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

All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

    I'm so confused with last years team...Roy seemed genuine that he wouldn't object to Lance coming back in that video. The real rift may lie somewhere with George Hill and Lance.
    "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

    ----------------- Reggie Miller

    Comment


    • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
      BTW, he has not regressed. He is playing on a team that is simply a terrible fit. Your shooting doesn't drop off a cliff like that by simply regressing.
      Or Lance may have overachieved the last season or so shooting the ball. Time will tell, but it's possible that his percentages were a lot better outside the paint due to a combination of not having to shoot a high volume in those areas and getting better looks.

      It could go either way, but ultimately we're not going to know for a few years what Lance's normal outside shooting percentages are going to look like. Last year was really his first season in a role where he was a featured offensive player.

      Comment


      • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

        Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
        He shot better than Paul George from mid range last year. Yes, the prior year he didn't shoot as well and Paul did shoot better but Paul is supposed to be a superstar or close to it. All I am saying is that Lance is all-star caliber. Borderline all-star.

        Do you believe last year was an aberration and that if he returned to the same team he would not be able to play at that level? Do you base that on his 45 days in a dysfunctional situation? If not, how do you come to that conclusion?
        If Lance has to play with certain players within a certain system, then he's not an AS caliber player IMO. Again maybe its a matter of semantics, but I truly believe that's what seperates AS caliber players from good players.

        AS caliber players are the ones that make a system and the other players around them look/produce better, while good players are the ones that benefit from playing with All Stars. This is why there are so few AS caliber players in the league.

        Lastly, Lance's ability to shoot isn't going to change just because of where he is. You've watched CHA, teams are backing off of him daring him to shoot a jump shot. He's doing so, and is missing for the most part. Lance's shooting percentage may be higher if he were here (and that's in question given the injuries on our team this yr) but his actual ability to shoot would be the same.
        Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 12-19-2014, 07:22 PM.

        Comment


        • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

          Originally posted by immortality View Post
          That's exactly the point, Lance is only good because of the system he plays in. See Jeremy Lin when playing with D'Antoini. Individually he is not that good of a player. He would regress with the Pacers, because the same talent is not around him as before. If Lance is supposed to be an All-star he should be able to succeed anywhere. That is what divides an exceptional player from a mediocre one.
          No, that's not the point. First, I didn't say he was an all-star. I said borderline. Also, just because a player doesn't perform well everywhere and in every circumstance does NOT mean that player cannot be a great player on another team in a different situation. He's also still a fairly young player and people writing his obit. at the age of 24 need to give him some time.

          Comment


          • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

            I wouldnt say last yr was an abberation altogether. I think last year was a demonstration of what Lance can do to help a team win. I've said this a million times but he reminds me of Lamar Odom in that he's a multi faceted player that's great at filling in the blanks as long as he's not counted on to be a primary scorer. His lack of shooting ability makes me wonder if he'd be better off the bench, but it depends on the team. The fact that he had such a spike during his contract year only to fall off a cliff once he signed a new deal is a cause of concern, but I'd need a lot more time before I'd consider him playing well while playing for a contract.

            Comment


            • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

              Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
              If Lance has to play with certain players within a certain system, then he's not an AS caliber player IMO. Again maybe its a matter of semantics, but I truly believe that's what seperates AS caliber players from good players.

              AS caliber players are the ones that make a system and the other players around them look/produce better, while good players are the ones that benefit from playing with All Stars. This is why there are so few AS caliber players in the league.

              Lastly, Lance's ability to shoot isn't going to change just because of where he is. You've watched CHA, teams are backing off of him daring him to shoot a jump shot. He's doing so, and is missing for the most part. Lance's shooting percentage may be higher if he were here (and that's in question given the injuries on our team this yr) but his actual ability to shoot would be the same.
              He doesn't have to play with certain players within a certain system. The Hornets are a worst case situation for him. Also, I DEFINITELY don't believe players make the all-star team because people measure where they might excel vs. where they might not excel. Players make the all-star team after playing very well on their team...not that they needed THAT team to play well. Also, in the end it doesn't matter. If he's operating at a high level on his team, he's producing. It's not relevant if he couldn't buy a bucket on another team.

              Also, his shooting will indeed change depending on coaching and the system and the players. So, I pretty much disagree with your entire post.

