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

The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

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

  • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

    I have no problem with foul shooting being part of the game. I have a problem when foul shooting is forced on the game to the point where it's the only thing that matters, and renders all of the other "fundamental skills" completely irrelevant.

    For instance, Poppovich was intentionally fouling with a double digit lead in the 3rd quarter at houston simply to keep james harden from touching the ball. Thats not good tactics, that's just a gimmick to junk up the game.
    Last edited by Kstat; 04-25-2015, 03:55 PM.

    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

    Comment


    • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

      Originally posted by Kstat View Post
      The game lasted just fine for 60 years with bad foul shooters because people weren't being hacked away from the ball.

      The simple solution is to actually make it part of the game, like it used to be, and not a gimmick. If someone doesn't have the ball then don't intentionally grab him. It isn't that hard to understand.
      Are we only talking away from the ball? I thought they fixed that with 2 shots plus possession.

      If I guy has the ball, then he has to be something other than a liability at the FT line.
      BillS

      A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
      Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

      Comment


      • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

        Originally posted by BillS View Post
        Are we only talking away from the ball? I thought they fixed that with 2 shots plus possession.

        If I guy has the ball, then he has to be something other than a liability at the FT line.
        Except no one has ever argued against that. And the 2 shots plus possesion rule only applies the last 2 minutes of the 4th quarter.

        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

        Comment


        • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

          Originally posted by Kstat View Post
          Except no one has ever argued against that. And the 2 shots plus possesion rule only applies the last 2 minutes of the 4th quarter.
          If that's what we're arguing about, I have no problem with extending it. However, if all fouls off the ball end up giving 2 + possession, see my previous comment about guys flinging themselves into defenders ad nauseum.

          If you create an "intentional" foul situation, you're giving another reason for the refs to stop the game for 5 minutes at a time to review tape to make sure it was intentional.
          BillS

          A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
          Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

          Comment


          • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

            Originally posted by BillS View Post
            Are we only talking away from the ball? I thought they fixed that with 2 shots plus possession.

            If I guy has the ball, then he has to be something other than a liability at the FT line.
            If they touch the ball, its fair game to foul if you want imo...it's the running off the ball to grab DeAndre Jordan that's annoying. An intentional off the ball foul over the limit should be 1 shot and the ball, simple solution. It would be just like the inbound foul situation if you foul before the ball is thrown in. Could also make it where the team has the option of 1 shot and ball or 2 shots if they happen to intentionally foul a good free throw shooter for whatever reason.
            "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: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

              Players are not going to flop themselves out of a play away from the ball trying to draw fouls on offense. That will get you benched fast.

              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

              Comment


              • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                Players are not going to flop themselves out of a play away from the ball trying to draw fouls on offense. That will get you benched fast.
                Unless it gets you two shots and the ball.
                BillS

                A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                Comment


                • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                  Originally posted by Cactus Jax View Post
                  If they touch the ball, its fair game to foul if you want imo...it's the running off the ball to grab DeAndre Jordan that's annoying. An intentional off the ball foul over the limit should be 1 shot and the ball, simple solution. It would be just like the inbound foul situation if you foul before the ball is thrown in. Could also make it where the team has the option of 1 shot and ball or 2 shots if they happen to intentionally foul a good free throw shooter for whatever reason.
                  When you stick the over the limit thing in there that helps. 1 shot instead of 2 and the ball also helps.

                  I just think teams should be able to take advantage of a weakness in the opponent's game rather than trying to rule out weaknesses.
                  BillS

                  A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                  Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                  Comment


                  • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                    If I had a nickel for everytime I heard the city Secaucus NJ on an NBA broadcast.......

                    Comment


                    • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                      Originally posted by mattie View Post
                      Ok. Why does Bill Simmons think the Raptors players are so good?

                      I read Simmons trade value every year. Obviously it's a guess to try to figure out everyone's trade value, and trade value doesn't necessarily mean actual ability, so it's always a fun column. I think he normally does a pretty good job with it. I mean a guy like Gobert will be high on the list even tho he isn't a polished NBA player yet. His potential alone has his value thru the roof clearly.

                      When you do a column like that, you won't run into fans getting pissed off and arguing over supposed "slights."

                      Which brings me to this years column. It's the first one I ever just stopped reading. I stopped reading it because i was in shock. I normally skim over it real quick before reading all of it.

                      Kyle Lowry's placement threw me for a loop. Forget for a moment Kyle's actual ability. Just his trade value. He rated him at 16!!! HE RATED HIM HIGHER THAN PAUL GEORGE Kyle Lowry is 29 years old. He's played 11 years in the NBA. Obviously he's not over the hill. I'm not saying that, but he's not getting any better, and maybe only has a few more years playing at the level his is now. Which means his trade value drops just for that reason.

                      Then, we get to Kyle Lowry's actual ability. I'm not saying Lowry is terrible. He clearly helps contribute to the Raptors 4th ranked offense. He moves the ball pretty well and is a solid passer. Not a great one, but solid. He's also an inefficient scorer. He's shooting 41% from the field with a TS% of .527.

