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

Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

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

  • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

    Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
    Just watched the Kentucky game. Georgia either has a good team or Kentucky just plain struggled against the zone.
    Kentucky starts and plays 3 freshmen. It's a wonder they are still unbeaten.

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

        can you guys tell me how is Al-Farouq Aminu doing? is he as good as advertise?
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

          Iowa St vs Duke
          Brackins (PF) vs Singler (SF/PF)

          Well if you want a physical Dale type of guy, Brackins shows that promise. He looks as though he'll fill out just a bit more and have that kind of power. He's got a very similar slowish but useful turnaround jumper and is a solid shot blocker. He's a much smoother shooter on the fly and has McRoberts like handles.

          He's very vocal (both guys were running their teams and gave off the "team hero" vibe most of the time), at one point you can hear him forcefully getting his team together to discuss strategy in a huddle.

          What hurts him is that he doesn't quite read the rebounding position well, so he often puts himself in tougher spots. He has the tools to recover, or to be strong if he's setup right, but I'd like to see him improve that skill this year. He is physical so if he just had better position he'd really intimidate people.

          He failed to defend a backdoor cut pass out top, letting his hands drop and given too much space - ESPN even called him on it. But he also showed patience in letting a lane cut develop to make the entry pass.

          Brackins looks like a guy that might go 11-12 right now.


          I'd all but given up on Singler, I really thought he was going to be something going into the season 2 years ago but the last 2 years he's been stuck at "good college player" level. This was my first chance to watch him at length this year and he is almost Budinger level improved (Chase famously turned it around last year to salvage his fallen stock).

          At one point ISU takes possession with him on the baseline and them out on the break. He comes all the way from the baseline, steps over a guy and chases down the play to make a block attempt that is halted by someone else's foul. Really strong acceleration with his stride.

          Another play on offense they run a 2 man PnR off ball, Singler curls over the Plumlee pick, catches the pass and waits just a second to get the bounce pass lane back to Plumlee for the monster dunk. Beautiful play by Singler.

          He's always been smooth, thus his prospect status coming out of HS, but he's finally putting it to work for him. He ran the team in this one, calling out plays and floor position, moving well off the ball, and showing a pretty smooth outside jumper.

          His game has always been incredibly similar to Detlef's. He moves very much like him. The problem has been that he was a poor copy. He's much closer now than he had been. He might be becoming a better defender than Detlef, rebounding is there, passing I'm not sure yet. Let's call him an 85% level Detlef, mostly because he needs to dial the shot in. So not AS, but pretty useful. I like Budinger's defense more but Singler strikes me as more of a PF type from the wing than Chase is.


          He's been tracking modestly so far but if he shows more games like this one he could climb to about 8-10th spot I'd guess.

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
            Iowa St vs Duke
            Brackins (PF) vs Singler (SF/PF)

            Well if you want a physical Dale type of guy, Brackins shows that promise. He looks as though he'll fill out just a bit more and have that kind of power. He's got a very similar slowish but useful turnaround jumper and is a solid shot blocker. He's a much smoother shooter on the fly and has McRoberts like handles.

            He's very vocal (both guys were running their teams and gave off the "team hero" vibe most of the time), at one point you can hear him forcefully getting his team together to discuss strategy in a huddle.

            What hurts him is that he doesn't quite read the rebounding position well, so he often puts himself in tougher spots. He has the tools to recover, or to be strong if he's setup right, but I'd like to see him improve that skill this year. He is physical so if he just had better position he'd really intimidate people.

            He failed to defend a backdoor cut pass out top, letting his hands drop and given too much space - ESPN even called him on it. But he also showed patience in letting a lane cut develop to make the entry pass.

            Brackins looks like a guy that might go 11-12 right now.
            Is he quick enough to guard quicker and more athletic PFs?

            How's his overall athleticsm?

            I'm trying to figure out what the best way is to defend against more athletic Lineups. It was greatly exposed against Teams that have more mobile Frontcourt Players.
            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

              Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
              Also, another thing that really stands out to me with Ed Davis is his rebounding. Rebounding seems to be the one stat that translates well to the NBA. Ed Davis is 6'10 and has a lot of athletic ability that helps him get rebounds, but he is crazy skinny. When Ed Davis adds some muscle to his frame, I think it will only help increase that as he would be able to out muscle people more.
              I'm hoping his deficit in strength helps drop him far enough so that the Pacers can get him. I really like the idea of having Hibbert, Hans, and Ed Davis in the frontcourt in rookie contracts. That's a nice rotation of bigmen for the future.

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                Brackins is very athletic. That's a plus. He's quick enough to defend.

                However, as I say he's got floor position issues and they aren't minor right now. I think that plays against him on defense too. He's a brilliant, forceful shot blocker. Not a guy like Thabeet that lived a lot on size. In some ways the contradiction of his floor position work vs his overall talent is odd.



                I'm catching up with the OKSt vs OK game right now. I see that Warren didn't shoot well, but what I'm watching looks decent. He swings the ball through before putting the ball down and gets his shoulder by guys nicely. Obviously athletic.

                Warren's biggest problem is lingering with the ball too long. Not overdribbling, he's avoids that, but he holds the ball too long. Bob Knight even mentioned it, it's pretty obvious. That will be a problem in the NBA.

                He's also bad about not staying involved in every play, he often slips into ball watching. And he is prone to forcing things. Not that happy with his ability to read the game and be the impact player. He clearly got more involved down the stretch and in OT and was coasting for the prior 35 or so minutes.

                I'd put him around 25th right now roughly. He has the skills to turn it around, but he might need another year of school

                Mason-Griffin, the OK PG, had a solid night. Quite the playmaker and far more involved at all times. Not sure he's NBA material, but he caught my eye as the guy worth watching if you have an OK game on.




                Another pair of guys I was bullish on but are nowhere where they need to be are L'ville's Samuels and Jennings. I'm disappointed with both of them and I'm almost to the point of taking L'ville off my viewing rotation.

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                  R Hummel with 29pts and 5 reb in half time he is shooting threes like crazy
                  @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                    Dont remember who said it, but Evan turner does remind me of Brandon Roy. I can't describe his game any better than saying he just has "the LOOK" of a good player. No effort to his game, very natural.
                    Roy Hibbert.... It's the POWER!!!

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                      i'm watching the ohio state vs. purdue game as well. Turner absolutely took over this game and is someone I would love to have for the pacers. He seems to do everything

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                        were is he listed as draft goes?
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                          Turner is a top 4 guy.
                          {o,o}
                          |)__)
                          -"-"-

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                            Wall is really unselfish, the guy pass the ball a bit to much I think
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                              my guy Greivis Vasquez had 30pts and 7 asst last night, he is one guy the pacers should look at in the second round, plus he is a senior.
                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                my guy Greivis Vasquez had 30pts and 7 asst last night, he is one guy the pacers should look at in the second round, plus he is a senior.
                                I like Greivis as well. I've been keeping an eye on him as my wife if from Venezuela. He'd be the first player from Ven to play in the NBA, I think.

                                Anywho, I do like the guy, but I think his knock is that he's not very fast and not athletic enough. I haven't had a chance to see him play, but he's always put up good numbers.

                                I think the Pacers really need some athleticism.
                                First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X