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

Uncle Buck speaks....

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

  • Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
    Wow. This is really true. Imagine if Lance was getting this press. People would be screaming to have him cut from the team.

    There is a huge difference in how much rope these guys are getting. This extends to what is going on out on the floor. Paul is getting a HUGE pass, but if Lance doesn't lead the team in assists every game, he's playing selfish and reckless.
    They both are very immature and not extremely smart players.

    Comment


    • Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

      Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
      If anything Paul George is the head case on the team. At least Lance isn't impregnating strippers and sending naked selfies to total strangers lol. Lance is a team player, PG isn't
      Well, I guess everyone is entitled to their opinion. Sure wish the Legend had determined a guy's suitablilty before we signed him for the next 5 years for a gazillion dollars. Of course, the marketabilty of PG is high so I guess you could discharge the issue fairly easily.

      And Lance is a team guy IF the team decides to assume his style. Personnally, Lance Stephenson is not a guy I would build a team on top of.

      Not in 15 lifetimes.

      PG has freak physical skills that you could build a team around. And his head is something you could work with more vs Lance if you could get him to focus on something besides his junk.

      Comment


      • Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

        Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
        I don't think you quite understand what anyone is saying, or the interactions between the players on the court. Carmelo Anthony puts up consistently great numbers, but his ego and style of play are not conducive to winning championships. Most teams these days seem to want to get rid of Rudy Gay as soon as they get him because despite his numbers, he doesn't help his teams max out their talent. This is why I have so much respect for Lebron the basketball player. He makes everyone on his team better. The same cannot be said of Melo and Gay, and currently Lance. Last year and early this year Lance did the stuff that helped his teammates to be better players. It is what made him so valuable in the first place, and is the same reason why the Bobcats value McBob. He does the things that help the players around him to play to the best of their ability. Lance doesn't do that anymore. So while his stats still look good, he isn't doing the things that helped made the team as a whole so good.
        Well, if LeBron is your comparison, none of our guys - including PG with his ******** offensive approach of late - has a snowball's chance in hell of attaining that level of making players around them better. Honestly, although both can't get outside their immaturity and over-inflated sense of hollow NBA rising stars for the good of the team - Lance's game is more suited to potentially making teammates better offensively, while Paul's has that advantage on the defense.

        If we could just somehow genetically graft them into one player with the best of both individuals, maybe then we could end this inane fake super-star power struggle.
        I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

        -Emiliano Zapata

        Comment


        • Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
          OK. then honestly, and I am being one hundred percent honest here, this is what I truly believe. If we in effect turn the team over to Lance then we are going to have to trade, West, Roy, PG and George Hill. Yes all 4 of them. Seriously I think that is where we are. Maybe it isn't Lance's fault at all, but you have to deal with the situation as it is. And I think those 4 don't want Lance on the team anymore
          I think that's insanity buck, and I don't see what you see. This is all based on your hunch, and I just need more proof you're right. I trust your judgement but damn, you've jumped off the deep end with both feet! I think the body language is poor, no doubt and I see that. But I just don't believe it deserves such a hasty move by management, YET. I agree with you that if you are indeed right and the whole damn team just doesn't like the kid, well then you gotta MOVE him and get assets in return. But you can't just give him away, and his team mates need to understand that. Idk, I am not around him so I don't know what he's really like. But I see a kid who's worked his butt off to get where he's at and I feel he deserves the benefit of the doubt.

          There are plenty of teams who see a future star in Lance, I'd bet the house on it. Put him on a team that will give him more freedom and you got a sure fire all star who can excite the fans and is only 23. That's worth a good something in return.

          The key thing here is that we have no way to replace Lance. If we had cap space, I might see them just going another direction, but we don't. We absolutely got to resign him and give it another shot next year. Maybe make a coaching change and see how that works. If problems continue, trade him. But you can't lose the kid for nothing.

