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

Evan or Lance?

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

  • Re: Evan or Lance?

    Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
    Wade is absolutely a HOFer. Zero doubt. Still hate the guy, but yeah. Every member of the Big 3 is a Hall of Famer.
    Bosh shouldn't be a hall of famer.

    Comment


    • Re: Evan or Lance?

      Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
      Bosh shouldn't be a hall of famer.
      He absolutely should be. If he retired today, he should be.

      If he didn't make it, he would be the only player in the History of the NBA to....

      -be in 8 All Star Games or more...
      -Average 19.3 points or better.
      - Shoot 49.8 percent or better...
      -Play more than 28000 minutes.
      -Score more than 14881 points.

      To not make the Hall of Fame. Every single other player with those stats has made it.
      Obviously Duncan and Shaq are surefire hall of famers. There is no argument here...

      There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.

      Comment


      • Re: Evan or Lance?

        Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
        He absolutely should be. If he retired today, he should be.

        If he didn't make it, he would be the only player in the History of the NBA to....

        -be in 8 All Star Games or more...
        -Average 19.3 points or better.
        - Shoot 49.8 percent or better...
        -Play more than 28000 minutes.
        -Score more than 14881 points.

        To not make the Hall of Fame. Every single other player with those stats has made it.
        Obviously Duncan and Shaq are surefire hall of famers. There is no argument here...
        Stats aren't everything. He hasn't done anything to deserve being in the Hall of Fame. He is a decent player, but hardly Hall of Fame worthy. His accomplishments and talent are similar to Granger's, and while I love Granger he isn't a Hall of Fame talent.

        Comment


        • Re: Evan or Lance?

          Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
          Stats aren't everything. He hasn't done anything to deserve being in the Hall of Fame. He is a decent player, but hardly Hall of Fame worthy. His accomplishments and talent are similar to Granger's, and while I love Granger he isn't a Hall of Fame talent.
          Disagree. Bosh was more impressive in Toronto than Granger was here in Indy. He was a legit 20+ppg 10rpg player there. There is a reason Bosh is signed to a max contract. Because he's actually that good. People like to rag on the guy, but the Heat wouldn't have won a single championship without him. He's got two rings, chances are he wins more if Miami stays together.

          Comment


          • Re: Evan or Lance?

            Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
            Stats aren't everything. He hasn't done anything to deserve being in the Hall of Fame. He is a decent player, but hardly Hall of Fame worthy. His accomplishments and talent are similar to Granger's, and while I love Granger he isn't a Hall of Fame talent.
            NBA Championships:2
            NBA All-Star: 2005–06; 2006–07; 2007–08; 2008–09 (did not participate due to injury); 2009–10; 2010–11; 2011–12; 2012–13; 2013–14
            All-NBA Second Team: 2006–07
            NBA All-Rookie Team: 2003–04
            NBA Rookie All-Star Game: 2003–04; 2004–05
            Bronze medal winner with Team USA at the 2006 FIBA World Championship
            Gold medal winner with Team USA at the 2008 Summer Olympics

            Raptors achèvements:
            Third-youngest player in NBA history to record 1,000 rebounds[2]
            Fourth-youngest player in NBA history to record 20 points and 20 rebounds in a game[2]
            Toronto's all-time leader in minutes played
            Toronto's first player to achieve 10,000 points
            Toronto's all-time leader in points scored[62]
            Toronto's all-time leader in rebounds[50]
            Toronto's all-time leader in defensive rebounds[50]
            Toronto's all-time leader in offensive rebounds[50]
            Toronto's all-time leader in rebounds per game
            Toronto's all-time leader in rebounds per game in a season
            Toronto's all-time leader in blocks
            Toronto's all-time leader in free throws made[92]
            Toronto's all-time leader in free throws made in a season
            Toronto's all-time leader in free throws attempted[92]
            Toronto's all-time leader in free throws attempted in a season
            Toronto's all-time leader in double-doubles[29]
            Toronto's all-time leader in double-doubles in a season

            Granger's accomplishments.....

