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

Lance Stephenson to sign with Charlotte- 3 years $27 million

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

  • Re: Lance Stephenson to sign with Charlotte- 3 years $27 million

    Originally posted by Tom White View Post
    I'm not that familiar with Miles, but if he is a better shooter and defender than a guy who was starting for us, why was he not starting for Cleveland?
    He started in 34 of the 51 games he played.

    Comment


    • Re: Lance Stephenson to sign with Charlotte- 3 years $27 million

      Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
      I wonder if Bird is gonna hold a media session to answer some questions about this and give his thoughts, being that Lance was his guy and all. Fans need an answer as to why a shorter deal was not on the table for the Pacers.

      As for Lance. I think he took some really bad advice from his self serving agent. Pacers wanted to pay him the most money. But if his agent convinced him to take that deal then his agent wouldn't have anything to do for the next 5 years considering his only other NBA player is Kyle O Quinn. Now his agent can start trying to secure deals with the Jordan Brand vs And1, and in 2 years he'll get to start the FA process all over again and get another big contract for his main guy, all while touting Lance as his success to pitch other athletes. Lance is just the right type of player to take advantage of in this case. Young, confident, headstrong, invincible, and a fast rising star who isn't afraid of the sun. Lance is the NBA version of Icarus. Guys like this are all to easy to convince that a secure 44 million that would set up his family for generations is just not enough.

      The top team in the East that you as a player helped to put on the NBA map wants to pay you the most money to continue building a monster team. That should have been enough for any other player in his position. In the NBA they say that first big long term contract is the most important one. Now 2nd round picks are scoffing at 45 Million dollars? How somebody can give up that kind of money when you are just an ankle or knee injury away from ending your career...SMDH.

      The "Disease of Me" is strong in this one.
      I agree with everything you said, but I really just wanted to comment because I really love the Lance/Icarus analogy. That is perfect.


      Comment


      • Re: Lance Stephenson to sign with Charlotte- 3 years $27 million

        I think the funniest thing about the media coverage over this signing has to be ESPN's 180 on Lance, 2 months ago he was the immature heel who tugged at Superman's cape and would never learn to control himself and cost his team in big moments. Now he is the perfect addition for Charlotte and the Pacers are going to struggle all year to overcome this decision. Obviously not 100% of the media personalities are saying this, but that seems to be the company line ESPN is pushing. Hilarious to me after the way they ran Lance off the tracks during the Eastern Conference Finals.
        Last edited by Trader Joe; 07-17-2014, 12:57 PM.


        Comment


        • Re: Lance Stephenson to sign with Charlotte- 3 years $27 million

          Originally posted by Tom White View Post
          I'm not that familiar with Miles, but if he is a better shooter and defender than a guy who was starting for us, why was he not starting for Cleveland?
          And more importantly, why don't his stats reflect it? He shot 42% from the field for his career. I've seen Miles play quite a bit over the years, and he's a solid bench piece. He's a streaky shooter, does absolutely nothing else (no rebounding, no assists). He is not a starter on even a halfway decent team, especially if the point guard is George Hill.

          I still maintain that there has to be something else coming. We've still got the guys we assumed would be gone (Scola, Mahinmi, Copeland), we've got an overabundance of wing players (Rudez, Copeland, SoHill, CJ, Stuckey) and we lost our 2nd best player. This is a team that had one playmaker and now has zero. This is a team whose starting and backup point guards are actually shooting guards. We don't have an actual point guard on the roster, lol.

