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

    Originally posted by BenR1990 View Post
    Gues Kemba hasn't been on the receiving end of one of these yet:
    This is exactly what I'm talking about. You go to all the trouble to find this video as is this is what Lance did for us. Every player in the league has made a bone headed play like that at some time. Hell West did it in the Pacers last game with a lazy don't see the defense pass. Why don't you post the great passes he has made that Kemba might get to be on the receiving end of. Kemba probably has been on the receiving end of a pass like that already but he probably understands their is two sides to every coin.

    Comment


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

      Nobody else contributing? Then entire starting 5 scored in double figures.


      Comment


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

        Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
        Show Lance looking confused, and then have his father come up with the hilairous "We are betting on you son". We know, without question, you will make 100 million in three years. 17 million is chump change
        I am amazed how much some people know about what went on behind the scenes when they actually have no clue. That includes myself, I am not going to pretend I do. But this is why I put very little stock into some of the posts on this forum. The way we go from good to bad after one game is almost comical. If the Pacers start sinking like the Titantic after we get everyone back I wonder if anyone will maybe think that West, Hill and Hibbert are not as valuable as some think. Perfect year to find out with Paul being sidelined. We seen what our bench could do without them now lets see what happens when they are all back. Time will tell.

        Comment


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

          Originally posted by doctor-h View Post
          I am amazed how much some people know about what went on behind the scenes when they actually have no clue. That includes myself, I am not going to pretend I do. But this is why I put very little stock into some of the posts on this forum. The way we go from good to bad after one game is almost comical. If the Pacers start sinking like the Titantic after we get everyone back I wonder if anyone will maybe think that West, Hill and Hibbert are not as valuable as some think. Perfect year to find out with Paul being sidelined. We seen what our bench could do without them now lets see what happens when they are all back. Time will tell.
          Just two weeks ago in this very thread you claimed the Pacers refused to give Lance a shorter contract, and that Lance's teammates never talked to Lance privately before Roy went public.

          I remember, because I gave you sources showing the opposite and you steadily refused to cite anything to back up your claims. Which sounds awfully fimiiliar, seeing as how you've not given any names of people who have claimed Lance's teammates hate him, and that Clifford said he didn't like Lance's personality.
          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

          Comment


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

            Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
            In fairness to Stephenson, here's Kemba on Lance...

            “We need his energy. He always makes the right plays. We’ve got to try our best to keep him like that – get him the ball in transition. We do that and it will be great the rest of the season.”

            Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/201...#storylink=cpy
            I think Kemba meant to say this in green.

            Comment


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

              Originally posted by doctor-h View Post
              I am amazed how much some people know about what went on behind the scenes when they actually have no clue. That includes myself, I am not going to pretend I do. But this is why I put very little stock into some of the posts on this forum. The way we go from good to bad after one game is almost comical. If the Pacers start sinking like the Titantic after we get everyone back I wonder if anyone will maybe think that West, Hill and Hibbert are not as valuable as some think. Perfect year to find out with Paul being sidelined. We seen what our bench could do without them now lets see what happens when they are all back. Time will tell.
              I agree that people change with the wind too often on here. Which is why I can only imagine what the overwhelming reaction would be on this board if we had signed a player for 9 million a year and he played like Lance has so far.


              Comment


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

                The contract made no sense anyway you slice it. If it was Player Option, it absolutely made sense from a business standpoint. New TV Contract, still in prime. Team option is the opposite of betting on yourself.

                Charlotte probably will be better, they seem more talented than this to me.

                Lance is the same Lance he's been, just a less managed, less accommodated one so far. Sucks, cuz I think he was continuing to get better here. I don't think he'll do that in Charlotte. And losing sure won't help.