          4 months ago Lance was a very key piece for a team DOMINATING the entire league. Now they can't play together because of 1 month of .500 ball? Because Lance isn't passing the ball as well as he was earlier in the year? Because he's taking a few more outside shots, and HITTING them? It ain't like they've dropped 10 in a row. It ain't like Lance is jacking up 20 shots and completely taking over the team. He is sharing the ball and at least TRYING to play team ball. And they are still very competitive. These guys are only 23 years old, it is away too early to throw in the towel.

          I think you're just still a little paranoid over the JO Artest debacle. But not every situation is that extreme. I guess we will just have to wait and see how it plays out but I really hope your wrong here.
          "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

          Comment


          • Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

            Originally posted by seeker80 View Post
            The moment for me was after we gutted to get back in the NYK game, had momentum with a couple 3s and multiple stops, we get out on the break.

            And Lance "no looks" past an open GH to the security lady in the tunnel.

            And Frank smiled at him and said "keep it simple". If that had been Slick on the bench, he would have choked him out like he was Neto.
            What about in that same span where we had multiple opportunities to take the lead and PG heaved up multiple threes early in the shot clock?

            I'm not trying to defend Lance here as having no role in all this. All I'm saying is you have to recognize both he and Paul - the way they're playing now - are both having deleterious affects on team unity and our offensive play. If you want to talk about Lance's antics - some of which I find downright stupid - then you have to talk about Paul's incessant and utterly annoying whining to the refs.

            And let's not forget Roy's brilliant airing of the team's dirty laundry publicly in the media. The young guys have to stop acting like babies. Grow up and put aside the differences and everybody sacrifice something for the team and a chance to make run at a championship. They could be ******** away the best chance they'll have in their careers.

            And, finally, not to overlook yet another key player, what in the hell is Vogel going to do about this? If Stephenson is as bad as some people on here are suggesting, you've got to do something. I don't care if there's only 11 games left. If the other four starters are really to the point where they can't play with in any more, Vogel should be doing more than just patting him on the head when he makes a bonehead mistake. Has he tried anything other than just the status quo in hopes that we'll magically regain our composure in time to right the ship? Could say the same about his handling of PG in this span too.
            Last edited by D-BONE; 03-25-2014, 09:53 PM.
            I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

            -Emiliano Zapata

            Comment


            • Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

              Artest was a head case, and I can't ever imagine Lance going off the deep end. Lance doesn't ever foul hard, and never looks to fight people. Not a dirty player at all. Lance gets a bad rap for some reason that I will never understand. Now I do like the comparison between JO and PG. Both are egotistical, and want desperately to be the alpha
              Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

              Comment


              • Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                This isn't the players fault. Frank is in charge and he needs to get whatever wrongs, righted. It's Frank's job to right the ship that Larry has given him. The players can do it, we all know this, heck, the players know this. Frank just needs to do his job.
                Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

                Comment


                • Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                  Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                  You're right, my mistake. I was looking at West FGA and not Lance.

                  Hill demonstrated last year that he could be an effective offensive player when given more freedom and shot attempts. In fact he averaged the same 14 and 5 on efficient FG% that Lance is this year. He also did so as the 3rd option in an offense that averaged less ppg and played at a slower pace....if we want to throw numbers out there.
                  My thing with Hill is, he is not 23 and still improving, he's 28 and pretty much topped out. And he's just not the player Lance is, even with the experience gap. Look at Lances numbers man, he's a damn good all around player. Hill is a combo guard who isn't great at either position. But Stephenson is probably the 2nd best young (under 25) SG in basketball, behind James Harden. He has potential to be great. I think people severely underestimate his talent level.

                  He's 23 and leading a possible 60 win team in 3 pretty important statistical categories and he's been their most consistent player along the way. That's damn impressive regardless of our current play.