            NBA All-Star (2009)
            NBA Most Improved Player (2009)
            NBA All-Rookie Second Team (2006)

            I appreciate everything Granger did...but it's just a really bad comparison.
            There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.

            Comment


            • Re: Evan or Lance?

              Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
              Disagree. Bosh was more impressive in Toronto than Granger was here in Indy. He was a legit 20+ppg 10rpg player there. There is a reason Bosh is signed to a max contract. Because he's actually that good. People like to rag on the guy, but the Heat wouldn't have won a single championship without him. He's got two rings, chances are he wins more if Miami stays together.
              I am no Chris Bosh fan, but he's better than Danny. He used to give JO fits...and JO was better than Granger. Count the all-star appearances. Heck, just watch the game.

              Comment


              • Re: Evan or Lance?

                Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                I am no Chris Bosh fan, but he's better than Danny. He used to give JO fits...and JO was better than Granger. Count the all-star appearances. Heck, just watch the game.
                I don't think you meant to quote ilive....
                There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.

                Comment


                • Re: Evan or Lance?

                  Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                  Disagree. Bosh was more impressive in Toronto than Granger was here in Indy. He was a legit 20+ppg 10rpg player there. There is a reason Bosh is signed to a max contract. Because he's actually that good. People like to rag on the guy, but the Heat wouldn't have won a single championship without him. He's got two rings, chances are he wins more if Miami stays together.
                  There are a lot of players on a similar level as Danny who have gotten max contracts, hell there are players worse than Danny who have gotten max contracts, like All-Star games that is pretty meaningless. He might have put up 20-10, but his teams, prior to Miami, were on a similar level as Danny's teams. I've been ragging on him since well before it was cool, because simply he was never that good. Both he and Granger are all-star level talents, but neither are Hall of Fame level. Lots of players can put up stats, or receive a huge contract in the NBA. That doesn't make them a Hall of Fame talent.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Evan or Lance?

                    Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                    There are a lot of players on a similar level as Danny who have gotten max contracts, hell there are players worse than Danny who have gotten max contracts, like All-Star games that is pretty meaningless. He might have put up 20-10, but his teams, prior to Miami, were on a similar level as Danny's teams. I've been ragging on him since well before it was cool, because simply he was never that good. Both he and Granger are all-star level talents, but neither are Hall of Fame level. Lots of players can put up stats, or receive a huge contract in the NBA. That doesn't make them a Hall of Fame talent.
                    Which is why I posted a comparison of career accomplishments for both players. To say Chris Bosh is the same level of player as Granger is ludicrous. He has always been better than Granger, and has also played at a higher level significantly longer than Granger.
                    There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Evan or Lance?

                      Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
                      I don't think you meant to quote ilive....
                      ...really. Now why would you say that. I happen to agree with him.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Evan or Lance?

                        Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                        ...really. Now why would you say that. I happen to agree with him.
                        Is there a reason you are seemingly always ridiculously sarcastic to me? I was trying to help you out because it sounded like you were trying to argue Eleazar's point.
                        There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Evan or Lance?

                          Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                          There are a lot of players on a similar level as Danny who have gotten max contracts, hell there are players worse than Danny who have gotten max contracts, like All-Star games that is pretty meaningless. He might have put up 20-10, but his teams, prior to Miami, were on a similar level as Danny's teams. I've been ragging on him since well before it was cool, because simply he was never that good. Both he and Granger are all-star level talents, but neither are Hall of Fame level. Lots of players can put up stats, or receive a huge contract in the NBA. That doesn't make them a Hall of Fame talent.
                          Not remotely true. I am one of Dannys biggest fans but Bosh was significantly better. Bosh led a team whose next leading scorers were Ford, Bargnani, and Anthony Parker to 47 wins. He has a 24-11 seas9n where he shot 59% TS and he's a great defender of the pick and role and extremely efficient in Miami. Danny had one season that wad comparable to an average bosh season, but generally bosh was much better and peaked higher too.
                          Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

                          Comment


                          • Re: Evan or Lance?