                      See, everyone is talking about his awful play this postseason, but it's not even remotely surprising to me. He's undersized, he's kind of quick but not explosive. He doesn't have a single skill that would help him on a nightly basis beat his opponent.

                      In general? I'd say a really solid point guard. You can do better, but you're happy with him as your point. But. Um. If he's your best player? Go ahead and forget about EVER winning a championship or even getting close to it.

                      He rated Lowry better than PG!! Even recovering from injury, if Bird called and said he wanted to trade PG for Lowry? Toronto would put the phone on mute, and say to whoever who was listening... "Is Bird ****ing with us? He just said he wanted to give us PG for Lowry?? Maybe he wants my firstborn. ****, I'll give him my firstborn too ********. WE GOT PG!!"

                      Anyways. Move on to yesterday. Bill Simmons trade suggestion. George Hill. AND THE ****ING 11th PICK for DeMar DeRozan! Forget Hill. DeMar DeRozan isn't worth the 11th pick by himself!

                      You know what DeMar DeRozan is? A player that has a TS% that is .009% better than Roy Hibbert. That's how efficient he is. In the Pace and Space era? He's a wing that can't shoot the three. Basically he's a wing that shoots a lot and misses a lot. Kyrie Irving shoots the same amount of shots per game? And scores almost 2 more points per game. Believe it or not, over the course of a season? That's HUGE.

                      I looked at the numbers trying to figure out why they score so much. No doubt DeMar and Kyrie help them become who they are, but it's Valuncianus, Amir Johnson, James Johnson Patrick Patterson and Lou Williams highly efficient scoring that probably helps them score so well. Or to put it this way, unless they're on? Kyrie, and DeMar are basically shooting too much! Clearly their ability to attack the rim helps the offense move- This is necessary, but they shoot to much which probably explains the Raptors inconsistent play this season.

                      Anyways, as the Raptors prepared to get SWEPT by the team that couldn't beat Indiana earlier this season, I can't help but remember this- George Hill led his team to a better winning percentage this season than the Raptors, with Roy being Roy, Solomon Hill scoring 9 points on 39% shooting, CJ Miles, and David West literally being the Pacers second best powerforward. In other words, that team was NOT talented at all, and they had a higher winning percentage with Hill. Yet. Bill Simmons thinks Indiana would trade the 11th AND Hill for Kyle Lowry. Um. Bird wouldn't trade Hill for Lowry straight up. I can list at least 15 point guards I'd take over Lowry.

                      So if Kyrie and DeMar DeRozan are as talented as Simmons says they are, why are they about to get punted out of the post season? Bill Simmons 16th ranked player on the trade value this year is averaging 9 points and 5 assists in the playoffs. Ew.


                      EDIT - He then suggests Sacramento should offer the 6TH pick for Lowry!! Why. In the ****. Would you do that.

                      I'd offer our pick this Summer to the Raptors for DeRozan and their pick this Summer.

                      Comment


                      • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                        Ignoring that I doubt that they'd want to trade him.....the Raptors would want Cap Space and multiple draft picks for DeRozan....neither of which we have ( cap Space ) nor should we give up ( multiple 1st round draft picks ) for DeRozan.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment


                        • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                          Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                          I'd offer our pick this Summer to the Raptors for DeRozan and their pick this Summer.
                          No question. People overreact when a guy has a bad playoff series. Proven track record>>>>>>>>a string of bad games.

                          Comment


                          • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                            Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
                            No question. People overreact when a guy has a bad playoff series. Proven track record>>>>>>>>a string of bad games.
                            Oh for sure! Proven track record means everything-

                            But here's the thing, DeMar Derozan has NEVER been an efficient scorer. He's just not that good.

                            Trading the 11th pick by its self for DeMar Derozan? is insansity. I'd trade our second round pick and solomon hill... That's it.

                            Comment


                            • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                              First off I don't wanna see the rule changed for a handful of guys. 300 guys in the league and we change a rule for 3 guys?

                              Second off, changing this rule would also have a negative impact as well. Think about the unintentional fouls off the ball at the end of the game. Changing the rules for intentional fouls would have a huge impact on unintentional fouls.


                              "Pacers will win 50 games this season" 07-16-2015
                              "Ian will average 10-10 this season" 10-21-15

                              Comment


                              • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                                Originally posted by JimmyJames View Post
                                First off I don't wanna see the rule changed for a handful of guys. 300 guys in the league and we change a rule for 3 guys?

                                Second off, changing this rule would also have a negative impact as well. Think about the unintentional fouls off the ball at the end of the game. Changing the rules for intentional fouls would have a huge impact on unintentional fouls.
                                I agree. If guys could just hit their FTs it wouldn't be such an issue. I get that its tough to watch, but so is constant flopping for offensive fouls (Draymond Green) or for FTs (James Harden) but nobody seems to care about that.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X