                  Don't get me wrong, Hill has been good for us. But I just don't see him making us better. I can see Lance taking us to the next level.
                  "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                  Comment


                  • Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                    Lance is good, a likely future all star even. ..but if he can't somehow make it work here, I have a hard time thinking he can make it as a main cog elsewhere. Hes talented but hes not talented enough to be a number one offensive option on a winning team. He's in a great spot as a 3rd offensive option for a winning team. If he's rubbing teammates the wrong way here as a 3rd offensive option, wouldn't it make sense that it would most likely be worse if he were the number one offensive option elsewhere?

                    Lance has a chance to make the best of an opportunity to do well on a team that has potential to win a championship. He should make the most of that and play the way necessary for his other teammates to thrive.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                      Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                      Lance is good, a likely future all star even. ..but if he can't somehow make it work here, I have a hard time thinking he can make it as a main cog elsewhere. Hes talented but hes not talented enough to be a number one offensive option on a winning team. He's in a great spot as a 3rd offensive option for a winning team. If he's rubbing teammates the wrong way here as a 3rd offensive option, wouldn't it make sense that it would most likely be worse if he were the number one offensive option elsewhere?

                      Lance has a chance to make the best of an opportunity to do well on a team that has potential to win a championship. He should make the most of that and play the way necessary for his other teammates to thrive.
                      Yes, and same can be said for Paul, IMO. And really they all need to ask what they need to do for the team to succeed.
                      I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                      -Emiliano Zapata

                      Comment


                      • Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                        Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                        My thing with Hill is, he is not 23 and still improving, he's 28 and pretty much topped out. And he's just not the player Lance is, even with the experience gap. Look at Lances numbers man, he's a damn good all around player. Hill is a combo guard who isn't great at either position. But Stephenson is probably the 2nd best young (under 25) SG in basketball, behind James Harden. He has potential to be great. I think people severely underestimate his talent level.

                        He's 23 and leading a possible 60 win team in 3 pretty important statistical categories and he's been their most consistent player along the way. That's damn impressive regardless of our current play.

                        Don't get me wrong, Hill has been good for us. But I just don't see him making us better. I can see Lance taking us to the next level.
                        The flaw here is that you're using stats to back up your argument but their stats are very similar (Hill last year to Lance this year).

                        You may think that I underrate Lance but I think many overrate him and think hes a superstar in the making. He's not going to be leading any team to an high winning level as the number one offensive option. Hes not a James Harden or anything close IMO.

                        As far as young 2guards, he's not better than Klay Thompson, Demar Derozean, and is prob about on par with Wes Matthews (not a knock on either guy, I like them both)

                        Comment


                        • Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                          Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
                          Yes, and same can be said for Paul, IMO. And really they all need to ask what they need to do for the team to succeed.
                          I agree wholeheartedly.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                            Jesus, all five of them need to wake the hell up and realize that they aren't going to have as good of an opportunity as they have *right now*, ever again in their NBA career.

                            They need to suck it up, and work it out with each other. This is their shot.

                            I agree with UB. I think the cohesiveness issue is mostly related to Lance, and I've felt that way for quite a long time. I still think it's correctable, but it's going to require some real leadership and some tough love.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                              Originally posted by presto123 View Post

                              Guys started believing the early season success and media hype and you see the result.
                              I couldn't agree more, and I feel Paul and Lance are the major players who got a big head from the media hype.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                                OK. then honestly, and I am being one hundred percent honest here, this is what I truly believe. If we in effect turn the team over to Lance then we are going to have to trade, West, Roy, PG and George Hill. Yes all 4 of them. Seriously I think that is where we are. Maybe it isn't Lance's fault at all, but you have to deal with the situation as it is. And I think those 4 don't want Lance on the team anymore
                                to state PG, Hill, and Hibbs got issues with Lance doesn't faze me the least. But when DWEST is included that speaks volumes. DWEST aint going nowhere. if lance has truly become that much of an issue that DWEST would not want him around Vogel needs to put Turner in the starting lineup ASAP.

                                not like he has to do all that much except stand in the corner anyways. I kinda believe the maturity facet would benefit the starting unit. as long as lance could handle running the 2nd unit. with that said Turners defense gives me shivvers.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X