                            Originally posted by daschysta View Post
                            Not remotely true. I am one of Dannys biggest fans but Bosh was significantly better. Bosh led a team whose next leading scorers were Ford, Bargnani, and Anthony Parker to 47 wins. He has a 24-11 seas9n where he shot 59% TS and he's a great defender of the pick and role and extremely efficient in Miami. Danny had one season that wad comparable to an average bosh season, but generally bosh was much better and peaked higher too.
                            Granger is a really good player, but I think part of the confusion centers on the numbers Danny put up under Jim O'Brien coached teams. Jim had a free flowing offense that led to Mike Dunleavy averaging 19.1ppg and over 42% from three. People were literally talking about Mike as an all-star. Well, under Jim's system Granger and Dunleavy were awesome offensive players. Not so much defensively. But the point is, the numbers Granger had were inflated just as Mike's were inflated...as compared to most teams they might be on. So, you really have to factor in the history. Even now, Bosh is playing 3rd fiddle to James and Wade and he's still putting up 17ppg, 53% from the floor and he's now a good 3pt shooter. He had 5 years above 22ppg. Granger had only 2...even with the benefit of JOb style coaching.

                            As unfortunate as it is to say because I cannot stand Bosh and I like Danny, Bosh is indeed a much better player.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Evan or Lance?

                              Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
                              Which is why I posted a comparison of career accomplishments for both players. To say Chris Bosh is the same level of player as Granger is ludicrous. He has always been better than Granger, and has also played at a higher level significantly longer than Granger.
                              A list that mostly consisted of accomplishments from a team that wasn't even 10 years old when Bosh was drafted. When you are the only good player a team has had play for you team for longer than just a few years it isn't hard to get to the top of the lists. In many cases he wouldn't even make it to the top 5 in Pacers history, and in some not even top 10.

                              As well you missed the part where Granger was on the 2010 Gold Medal winning World Championship team, or that while you included Bosh as being part of the rookie all-star game you neglected to mention that so did Granger.

                              All-NBA Second Team: 2006–07
                              NBA All-Rookie Team: 2003–04
                              NBA Rookie All-Star Game: 2003–04; 2004–05
                              Bronze medal winner with Team USA at the 2006 FIBA World Championship
                              Gold medal winner with Team USA at the 2008 Summer Olympics
                              Team record with Raptors option 44.2% (7 seasons) - 2 playoff appearances lost in 1st round both times (team they lost to lost in the second round)


                              NBA All-Star (2009)
                              NBA Most Improved Player (2009)
                              NBA All-Rookie Second Team (2006)
                              NBA Rookie All-Star Game: 06; 07
                              Gold medal winner with Team USA at the 2010 FIBA World Championship
                              Team record with Pacers prior to his injury 46.4 (7 seasons) Playoffs 3 seasons (lost in first round twice (once to an ECF team) and lost once in 2nd round to eventual NBA Champs)

                              As far as I am concerned that is the comparison right there.


                              By the way BnG, I have never said Granger was better than JO. In his prime JO was obviously more talented than both Granger and Bosh.



                              Daschysta so you are saying two season with a better PPG than Bosh's best season is comparable to Bosh's average season? Granger's scoring statistics are actually quite similar to Bosh's, especially when you look at per 36. When you go beyond popularity Granger and Bosh are very similar players for their respective positions.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Evan or Lance?

                                Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                                A list that mostly consisted of accomplishments from a team that wasn't even 10 years old when Bosh was drafted. When you are the only good player a team has had play for you team for longer than just a few years it isn't hard to get to the top of the lists.
                                For Bosh's best 5 statistical years in Toronto (all 22ppg or higher), the Raptors were above .500 3 out of 5 years.

                                For Danny's best 4 statistical years in Indiana (19, 20, 24 and 25ppg), the Pacers were never over .500. Best record was .451...the year he averaged 20ppg.

                                If Bosh was the only good player on the Raptors, piling up stats...and he wasn't as good as Granger....how in the world do you explain the records? How could Bosh, all alone and no better than Danny...lead that team to a much better record?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X