                Comment


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

                  Originally posted by doctor-h View Post
                  I am amazed how much some people know about what went on behind the scenes when they actually have no clue. That includes myself, I am not going to pretend I do. But this is why I put very little stock into some of the posts on this forum. The way we go from good to bad after one game is almost comical. If the Pacers start sinking like the Titantic after we get everyone back I wonder if anyone will maybe think that West, Hill and Hibbert are not as valuable as some think. Perfect year to find out with Paul being sidelined. We seen what our bench could do without them now lets see what happens when they are all back. Time will tell.
                  Hill and West completely changed the team in 2011-12. They transformed us from the 8 seed to a team that was one of the best in the EC. Keep in mind that PG was not superstar PG in 2011-12. West will only lose importance when age finally catches up to him. Hibbert has had his funks, but the team has been at its best when he's playing his best. His 2013 playoff performance was elite.

                  Lance did offer an awesome dynamic to the team in the first half of last season when we still had a nice balance. I wanted him back badly because we saw what the team was capable of when they worked together. We will never know what happened behind the scenes last year, but I don't think you have to be a wise sage to come up with the relatively easy conclusion that Lance made an absolutely horrible decision to not take the Pacers' offer. People who were huge Lance fans say that, and people who weren't his biggest fans also say that. It's pretty straightforward and easy to see unless things drastically change.

                  Comment


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

                    Originally posted by TinManJoshua View Post
                    I'll admit that I liked Lance while he was here, and doing good things. I didn't think he was quite an All-Star last year, and his reaction to it kind of soured me on him. But I still wished him well, and thought if he could get out of his own way he could really be something.

                    I didn't take up being a Lance "hater" until the reaction to him leaving came out. I thought the lamentations and gnashing of teeth were a little over the top. Then came the finger-pointing about why we couldn't keep him, and everyone who was fine with him not re-signing were haters with agendas who were gonna be so sorry once he blows up in Charlotte and is starting multiple All-Star games. I mean, come on. Lance can be better than what he has been so far, but that is totally dependent on him actually trying to make the right basketball play, not a highlight. I do hate the way he acts like a crybaby on the court when he doesn't get the ball. I recognize his talent(though I think there a plenty here that have overrated him in that aspect even), but I think his baggage is too much.

                    Like it or not, he's playing like a "cab driver" currently, and if he gets out of that rut good for him. The thing that starts to wear on me after awhile is the "just you wait" posts. And this one you made. Talking about everything wrong with the Hornets except Lance, for god knows what reason, unless you think that Lance can continue to play the way he has and everything will be fine so long as everyone else gets much much better.

                    This thread is about Lance. He's not playing well. This thread isn't about the rest of the Hornets. So we don't have to talk about the Hornets as a whole while they struggle. I don't see people putting the losses on Lance's shoulders, I see them making comments about his direct play.

                    So yeah, I'll admit I was wrong if he suddenly becomes an All-Star. I've admitted when I was wrong before, without hesitation. But this is the part of the thread where those who are asking "Will you admit when you're wrong" to be making their own admissions, and all I see are excuses and squinting into the All-Star horizon...
                    I have never said Lance was not part of the problem because if you are a player who is not playing as well as you are capable of you are part of the problem. When and even if that TEAM starts playing better and start to form some cohesion together Lance will play better and he probably be a factor in the reason why. No way Lance will be an all star this year why is that the measuring stick? I do not like his antics sometimes but I like his ability and believe under the correct circumstances he can be very good. I think that could have been here and I don't like the way the Pacers handled it. Now we are stuck with 4 years of Miles disappearing act and the possibility that Stuckey will not even be with us after this season. Some people just need to give the kid a break what did he actually do to us but grow some as a person and a player in the time he was here. He played hard and gave us some very good moments. He chose to take another offer who are we to say he is a fool.

                    Comment


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

                      Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                      Hill and West completely changed the team in 2011-12. They transformed us from the 8 seed to a team that was one of the best in the EC. Keep in mind that PG was not superstar PG in 2011-12. West will only lose importance when age finally catches up to him. Hibbert has had his funks, but the team has been at its best when he's playing his best. His 2013 playoff performance was elite.

