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

I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

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

  • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
    So in your mind a player like Bruce Bowen who's speciality was to stay on the corner, shoot threes to open the floor for the bigs and play defense is wortless?(this how I see it)........... Damn I wonder if Pop agrees with this.
    OK, why is everything interpreted as an extreme when it is 5 responses down from the qualifying post?

    Did I say Rush was worthless? No. I said that the way Dun plays offense is more valuable to this team than Rush as he has played in general, and that the overall is greater than the advantage Rush brings on defense.

    I refuse to believe that you are trying to say Rush is the equivalent to Bruce Bowen or that the rest of the lineup is equivalent to the rest of the Spurs' lineup.
    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: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

      Originally posted by Robert Swift View Post
      i might change my username to something brandon rush related i think i might make it BRush Force 25

      rush > dunleavy
      george > dunleavy
      rush = george (both are really good young players)
      agree
      but Robert Swift is epic dont let his leagacy die lol

      Comment


      • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

        Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
        agree
        but Robert Swift is epic dont let his leagacy die lol


        he is the coolest non pacer in the nba (or used to be in the nba)

        rswift > chris birdman anderson

        i really dont want swift to be a pacer but at a cheap price and for him to sit on the bench he would be a really fun player between the hair, the tats
        In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

        Comment


        • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

          I think both side of the argument fully understands the other sides argument. So at this point further explanation is useless.

          Comment


          • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

            Originally posted by Robert Swift View Post


            he is the coolest non pacer in the nba (or used to be in the nba)

            rswift > chris birdman anderson

            i really dont want swift to be a pacer but at a cheap price and for him to sit on the bench he would be a really fun player between the hair, the tats
            he is still in NBA2k11 43 overall

            Comment


            • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

              Originally posted by Trophy View Post
              Brandon, as a wingman should attempt at least 5 three pointers a game. I mean if he's ice cold by his 8th attempt then he can stop and shoot more inside.
              This offends me to the very core. Not you Trophy your a good guy, but seriously this line of thinking is why I really want the NBA to do away with the three point shot. My dream I realize and probably nobody else agree's with me but I've come to the point I hate the three point shot (for the most part).

              Now as to the topic at hand.

              I have no real dog in this fight because IMO we need an upgrade at the shooting guard period. I am hopeful that Paul George is that upgrade but right now he is not ready to take it on full time & I don't want to just throw him to the wolves this season (because honestly this year I think we have a shot at the playoffs).

              I've said it before & I'll say it again. Brandon Rush & Mike Dunleavy are the exact same player with the exact opposite problem.

              The arguement that one is not as bad at his falicy or so much better at his strength does not excuse the fact that neither are two way players which we need.

              Right now Mike is starting.

              You know why? Because Brandon Rush could not bother to not smoke weed during the regular season even after being caught doing it not once, not twice but three times.

              I don't care whether or not you think pot should be legal or not, it is NOT right now and he knows it.

              You could understand if he got caught once, but after that????

              So all of this teeth gnashing about who should or should not start is really on Brandon because it was his up until he let his character flaw take over his life.

              But that doesn't mean that I am a Mike Dunleavy fan either.

              How about this, let's turn this into an O'Brien thread.

              What law out there say's that you can only have a 3 man rotation on the wings?


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

              Comment


              • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                he is still in NBA2k11 43 overall
                oh man are you serious

                i never looked through the centers

                i have the game so im going to have to take a look

                43 is really bad and thats what robert swift is but he makes up for it by being a cool guy and unique

                <---------- as you can tell
                In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

                Comment


                • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                  Originally posted by Peck View Post
                  What law out there say's that you can only have a 3 man rotation on the wings?
                  That deserves its own thread, it'll get buried here.
                  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: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                    Originally posted by Peck View Post
                    This offends me to the very core. Not you Trophy your a good guy, but seriously this line of thinking is why I really want the NBA to do away with the three point shot. My dream I realize and probably nobody else agree's with me but I've come to the point I hate the three point shot (for the most part).

                    Now as to the topic at hand.

                    I have no real dog in this fight because IMO we need an upgrade at the shooting guard period. I am hopeful that Paul George is that upgrade but right now he is not ready to take it on full time & I don't want to just throw him to the wolves this season (because honestly this year I think we have a shot at the playoffs).

                    I've said it before & I'll say it again. Brandon Rush & Mike Dunleavy are the exact same player with the exact opposite problem.

                    The arguement that one is not as bad at his falicy or so much better at his strength does not excuse the fact that neither are two way players which we need.

                    Right now Mike is starting.

                    You know why? Because Brandon Rush could not bother to not smoke weed during the regular season even after being caught doing it not once, not twice but three times.

