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

Cleveland/Washington generals 2.0 postgame thread

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

  • #76
    Re: Cleveland/Washington generals 2.0 postgame thread

    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
    I expect him to get more muscle he looks like Tmac in his rookie season and as Tmac and many other players I expect him to get bigger and stronger.
    He also resembles Reggie and his frame never grew.


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

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Cleveland/Washington generals 2.0 postgame thread

      Originally posted by Peck View Post
      But isn't the same true in the opposite opinion as well? People who know what they are talking about think Paul George's perfect position is shooting guard. This game didn't prove anything other than we really are bad right now.
      Who outside of PD and Paul himself thinks he should be a SG? Maybe I'm wrong, but I haven't seen anyone.

      Originally posted by Peck View Post
      He also resembles Reggie and his frame never grew.
      Reggie was 185 full grown. Paul's 221 at the age of 21, and should get heavier.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Cleveland/Washington generals 2.0 postgame thread

        Originally posted by Peck View Post
        He also resembles Reggie and his frame never grew.
        I think is going to depend in whatever the coaches want with him, remember that he is close to 6'10", him adding some weight could move him to SF and probably PF ala Josh Smith, again whatever the coaches want I think.
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Cleveland/Washington generals 2.0 postgame thread

          Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
          Who outside of PD and Paul himself thinks he should be a SG? Maybe I'm wrong, but I haven't seen anyone.

          You mean besides the coaching staff?


          Reggie was 185 full grown. Paul's 221 at the age of 21, and should get heavier.
          Reggie may have been listed as 185 but I assure you he was not. Dale Davis for his entire career was listed as 232 as well, which was maybe true during his rookie training camp.


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

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Cleveland/Washington generals 2.0 postgame thread

            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
            I think is going to depend in whatever the coaches want with him, remember that he is close to 6'10", him adding some weight could move him to SF and probably PF ala Josh Smith, again whatever the coaches want I think.
            I think the hype about his height this summer was just that. I've seen him standing next to Danny several times and if he is any taller at all it's not even a 1/4 inch. In fact I still think he is slightly shorter than Danny.

            Also why does him gaining any weight have anything to do with him playing shooting guard or not? You don't think that Dwayne Wade outweighs him right now?

            You do realize that Magic Johnson played point guard weighing significantly more?


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

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Cleveland/Washington generals 2.0 postgame thread

              Originally posted by Peck View Post
              Reggie may have been listed as 185 but I assure you he was not. Dale Davis for his entire career was listed as 232 as well, which was maybe true during his rookie training camp.
              You're probably right, but I can't see Reggie ever being over 200. Paul should be at least 230-240 by the time he's 25. He gained over 10 pounds from last year to this year, so I don't see why he wouldn't continue adding weight.

              edit: where's the quote that they think he's more of a SG than a SF? Having him start at the 2 proves nothing. They're just putting the best 5 players on the court.
              Last edited by CJ Jones; 02-16-2012, 02:12 AM.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Cleveland/Washington generals 2.0 postgame thread

                I am not sure what ails the team right now...
                But I have my own theories..

                I believe that the way this team is set up, is like a finely tuned machine...
                When 1 or 2 of the important "cogs" to the team is out , that the whole machine starts to break down... offensively, and more important, DEFENSIVELY...
                I mean come on, we were top 6 in the whole NBA on defense .. up untill the last 6 or 7 games... and moreso, ever since Hill got injured....

                The other thing, since our "machine" has broken down,on the offensive end, everyone is playing scared , seemingly not trusting in each other, resorting to playing more "me ball" instead of making the extra pass , running the play to get a good shot..

                As a result to all the above, AND this string of losses, I think what has happened is the proverbial "rookie wall" of sorts... But instead of it happening to a rookie PLAYER, it is happening to a rookie coach and a young team... Add in the psychological aspect, and I believe that is what we are seeing happen..

                I truly believe we will get through this , and by the first week of March we will be able to put this string of losses behind us and get back to playing like we should be...

                ..
                Last edited by Kemo; 02-16-2012, 02:09 AM.
                "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Cleveland/Washington generals 2.0 postgame thread

                  Originally posted by Peck View Post
                  I think the hype about his height this summer was just that. I've seen him standing next to Danny several times and if he is any taller at all it's not even a 1/4 inch. In fact I still think he is slightly shorter than Danny.