          Comment


          • Re: Lance Stephenson to sign with Charlotte- 3 years $27 million

            At the end of the day, the Pacers lost their player with the highest shooting percentage who led the team in rebounds and assists. You can say all you want about him trying to stuff the stat sheet, but Roy and West are some pretty craptastic rebounding bigs, Hill is one of the worst passing point guards in the league, and no one on the team is that great a shooter. Lance leaving makes this team significantly worse talent-wise. I don't blame him for going because I think he finds himself in a much better situation on a team that has some chemistry and was getting better. And he leaves a team where the two superstars can't stay out of their own way. People accuse Lance of being immature, and he was immature on the court. But off it there hasn't been a single peep in regards to him over the last couple years, as opposed to Roy and PG who behave more maturely on the court, but who are immature off it.
            Danger Zone

            Comment


            • Re: Lance Stephenson to sign with Charlotte- 3 years $27 million

              Originally posted by Rogco View Post
              as opposed to Roy and PG who behave more maturely on the court
              shoot, and even this is debatable

              Comment


              • Re: Lance Stephenson to sign with Charlotte- 3 years $27 million

                Originally posted by Rogco View Post
                At the end of the day, the Pacers lost their player with the highest shooting percentage who led the team in rebounds and assists. You can say all you want about him trying to stuff the stat sheet, but Roy and West are some pretty craptastic rebounding bigs, Hill is one of the worst passing point guards in the league, and no one on the team is that great a shooter. Lance leaving makes this team significantly worse talent-wise. I don't blame him for going because I think he finds himself in a much better situation on a team that has some chemistry and was getting better. And he leaves a team where the two superstars can't stay out of their own way. People accuse Lance of being immature, and he was immature on the court. But off it there hasn't been a single peep in regards to him over the last couple years, as opposed to Roy and PG who behave more maturely on the court, but who are immature off it.
                Damn, I wonder how the Pacers got to the ECF's two years in a row with all those craptastic players.

                Two post players that can't rebound, but yet the Pacers have been a top rebounding team in the league. A superstar that's immature, a PG who isn't fit to serve up soft serve ice cream from DQ. I can't believe Lance couldn't wrangle out a max contract from somewhere, since he clearly carried the other 12 Pacers.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • Re: Lance Stephenson to sign with Charlotte- 3 years $27 million

                  Originally posted by Rogco View Post
                  At the end of the day, the Pacers lost their player with the highest shooting percentage who led the team in rebounds and assists. You can say all you want about him trying to stuff the stat sheet, but Roy and West are some pretty craptastic rebounding bigs, Hill is one of the worst passing point guards in the league, and no one on the team is that great a shooter. Lance leaving makes this team significantly worse talent-wise. I don't blame him for going because I think he finds himself in a much better situation on a team that has some chemistry and was getting better. And he leaves a team where the two superstars can't stay out of their own way. People accuse Lance of being immature, and he was immature on the court. But off it there hasn't been a single peep in regards to him over the last couple years, as opposed to Roy and PG who behave more maturely on the court, but who are immature off it.
                  Roy made those comments about Lance, and I couldn't care less about what relationships PG has off the court as long as it doesn't affect his game.

                  On the court and in the locker room is what matters.

                  Larry loved Lance, if Lance wasn't a problem he would be a Pacer.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Lance Stephenson to sign with Charlotte- 3 years $27 million

                    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                    Damn, I wonder how the Pacers got to the ECF's two years in a row with all those craptastic players.

                    Two post players that can't rebound, but yet the Pacers have been a top rebounding team in the league. A superstar that's immature, a PG who isn't fit to serve up soft serve ice cream from DQ. I can't believe Lance couldn't wrangle out a max contract from somewhere, since he clearly carried the other 12 Pacers.
                    Well, two years ago was a different team, at least in terms of ages and how people were playing. This year was an absolute stinking mess of scraping by inferior eastern conference opponents. I take it you didn't watch any of the games from your comments, and I wouldn't bother. While they did make it to the ECF, it was ultimately a depressing run.
                    Danger Zone

                    Comment


                    • Re: Lance Stephenson to sign with Charlotte- 3 years $27 million

                      Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                      Roy made those comments about Lance, and I couldn't care less about what relationships PG has off the court as long as it doesn't affect his game.

                      On the court and in the locker room is what matters.

