be the excuse.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                      Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                      Although I agree with most of your post , I do beg to differ on the bolded part. I dont think Danny "gave up" his prime years. Danny was under contract and really had no other choice but to play with the team he had. Also I believe that there were some questions Bird alluded to about Danny's off season work ethic. I will be the first one to admit that I didn't want Danny traded, and felt he wasn't given enough help or time (he seems to be doing pretty well with LA Clippers)
                      He could have asked for a trade and gotten the hell out of here.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                        People keep talking about Hibbert being ready to sign with Portland but I think all of you who are complaining about that are completely missing the boat.

                        Keep in mind that Donny was in charge when this happened, Donny has a history of telling players to go out and see what the market will bear, with him being a restricted free agent I think Donny told him to take the highest offer and he would match it. I don't think that Hibbert was trying to leave, The Pacers could have offered him more so this actually saves the Pacers money while Hibbert knows this was the market value.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                          He could have asked for a trade and gotten the hell out of here.
                          Or have been a locker room disruption to force a trade. Or have gone to the media. Or have faked injuries. The list goes on

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                            Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                            The wheels were already coming off with Granger here, you'd had to have been under a rock to not see that. Bird made a move to attempt to jumpstart the team again. It hasn't worked out, but it was one of the few moves at his disposal.
                            Bird clearly did not understand the problem. If he did he would have traded Lance. You would have to be blind to think the main problem isn't Lance. It was prior to the All-Star break, and still is. Yeah Paul hasn't been great, but the guys have bought into him being a great player. They like him and respect him. Lance they don't. I also think Paul has respect for the other players on the team as well, where Lance clearly does not. Paul's play clearly isn't helping, but it starts and ends with Lance.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                              Originally posted by Ragnar View Post
                              People keep talking about Hibbert being ready to sign with Portland but I think all of you who are complaining about that are completely missing the boat.

                              Keep in mind that Donny was in charge when this happened, Donny has a history of telling players to go out and see what the market will bear, with him being a restricted free agent I think Donny told him to take the highest offer and he would match it. I don't think that Hibbert was trying to leave, The Pacers could have offered him more so this actually saves the Pacers money while Hibbert knows this was the market value.
                              Yeah, people are focusing on the wrong thing, and completely ignoring that Hibbert never even signed Portland's offer sheet. It was just the typical let him test the market so we don't pay him $14 million when he would have only gotten $12 on the free market.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                                The more we talk about the shift of the offense to Lance and Paul the more I realize..it's HARD for wing tandems to lead an offense efficiently. Obviously you have the exceptions to the rule in Jordan/Pippen, Wade/James, and maybe a Durant/Westbrook, but even the last two tandems have struggled at different times. Obviously Lance and Paul do not match these other tandems in terms of talent and skill, so maybe the emergence of both players has thrown off the entire starting 5.

                                What makes it worse is that one sees the other jack up a horrible shot attempt without consequence, so they feel that they should be able to do the same thing. Earlier in the season we were able to get away with this because we were hot, but also because we had the talent to make concerted comebacks every other game. Well now, we aren't nearly as hot, and the long season has caused teammates to be disgruntled with these tough, contested shot attempts.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X