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

Paul George thinks Pacers lost their title hopes after first losing their edge

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

  • #31
    Re: Paul George thinks Pacers lost their title hopes after first losing their edge

    Originally posted by beast23 View Post
    PG doesn't need to be taking one third of our team's shots. He does need to be boosting his shooting percentages and his points per shot by being aggressive and getting to the free throw line more. In other words, put more emphasis by scoring more points through improved offensive efficiency as opposed to merely taking more shots. If he is able to improve his efficiency, then heck yes, also take a few more shots as well.

    Game 6 against Miami was a perfect example of what he needs to work on. After his Game 5 second half explosion in which his jumper was on fire, he started Game 6 by jacking up a bunch of jumpers and I think he maybe had one aggressive take to the rack in the first half. He was better in the second half and scored a lot of points, but the game was long out of reach by that point. His offensive game is too jumper heavy and a lot of the jumpers are forced junk early in the shot clock.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Paul George thinks Pacers lost their title hopes after first losing their edge

      Originally posted by BillS View Post
      While I understand what you are saying, comparing what Paul does or has to do given the supporting cast on this team (even if they are at their very best) with what LBJ has to do given the supporting cast on HIS team last year, is both inflating the offense of our supporting cast and dissing the value of the Heat's.

      I think the make up of our team is going to be a lot more like that of LA (in terms of how the skill levels stack up against each other across the board, not in terms of talent at each position) than like Miami. Therefore, our team scoring leader should be more like Kobe than like LBJ.

      I definitely agree that if the shot selection stinks it is very likely a detriment - but I guess I choose not to assume that when he says more shots he means he'll just fling the ball up more often.
      The Heat's supporting cast wasn't that great last year when you factor in that Wade missed so many games. Anyway, I was just making sort of an abstract point that PG's shot attempts last year were just 0.6 fewer than the greatest player in the world.

      In Lebron's two MVP years in Cleveland (08-09 and 09-10) he attempted 19.9 and 20.1. That was on teams that weren't particularly stacked.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Paul George thinks Pacers lost their title hopes after first losing their edge

        Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
        Game 6 against Miami was a perfect example of what he needs to work on. After his Game 5 second half explosion in which his jumper was on fire, he started Game 6 by jacking up a bunch of jumpers and I think he maybe had one aggressive take to the rack in the first half. He was better in the second half and scored a lot of points, but the game was long out of reach by that point. His offensive game is too jumper heavy and a lot of the jumpers are forced junk early in the shot clock.
        This is true and I mostly agree, but does this team really have the offensive spacing for him to constantly drive the lane? I am not so sure with Hibbert, West, and to a lesser extent Stephenson's shooting touch that there was much room in the paint.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Paul George thinks Pacers lost their title hopes after first losing their edge

          I'm all for PG averaging 25-30 ppg. If he has to take more than 22 shots a game to do it though, I don't see how it helps the team.
          Last edited by Phree Refill; 07-31-2014, 05:12 PM.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Paul George thinks Pacers lost their title hopes after first losing their edge

            Meh, I'm glad he's willing to take on the responsibility of being the best player. He would get criticized on PD early in career for not having that "killer" instinct. I hope he becomes an assassin, regardless of how many shots he takes.

            Plus, I wonder what the question was he was answering?

            Plus, If he can get to the line 10 times a game, that would probably make more of a difference than the number of points or shots.

            To reiterate, I took this statement as PG taking leadership and responsibility, not trying to gun for stats, at all.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Paul George thinks Pacers lost their title hopes after first losing their edge

              You all can argue over number of shots all day long for all I care. What I care about is the fact that Paul agree's with me that our end of the season collapse wasn't just some locker room issue. We had a real and tangible collapse of basketball play on the court and I think he is spot on in saying that when teams stepped it up we fell off.

              I think there is a lot more to that and that actually kind of plays into what Bird was saying earlier when he said we weren't as good as we played early in the season.

              This is why I have the vast concerns about going back into next season with the same old cast even with the subtraction of Stephenson.

              This is why I think people were way overblowing his detrimental aspect on the team, I do think he drug others down around him but I DO NOT believe he was either the sole or even largest contributor to last seasons downfall.

              I honestly believe our team has been figured out, I think teams have scouted and conversely adapted to our defense and our offense was always a shamble to begin with and whenever we couldn't hit open shots we frankly just lost.

              So while I appreciate Paul being willing to take on more of a role, I also know that until we come up with a different defensive scheme and a competent offense that I feel we are not only going to not go back to the E.C. finals we may very well end up 3rd in our own division.


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

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Paul George thinks Pacers lost their title hopes after first losing their edge

                The biggest thing I see is if he's trying to take more shots...will his defense drop?
                I'm not perfect and neither are you.

                Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the esteem of Elohim,
                Ephisians 4: 32 And be kind towards one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as Elohim also forgave you in Messiah.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Paul George thinks Pacers lost their title hopes after first losing their edge

                  Originally posted by Peck View Post
                  You all can argue over number of shots all day long for all I care. What I care about is the fact that Paul agree's with me that our end of the season collapse wasn't just some locker room issue. We had a real and tangible collapse of basketball play on the court and I think he is spot on in saying that when teams stepped it up we fell off.

                  I think there is a lot more to that and that actually kind of plays into what Bird was saying earlier when he said we weren't as good as we played early in the season.

                  This is why I have the vast concerns about going back into next season with the same old cast even with the subtraction of Stephenson.