              Comment


              • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                No, that's not the point. First, I didn't say he was an all-star. I said borderline. Also, just because a player doesn't perform well everywhere and in every circumstance does NOT mean that player cannot be a great player on another team in a different situation. He's also still a fairly young player and people writing his obit. at the age of 24 need to give him some time.
                That's what I'm saying, Lance is an okay player. You are saying Lance is a great player than contradict yourself, because great players can play great on any team regardless of circumstance. Monta Ellis was still a good player when he played with Warriors and a crappy Bucks team. Playing as the 2nd option in Mavs, only elevated his stats. Lance has regressed, he should at least perform as well as before. Since he hasn't it means his production was an outlier and he only looked good because of the system, just like Linsanity.

                Comment


                • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                  Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                  I wouldnt say last yr was an abberation altogether. I think last year was a demonstration of what Lance can do to help a team win. I've said this a million times but he reminds me of Lamar Odom in that he's a multi faceted player that's great at filling in the blanks as long as he's not counted on to be a primary scorer. His lack of shooting ability makes me wonder if he'd be better off the bench, but it depends on the team. The fact that he had such a spike during his contract year only to fall off a cliff once he signed a new deal is a cause of concern, but I'd need a lot more time before I'd consider him playing well while playing for a contract.
                  Do you honestly think the drop-off had anything more to do than playing in a different system and with different players? What other explanation do you have for it beyond simply thinking he's not that good?

                  Comment


                  • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                    Originally posted by immortality View Post
                    That's what I'm saying, Lance is an okay player. You are saying Lance is a great player than contradict yourself, because great players can play great on any team regardless of circumstance. Monta Ellis was still a good player when he played with Warriors and a crappy Bucks team. Playing as the 2nd option in Mavs, only elevated his stats. Lance has regressed, he should at least perform as well as before. Since he hasn't it means his production was an outlier and he only looked good because of the system, just like Linsanity.
                    He's a great player on the Pacers. He's not so great on the Hornets. Peace?

                    Comment


                    • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                      He doesn't have to play with certain players within a certain system. The Hornets are a worst case situation for him. Also, I DEFINITELY don't believe players make the all-star team because people measure where they might excel vs. where they might not excel. Players make the all-star team after playing very well on their team...not that they needed THAT team to play well. Also, in the end it doesn't matter. If he's operating at a high level on his team, he's producing. It's not relevant if he couldn't buy a bucket on another team.

                      Also, his shooting will indeed change depending on coaching and the system and the players. So, I pretty much disagree with your entire post.
                      Your entire argument has been that Lance doesn't look like an AS because of the teammates he plays with in CHA, you've even mentioned that you thought he looked like an AS while playing here BC he played with PG, you've been clamoring that if Lance played with shooters he would look better, and now you're saying he doesn't need a specific system or specific players around him in order to succeed? Got it.

                      I didn't say that's why players make the AS team, players make the AS team vc of their production. But the AS players in this league produce at a certain level. Specific systems may add or take away to that production, but not to a heightened extent to make a player the least efficient high usage player in the league for a 4th of the season.

                      And your ability to shoot doesn't change where you're playing. Lol if you can shoot. You can shoot.

                      But hey I get it man, but the contradictions are starting to add up a bit IMO

                      Comment


                      • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                        Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                        Do you honestly think the drop-off had anything more to do than playing in a different system and with different players? What other explanation do you have for it beyond simply thinking he's not that good?
                        That's it. I just dont think he's good enough to produce unless he's playing with other players that require a lot of focus from the defense, and being in CHA just exasperates this flaw.

                        That doesn't mean he's a scrub, or doesn't have talent. I just have a higher expectation for an AS caliber player I guess.

                        Comment


                        • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                          I think I'm done with this thread for now. Feel like my position has been clearly stated and been pretty accurate so far. I'll re-visit you guys in a month or so. (Or if he gets traded) Have fun boyos!


                          Comment


                          • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                            Something's going on.

                            Just looked at the Charlotte - Philly box score .............. I don't see Lance's name there.

                            He's INACTIVE tonite.

                            Stay tuned.

                            Comment


                            • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                              Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
                              Something's going on.

                              Just looked at the Charlotte - Philly box score .............. I don't see Lance's name there.

                              He's INACTIVE tonite.

                              Stay tuned.
                              he hurt his pelvis

                              Comment


                              • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                                ^^ Well, that's a unique one.

                                Not sure I buy it. Not questioning you, just the reported 'pelvis'.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X