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

All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
    I put it hypothetical in another thread, and I've basically already said I think it's borderline impossible Lance returns, but would you offer Copeland and Ian for Lance? Basically this gives Charlotte a shooter and rim protector. Cope is an expiring deal which gives Charlotte some of their money back this offseason and Ian's deal is up next year.

    Let's say Charlotte would expect that sort of package, would you if you were Larry? How would most Pacer fans react? How would the roster react? How would Lance behave in his return press conference? Can you still control him?
    If we're just playing the hypotheticals game for SnGs anyway? In a heartbeat.

    Comment


    • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
      I put it hypothetical in another thread, and I've basically already said I think it's borderline impossible Lance returns, but would you offer Copeland and Ian for Lance? Basically this gives Charlotte a shooter and rim protector. Cope is an expiring deal which gives Charlotte some of their money back this offseason and Ian's deal is up next year.

      Let's say Charlotte would expect that sort of package, would you if you were Larry? How would most Pacer fans react? How would the roster react? How would Lance behave in his return press conference? Can you still control him?
      From Charlotte's perspective, I'd much rather gamble on Lance's talent than take Copeland and Mahinmi. From the Pacers' perspective, I think Bird would have little interest in trying to get Lance back. Bird is a prideful guy, and he had to be insulted at the fact that Lance dumped us for a worse offer.

      Comment


      • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

        Another question, how will Lance deal with trade rumors? Something he never had to deal with here.


        Comment


        • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

          Lance Stephenson has hit just 7-of-38 three-point attempts, which is 18.4 percent. Stephen Curry recently made more threes in a single game.
          Impossible Is Nothing

          Comment


          • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

            I am not insistent on getting Lance back, but if we were to trade for him I would only do it if the Hornets took the CJ Miles contract.

            Comment


            • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

              Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
              From Charlotte's perspective, I'd much rather gamble on Lance's talent than take Copeland and Mahinmi. From the Pacers' perspective, I think Bird would have little interest in trying to get Lance back. Bird is a prideful guy, and he had to be insulted at the fact that Lance dumped us for a worse offer.
              Sure from a talent level it's lopsided, but if Charlotte is ready to cut ties you could do worse than getting the exact two roles you need for your team plus money savings.


              Comment


              • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                http://mweb.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on...55318?v=1&vc=1



                NBA

                HOMEFANTASYNFLMLBNBANEWSSCORESSTANDINGSTEAMSPOWER RANKINGSPLAYER STATSEXPERT PICKSODDSNHLNCAA FOOTBALLNCAA BASKETBALLGOLFNASCARTENNISHIGH SCHOOLFULL SITE

                "" style="border: 0px; vertical-align: bottom;">

                Report: 'Few would be surprised' if Hornets explore Stephenson trades

                By*James Herbert*/ NBA writer

                December 01, 2014 11:10 AM ET

                The*Lance Stephenson*era in Charlotte isn't off to a great start.*(USATSI)

                The first month of the season has been a disaster for the 4-14*Charlotte Hornets, and they're looking to explore trade opportunities, perhaps even ones involving marquee free-agent signing Lance Stephenson,*according to Grantland's Zach Lowe.*

                The Hornets have been aggressive making trade calls, according to sources across the league.

                The Hornets are searching for upgrades on the wing and at power forward, per those sources, and they are willing to talk turkey on basically anyone other than Kemba Walker and Al Jefferson. Free agents signed this past offseason can’t be traded until December 15, and few would be surprised if the Hornets make and take calls on Lance Stephenson ahead of that trigger date.

                Stephenson has not clicked with his new teammates at all. While he's known backcourt mate*Kemba Walker*since high school and it looked like the Hornets needed another creator, on the court they haven't been able to figure things out. Stephenson is shooting a miserable 37 percent from the field and 18 percent from the 3-point line. Both those numbers are bound to improve, but Charlotte head coach Steve Clifford has been looking at other options lately. He's benched Stephenson in two straight fourth quarters, and*he has spoken honestly about how far away the shooting guard is from being a star.*

                That signing wasn't the only thing the Hornets did in the summer -- they also failed to sign power forward*Josh McRoberts, who joined the*Miami Heat. McRoberts was a favorite of Clifford's, and he made an impact on both ends last season. The ball movement, outside shooting, screening and heady defense he brought are missed now, and the combination of Stephenson and stretch forward*Marvin Williams*have rather obviously not made up for his absence. Williams is shooting 39 percent from 3-point range, which is fine, but he is not the complete player that McRoberts is.*

                Charlotte still has the talent to be an upper-echelon team in the East. It also has time to work through its problems because of the relative incompetence of most of the conference. Some changes do need to be made, though, and you can understand why the front office is working the phones. The question is whether or not something drastic will have to be done. Moving Stephenson would certainly fall into that category.