                  This is why I think people were way overblowing his detrimental aspect on the team, I do think he drug others down around him but I DO NOT believe he was either the sole or even largest contributor to last seasons downfall.

                  I honestly believe our team has been figured out, I think teams have scouted and conversely adapted to our defense and our offense was always a shamble to begin with and whenever we couldn't hit open shots we frankly just lost.

                  So while I appreciate Paul being willing to take on more of a role, I also know that until we come up with a different defensive scheme and a competent offense that I feel we are not only going to not go back to the E.C. finals we may very well end up 3rd in our own division.
                  I usually try not to quote so much, but I agree with Peck. If we are to move onwards and upward from here than I think there needs to not only be improvement from players but also a change in coaching philosophy. But I did like what Paul said in regards to the season collapse.
                  Danger Zone

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Paul George thinks Pacers lost their title hopes after first losing their edge

                    Originally posted by Peck View Post
                    You all can argue over number of shots all day long for all I care. What I care about is the fact that Paul agree's with me that our end of the season collapse wasn't just some locker room issue. We had a real and tangible collapse of basketball play on the court and I think he is spot on in saying that when teams stepped it up we fell off.

                    I think there is a lot more to that and that actually kind of plays into what Bird was saying earlier when he said we weren't as good as we played early in the season.

                    This is why I have the vast concerns about going back into next season with the same old cast even with the subtraction of Stephenson.

                    This is why I think people were way overblowing his detrimental aspect on the team, I do think he drug others down around him but I DO NOT believe he was either the sole or even largest contributor to last seasons downfall.

                    I honestly believe our team has been figured out, I think teams have scouted and conversely adapted to our defense and our offense was always a shamble to begin with and whenever we couldn't hit open shots we frankly just lost.

                    So while I appreciate Paul being willing to take on more of a role, I also know that until we come up with a different defensive scheme and a competent offense that I feel we are not only going to not go back to the E.C. finals we may very well end up 3rd in our own division.
                    Different defensive scheme? I don't think we can until we have different big men. We can make minor tweeks, but with the same coaching staff, the same players - especially inside, I don't think we can change the scheme. And I wouldn't change the scheme.

                    what change in scheme are you looking for?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Paul George thinks Pacers lost their title hopes after first losing their edge

                      Originally posted by Peck View Post
                      You all can argue over number of shots all day long for all I care. What I care about is the fact that Paul agree's with me that our end of the season collapse wasn't just some locker room issue. We had a real and tangible collapse of basketball play on the court and I think he is spot on in saying that when teams stepped it up we fell off.

                      I think there is a lot more to that and that actually kind of plays into what Bird was saying earlier when he said we weren't as good as we played early in the season.

                      This is why I have the vast concerns about going back into next season with the same old cast even with the subtraction of Stephenson.

                      This is why I think people were way overblowing his detrimental aspect on the team, I do think he drug others down around him but I DO NOT believe he was either the sole or even largest contributor to last seasons downfall.

                      I honestly believe our team has been figured out, I think teams have scouted and conversely adapted to our defense and our offense was always a shamble to begin with and whenever we couldn't hit open shots we frankly just lost.

                      So while I appreciate Paul being willing to take on more of a role, I also know that until we come up with a different defensive scheme and a competent offense that I feel we are not only going to not go back to the E.C. finals we may very well end up 3rd in our own division.

                      Yep, exactly. And without our 2nd best player, what's gonna happen when teams focus on shutting down PG on offense? Who is gonna take the ball and do something with it?

                      I like PG's attitude here, because realistically our only hope (beyond a major trade) is if he does turn into Kobe/Durant/Lebron/TMac. Then again, each of those guys had an undisputed 2nd fiddle other than TMac, and we saw how far that got him. Addition by addition is how you improve.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Paul George thinks Pacers lost their title hopes after first losing their edge

                        Originally posted by righteouscool View Post
                        This is true and I mostly agree, but does this team really have the offensive spacing for him to constantly drive the lane? I am not so sure with Hibbert, West, and to a lesser extent Stephenson's shooting touch that there was much room in the paint.
                        It's not just driving the lane, it's his movement without the ball. PG is lazy in his cuts and especially coming off screens (not that we set enough of them). But you make a good point. Hibbert can't just pitch a tent by the lane, waiting for someone to throw him the ball so he can shoot an off-balance hook with limited success. We need to move him out more, and have Hibbert set more screens.
                        Danger Zone

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Paul George thinks Pacers lost their title hopes after first losing their edge

                          I am disturbed that there were no chemistry issues according to Paul and the Pacers imploded that much. How is that even possible?

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Paul George thinks Pacers lost their title hopes after first losing their edge

                            why's Roy get treated like a redheaded stepchild for the "selfish dudes" thing but PG, the guy that shot under 40% after the break, gets praised for saying he's gonna start gunning? Thank you for chucking based PG.

                            we gonna pretend like PG's a better defender than Roy or something?

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Paul George thinks Pacers lost their title hopes after first losing their edge

                              Originally posted by presto123 View Post
                              I am disturbed that there were no chemistry issues according to Paul and the Pacers imploded that much. How is that even possible?
                              There has to be chemistry issues.... You don't fall apart that badly just because you lost your edge....

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Paul George thinks Pacers lost their title hopes after first losing their edge

                                Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
                                There has to be chemistry issues.... You don't fall apart that badly just because you lost your edge....
                                they didn't "fall apart," they came back to Earth. they were never that good in the first place.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X