                    I don't care whether or not you think pot should be legal or not, it is NOT right now and he knows it.

                    You could understand if he got caught once, but after that????

                    So all of this teeth gnashing about who should or should not start is really on Brandon because it was his up until he let his character flaw take over his life.

                    But that doesn't mean that I am a Mike Dunleavy fan either.

                    How about this, let's turn this into an O'Brien thread.

                    What law out there say's that you can only have a 3 man rotation on the wings?
                    I do agree with this, but I disagree with your thought on wanting to take away the 3 point arc.

                    Don't get me wrong I think Brandon is a really good shooter and Mike is too and your right they are very similar mainly because they are inconsistent scorers.

                    Continue to start Mike and slowly put Brandon back into the rotation so we can continue our good play.

                    Comment


                    • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                      Originally posted by Robert Swift View Post
                      oh man are you serious

                      i never looked through the centers

                      i have the game so im going to have to take a look

                      43 is really bad and thats what robert swift is but he makes up for it by being a cool guy and unique

                      <---------- as you can tell
                      i signed him to my created team lol he started we only won 3 games the whole season lol

                      Comment


                      • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                        Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                        i signed him to my created team lol he started we only won 3 games the whole season lol


                        is he listed in the free agent roster
                        In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

                        Comment


                        • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                          Originally posted by Peck View Post
                          This offends me to the very core. Not you Trophy your a good guy, but seriously this line of thinking is why I really want the NBA to do away with the three point shot. My dream I realize and probably nobody else agree's with me but I've come to the point I hate the three point shot (for the most part).

                          Now as to the topic at hand.

                          I have no real dog in this fight because IMO we need an upgrade at the shooting guard period. I am hopeful that Paul George is that upgrade but right now he is not ready to take it on full time & I don't want to just throw him to the wolves this season (because honestly this year I think we have a shot at the playoffs).

                          I've said it before & I'll say it again. Brandon Rush & Mike Dunleavy are the exact same player with the exact opposite problem.

                          The arguement that one is not as bad at his falicy or so much better at his strength does not excuse the fact that neither are two way players which we need.

                          Right now Mike is starting.

                          You know why? Because Brandon Rush could not bother to not smoke weed during the regular season even after being caught doing it not once, not twice but three times.

                          I don't care whether or not you think pot should be legal or not, it is NOT right now and he knows it.

                          You could understand if he got caught once, but after that????

                          So all of this teeth gnashing about who should or should not start is really on Brandon because it was his up until he let his character flaw take over his life.

                          But that doesn't mean that I am a Mike Dunleavy fan either.

                          How about this, let's turn this into an O'Brien thread.

                          What law out there say's that you can only have a 3 man rotation on the wings?
                          I don't quite get how Brandon and Mike are the same player with the opposite problem. Mike's problem is he can't play defense, and it isn't that he has the ability but doesn't know how to channel it. Brandon on the other hand has some pretty good offensive skills, but just has problems with being assertive about it.

                          Comment


                          • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                            Originally posted by Peck View Post
                            ...I have no real dog in this fight because IMO we need an upgrade at the shooting guard period. I am hopeful that Paul George is that upgrade but right now he is not ready to take it on full time & I don't want to just throw him to the wolves this season (because honestly this year I think we have a shot at the playoffs)...
                            Now that is something that I have agreed with for quite some time. I would hope that no one could disagree with the statement that neither of Dunleavy or Rush is the long-term solutioin at SG for the Pacers.

                            And, I think that most are also hoping that George is. At least I am.

                            ------------------

                            By the way, sorry about the burr that somehow worked it's way into your Jockeys. But it is good to see you get a little riled and sound off once in a while.

                            Comment


                            • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                              Originally posted by BillS View Post
                              OK, why is everything interpreted as an extreme when it is 5 responses down from the qualifying post?

                              Did I say Rush was worthless? No. I said that the way Dun plays offense is more valuable to this team than Rush as he has played in general, and that the overall is greater than the advantage Rush brings on defense.

                              I refuse to believe that you are trying to say Rush is the equivalent to Bruce Bowen or that the rest of the lineup is equivalent to the rest of the Spurs' lineup.
                              No only you want to argue with me nonsense but also want to destroy my dreams, thanks
                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment


                              • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                                I think Mike is better at offense than Rush by greater margin that Rush is better at defense than Mike.
                                Given the disparity between Rush's and Dunleavy's defensive skills, for that statement to be true either Rush couldn't have scored a point since mid-2008 or Dunleavy is on his way to a scoring title this season.

                                Rush's defense blows Dunleavy's defense into the weeds. It's not remotely close.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X