                  Also why does him gaining any weight have anything to do with him playing shooting guard or not? You don't think that Dwayne Wade outweighs him right now?

                  You do realize that Magic Johnson played point guard weighing significantly more?
                  I was actually paying attention to his height yesterday and he looked justa bit bigger than Danny.

                  Regarding him getting bigger and been able to play the two, I think he could be fine at the two if we had a shot creator at the 3, the problem that we have right now is that neither Danny or Paul can create their own shot or create for others.

                  I could tell you that if we get a point guard that could create for others maybe neither Danny or PG would be need it to create their own shot so it wouldn't be such a problem.
                  @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Cleveland/Washington generals 2.0 postgame thread

                    Originally posted by Peck View Post

                    Also why does him gaining any weight have anything to do with him playing shooting guard or not? You don't think that Dwayne Wade outweighs him right now?

                    You do realize that Magic Johnson played point guard weighing significantly more?
                    I don't think weight has anything to do with it. We're just pointing that out to people who think he's too weak to play SF.

                    The reason people think he should play SF is style of play. Especially offensively and I've stated plenty of reasons I think he'd be more useful defensively playing closer to the basket.

                    It's not all that crazy if you think about it.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Cleveland/Washington generals 2.0 postgame thread

                      Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                      I don't think weight has anything to do with it. We're just pointing that out to people who think he's too weak to play SF.

                      The reason people think he should play SF is style of play. Especially offensively and I've stated plenty of reasons I think he'd be more useful defensively playing closer to the basket.

                      It's not all that crazy if you think about it.
                      What about his style of play indicates he is a small forward instead of a shooting guard.

                      Also can you really define the difference between a small forward and shooting guard?

                      Also why is he better closer to the rim when he has shown to be a very good perimeter defender against point guards let alone shooting guards?


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

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Cleveland/Washington generals 2.0 postgame thread

                        Originally posted by Peck View Post
                        Also can you really define the difference between a small forward and shooting guard?
                        Can anyone? I can't.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Cleveland/Washington generals 2.0 postgame thread

                          If Hansbrough has strep throat why did he play and isn't it contagious? Seems silly to use one play at the risk of getting others sick, but at least it helps explain how he managed to missed 4 of 8 FT which should never happen.

                          My mind is still blown we gave Semih Erden a new career high in Points on just 8 shots and his 3rd most rebounds, if Roy was going to break out of his funk this was the game but no such luck. Pendergraph is a +18 the last two games all in garbage times and has just a TO and a foul on the stat sheet. We somehow managed just 4 assists from our starting 5.

                          The overall 9 assists were our second fewest of the year and we're now 2-7 if we get fewer than 15 and 0-5 when 12 or less. But with the lack of passing today we did have our season low in TO but oddly we have now lost our last 3 games committing 6 or less TO.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Cleveland/Washington generals 2.0 postgame thread

                            Originally posted by Peck View Post
                            What about his style of play indicates he is a small forward instead of a shooting guard.

                            Also can you really define the difference between a small forward and shooting guard?

                            Also why is he better closer to the rim when he has shown to be a very good perimeter defender against point guards let alone shooting guards?
                            You can't define a position, since that position varies from system to system. However, in every system, the SF and SG have different responsibilities, so obviously it does matter what position someone plays, and whether or not they compliment the other wing in the line-up.

                            Obviously PG could play either spot if the fit is right. But that doesn't mean he wouldn't be a better SF. I think his quickness at SF would be a much greater advantage than his size at SG (which he rarely utilizes).
                            "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Cleveland/Washington generals 2.0 postgame thread

                              Originally posted by flox View Post
                              Its like that legendary 5 game win streak, it's just gonna be an aberration. I can't think that this team will be like this.
                              By aberration, I hope you don't mean illogical.

                              It was logical. Troy Murphy was not playing.
                              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Cleveland/Washington generals 2.0 postgame thread

                                Pacers just need to learn to finish around the basket. I keep seeing us miss layup after layup, contested or not, these are professionals who need to finish or try to draw the foul. Hibbert misses so many close shots it's pathetic.

                                I think we'll start hitting those close shots.

                                It's our D that's totally done a 180. I guess our guys thought the season was just 1 month. It's funny, cause we totally suck at PnR, but every team looks like a PnR genius against us. Pacers need to get better at initiating the PnR and defending it.
                                Last edited by Sparhawk; 02-16-2012, 08:46 AM.
                                First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X