                      Larry loved Lance, if Lance wasn't a problem he would be a Pacer.
                      That makes no sense. The Pacers wanted Lance and offered him 44 million dollars. The problem lies with other players and Lance not wanting to be part of the team if they are still here. The rumors were never about Lance being the problem, it was about PG and Roy. West didn't come out yelling about Lance, he came out yelling at Roy. The national media have an inkling of the issues, and you'll note they'll always distinguish between Lance being an irritant versus whatever the problems were. PG's inability to keep it in his pants off the court led to the issues on the court, but at least he was mature enough to keep playing, even if he did become much worse. Roy on the other hand become a lump of worthless 7'2" whiny dude.
                      Danger Zone

                      Comment


                      • Re: Lance Stephenson to sign with Charlotte- 3 years $27 million

                        Originally posted by Rogco View Post
                        Well, two years ago was a different team, at least in terms of ages and how people were playing. This year was an absolute stinking mess of scraping by inferior eastern conference opponents. I take it you didn't watch any of the games from your comments, and I wouldn't bother. While they did make it to the ECF, it was ultimately a depressing run.
                        And clearly those players will never get back to 12-13 form, they're destined to stay forever locked into their 2014 bodies. No need to watch games, when we have so many soothsayers here on PD.
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Lance Stephenson to sign with Charlotte- 3 years $27 million

                          I just hope the Pacers can get a good lottery pick next season. Maybe they'll be able to replace the talent of Lance, but I doubt it.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Lance Stephenson to sign with Charlotte- 3 years $27 million

                            Originally posted by Rogco View Post
                            That makes no sense. The Pacers wanted Lance and offered him 44 million dollars. The problem lies with other players and Lance not wanting to be part of the team if they are still here.
                            Lance wanted to stay here, Pacers basically quit negotiating...


                            Candace BucknerVerified account ‏@CandaceDBuckner

                            Agent: "They made an offer and then they went out and while I thought we were still at the table, they made some other deals…"

                            The rumors were never about Lance being the problem, it was about PG and Roy.
                            What rumors? Every person following the team has said the team was frustrated with Lance and was difficult to deal with. It's been talked about ad nauseam. Wells was even on 1070 today laboring the same fact. Where have you been?

                            West didn't come out yelling about Lance, he came out yelling at Roy.
                            West yelled at PG for his swag passes too. We're not talking about getting in line on the court, we're talking about constantly having to babysit Lance.

                            The national media have an inkling of the issues, and you'll note they'll always distinguish between Lance being an irritant versus whatever the problems were. PG's inability to keep it in his pants off the court led to the issues on the court, but at least he was mature enough to keep playing, even if he did become much worse. Roy on the other hand become a lump of worthless 7'2" whiny dude.
                            LOL, if you believe the bolded then literally EVERY team in the NBA would be in complete chaos!

                            Comment


                            • Re: Lance Stephenson to sign with Charlotte- 3 years $27 million

                              Originally posted by Rogco View Post
                              PG's inability to keep it in his pants off the court led to the issues on the court, but at least he was mature enough to keep playing
                              Without practicing chastity, one cannot be a successful male athlete.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Lance Stephenson to sign with Charlotte- 3 years $27 million

                                Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                                Lance wanted to stay here, Pacers basically quit negotiating...


                                Candace BucknerVerified account ‏@CandaceDBuckner

                                Agent: "They made an offer and then they went out and while I thought we were still at the table, they made some other deals…"
                                All the reports have been that Lance didn't give the Pacers a chance to match, because he wanted out!


                                Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                                What rumors? Every person following the team has said the team was frustrated with Lance and was difficult to deal with. It's been talked about ad nauseam. Wells was even on 1070 today laboring the same fact. Where have you been
                                Frustrated with him, but they also say he's not the reason the team imploded

                                Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                                West yelled at PG for his swag passes too. We're not talking about getting in line on the court, we're talking about constantly having to babysit Lance.



                                LOL, if you believe the bolded then literally EVERY team in the NBA would be in complete chaos!
                                Ok, he got a stripper pregnant while dating the daughter of the most respected coach in the league, then tried to pay her a million dollars for an abortion, then the issues with sex and Hibbert, then he got catfished into sending dick picks to a fat black dude. PG had serious issues, and the belief among many is the roy / pg sex issues were what destroyed the team
                                Danger Zone

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X