                BIGGEST*STORIES

                NBABulls fans too hard on RoseNFLObservations: Cincy's to lose

                NBAWarriors win 9th straight, beat Pistons 104-93*|*Curry injures ankleNBAKobe gets triple-double; Lakers top Raps in OTNBAWade scores 27 in return, Heat win at MSGNewsMariners, Cruz agree to four-year, $57M dealNFLNFL: No discipline for players' Ferguson gestureNewsReport: OKC expects Durant back within week

                FULL SITE******TERMS OF USEPRIVACY POLICY******HELP/FEEDBACKCBS SPORTS MOBILE APPS© 2014 CBS INTERACTIVE. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
                Impossible Is Nothing

                Comment


                • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                  I really am not wild about acquiring Lance unless the trade is really in our favor. We're realistically probably going to get around the 14th-16th pick in the draft next year, and I have all the faith in the world that Larry can acquire someone, if he wants, that can do many of things Lance does at a much cheaper price (rookie deal) and likely without the baggage.

                  If we trot out a lineup of Lance and Stuckey we are going to have the same problems the Hornets are having right now.

                  Comment


                  • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                    This year's pick isn't to replace Lance. This year's pick is to bolster the bench. Solomon Hill is already on his way to being fine at the 2.


                    Comment


                    • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                      This year's pick isn't to replace Lance. This year's pick is to bolster the bench. Solomon Hill is already on his way to being fine at the 2.
                      Actually I largely agree with that.

                      If you were to poll GMs right now on whether they'd have Solo or Lance, on their current deals and considering the cap, I wonder what the spread would look like.

                      Comment


                      • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                        Originally posted by idioteque View Post
                        Actually I largely agree with that.

                        If you were to poll GMs right now on whether they'd have Solo or Lance, on their current deals and considering the cap, I wonder what the spread would look like.
                        It wouldn't be close.


                        Comment


                        • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                          Solo is a dependable shot from 3 away from being a steal on his rookie contract.

                          Comment


                          • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                            I put it hypothetical in another thread, and I've basically already said I think it's borderline impossible Lance returns, but would you offer Copeland and Ian for Lance? Basically this gives Charlotte a shooter and rim protector. Cope is an expiring deal which gives Charlotte some of their money back this offseason and Ian's deal is up next year.

                            Let's say Charlotte would expect that sort of package, would you if you were Larry? How would most Pacer fans react? How would the roster react? How would Lance behave in his return press conference? Can you still control him?
                            I would not trade any player on this roster, any foreign player we have stashed overseas, any draft picks, or anything else for Lance. I don't want him back. I don't think we need him back.

                            Edit: I would only consider it if Charlotte sweetened the deal by taking scrubs from us and sweetening the sour Lance pot with Noah Vonleh or an unprotected first round pick.
                            Last edited by cdash; 12-01-2014, 01:21 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                              Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                              I put it hypothetical in another thread, and I've basically already said I think it's borderline impossible Lance returns, but would you offer Copeland and Ian for Lance? Basically this gives Charlotte a shooter and rim protector. Cope is an expiring deal which gives Charlotte some of their money back this offseason and Ian's deal is up next year.

                              Let's say Charlotte would expect that sort of package, would you if you were Larry? How would most Pacer fans react? How would the roster react? How would Lance behave in his return press conference? Can you still control him?
                              Easy yes for me. CJ Miles could be in the mix for the trade package too.

                              How would fans react - no idea, but I expect most will welcome Lance back (eventually). His welcome will wear out fast though if he shoots the same percentages as in CHA

                              How would the roster react - this is the tricky one. As mentioned before, on a personal level they all get along, so I assume they'd give Lance a fair chance to fit in professionally once again. Right now, I do think we have a need for a ball dominating player, which currently is being filled by Sloan and Stuckey. Those players would obviously lose out if Lance returns.

                              How would Lance react - I have to think he would be humbled. Prodigal son coming home kind of thing. That disaster in CHA isn't anything that would build up someone's ego.

                              How would Larry react - this is the toughest one to read for me. I agree that Larry might be feeling all prideful and upset about Lance leaving, but at the same time, is there a GM in the league that values Lance more than Larry? Let's be honest, the Hornets took a chance on Lance because he came relatively cheap, not because they believed in him. But I think Larry genuinely believes in Lance.

                              Comment


                              • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                                Part of me would be terrified about Lance's return, but part of me is very fascinated by the idea.


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X