                      Lance did offer an awesome dynamic to the team in the first half of last season when we still had a nice balance. I wanted him back badly because we saw what the team was capable of when they worked together. We will never know what happened behind the scenes last year, but I don't think you have to be a wise sage to come up with the relatively easy conclusion that Lance made an absolutely horrible decision to not take the Pacers' offer. People who were huge Lance fans say that, and people who weren't his biggest fans also say that. It's pretty straightforward and easy to see unless things drastically change.
                      Hill and West did in no way do that alone and besides what does 2011-12 have to do with anything. West is nowhere near the player he was them. I'm just saying when they come back to this group and after we have seen this group show that they can contribute the way they have, if the team does not improve then who do we blame. If they are the players some think they are there should be marked improvement if not then maybe they aren't who we thought they were. As far as whether Lance made a foolish decision it is all subjective. Nobody will know until that contract is up. He may have but that is a long way off.

                      Comment


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

                        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                        Almost half of Lance's made FGs, were assisted. Which supports the argument that Lance isn't used as a closer (who I look at as someone you put the ball in their hands at the end of the game), but he's more used as a catch-and-shoot player in those situations. For example, there's an assist for Kemba's clutch shooting only about 1/4th of the time.
                        Question for you, so do closers always have to create their own shot? Kemba had a very low assist percentage on all his shots (.323) not just when closing. As a high volume shooter, this indicates that he's a ball hog, not a closer. Also, a large percentage of his assisted shots were 3 pointers; however, he shot a terrible percentage from 3, which is one of the reasons his assisted shot percentage is so low. Cause he was missing the assisted shots that would count as assisted. This would indicate (to me at least) that Kemba is not a closer, just a ball hog.
                        Danger Zone

                        Comment


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

                          Originally posted by Rogco View Post
                          Question for you, so do closers always have to create their own shot? Kemba had a very low assist percentage on all his shots (.323) not just when closing. As a high volume shooter, this indicates that he's a ball hog, not a closer. Also, a large percentage of his assisted shots were 3 pointers; however, he shot a terrible percentage from 3, which is one of the reasons his assisted shot percentage is so low. Cause he was missing the assisted shots that would count as assisted. This would indicate (to me at least) that Kemba is not a closer, just a ball hog.
                          No, could be a closer like Reggie who needs to come off a screen for a catch and shoot.

                          But we never saw Lance in that type of role, and we shouldn't ever see him in that type of role because he's not that type of player. Paul and DWest were the Pacers closers last year.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


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

                            Originally posted by BenR1990 View Post
                            Gues Kemba hasn't been on the receiving end of one of these yet:
                            For me... That was the moment I fell out of love with Lance... The importance of that play, the inability to make the simplest of plays... The momentum that it killed... That play would be my summary of Lance...
                            Last edited by bballpacen; 12-04-2014, 01:21 PM.
                            Abba Zaba, your my only friend.

                            Comment


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

                              Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                              I agree that people change with the wind too often on here. Which is why I can only imagine what the overwhelming reaction would be on this board if we had signed a player for 9 million a year and he played like Lance has so far.
                              Do you think Lance is the Hornets problem? So fun on vs off court stats for the 5 Charlotte players with the most minutes: Since it screwed up my formatting, the numbers are in the following order: Offense Rtg Reb% ast% Eff. FG%

                              Kemba -4.9 -1.1 +3.2 -.006
                              Lance +3.3 +6.4 -1.4 -.005
                              Jefferson -16.1 -6.7 +0.8 -.043
                              Zeller +13.8 +9.5 +4.3 +.084
                              Williams -10.9 -5.8 -5.0 -.0641

                              Charlotte in general this year has played better with Lance (and especially Zeller) and Jefferson and Williams have been an albatross. Obviously like with all stats please take with a grain of salt. Also note that these numbers are comparison numbers, so take offensive Rtg. This number compares Charlotte's offensive Rtg with the opponents offensive Rtg with the player on the court, and compares it to the number when the player is not on the court. So for Kemba, this mean's the disparity of Charlottes offensive rtg compared with the opponents offensive rtg is greater when he's on the court (ie, they do worse when Kemba is playing) hence the negative number.
                              Danger Zone

                              Comment


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

                                I don't think Lance is the Hornets only problem no. I feel like I've been abundantly clear about that in this thread honestly.


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X