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 Ace E.Anderson View Post
    I dont hate him. I just dont want him on my team.

    Edit: We already have players that aren't producing up to their contract, we would just be adding another.
    He wouldn't be my first choice either but I would choose him way ahead of Solo, Miles or Stuckey and that is where we are at right now.

    Comment


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

      Originally posted by diamonddave00 View Post
      I'd not be shocked if David West who played in Charlotte early in his career and still lives in the area were to end up part of any Lance trade if it occurred. I'd gladly accept Noah Vonleh instead of a 2015 #1 in a deal. Not 100% I want Lance back but I think Larry would take him back if a real trade does make sense. Bird was upset the Pacers were not given a chance to match the Hornets offer, I think they would have.

      The deal Lance ended up with is not worse than the Pacers offered him and not significantly better so I don't see the contract as any problem.

      The upcoming draft class is deep man. I think having two top 10 picks next Summer would be better than Vonleh. Also I think most of our fan base would blow their stacks if the front office chose Vonleh over a second top 10 pick. Other than NBA die-hards no one knows who Noah Vonleh is. Whereas two top 10 picks generates all kinds of buzz and excitement within Pacer nation next season.

      Comment


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

        People here know who Vonleh is.

        Comment


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

          Originally posted by doctor-h View Post
          Its his job to try to get the best deal he can and who says there actually was an offer or just exploritory talks. Besides I would be surprised if this ever happens Bird just might be pulling Jordan's chains who knows.
          The talks were exploratory but basically, Charlotte wanted to "explore" trading Lance back to Indy. Larry and KP said the Safari ain't open unless that 2015 1st rounder comes with him....

          Comment


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

            Originally posted by PacersHomer View Post
            People here know who Vonleh is.
            Because most of us are die hards. The casual Pacer or NBA fan hears we passed on a top 10 pick for some guy named Vonleh who hardly plays on a bad Hornets team, they'll have a stroke. Especially if Vonleh comes here and "remains anonymous."

            Comment


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

              Originally posted by doctor-h View Post
              He wouldn't be my first choice either but I would choose him way ahead of Solo, Miles or Stuckey and that is where we are at right now.
              In all honesty without being biased, does it really surprise anyone? Outside of maybe Danny being a distant second, LB has been closer to Lance than any other player during Birds tenure.

              Whether or not he fits here, is overpaid, or has any type of extra curricular issues is probably moot to Bird when it comes to Lance. Guess we will see what happens.

              Comment


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

                Originally posted by Sandman21 View Post
                Enter Stuckey.
                Charlotte has a full roster like us. Even at Copeland/Scola (or whoever) they'd have to cut someone, so I doubt they'd do a 3 for 1.

                Comment


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

                  If a #1 is not offered Vonleh who is only 19 is a great option. Vonleh would have the bulk of this season to get playing time to develop on top of that I can't see the Hornets having to give up a #1 to unload Lance. Remember too last years draft was hyped as a great draft and only 3 or 4 of those "great upside" players are even playing regular minutes this year.

                  Comment


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

                    Originally posted by diamonddave00 View Post
                    If a #1 is not offered Vonleh who is only 19 is a great option. Vonleh would have the bulk of this season to get playing time to develop on top of that I can't see the Hornets having to give up a #1 to unload Lance. Remember too last years draft was hyped as a great draft and only 3 or 4 of those "great upside" players are even playing regular minutes this year.

                    You also forget though, if we take Charlotte's pick? There's no law that says we have to keep it. We can dangle it at the draft for a "player." If we choose to. Top 10 Draft picks hold more value than just drafting a good young player. If we wanna contend, that pick and maybe another player could net us that coveted point guard. West and Roy if they're still here by June, as well as George Hill will all be entering the final year of their contracts in the 2015-2016 season. So lets say that pick ends up being the 8th pick?

                    West or Roy or George Hill and the 8th pick to OKC for RJ in a sign and trade or to Phoenix for Goran or Bledsoe. Not trying to turn this into a TRADE SCENARIO thread, but top 10 picks hold many possibilities.

                    Comment


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

                      Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                      Charlotte has a full roster like us. Even at Copeland/Scola (or whoever) they'd have to cut someone, so I doubt they'd do a 3 for 1.
                      Enter Jason Maxiell's unguaranteed contract.
                      "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                      "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                      Comment


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

                        Its not as sexy as the dream trades some have thought up, but realistically its probably something like West and Cope for Lance and Biyombo. I'd doubt CHA gives up a first or Vonleh just to get rid of Lance.

                        West gives them a vet post scorer that can play with Jefferson or Zeller, and Cope can give them a bench shooter to replace what Anthony Toliver brought to the table last year.

                        Though I doubt Lance's value is super high right now, trades for Scola, Watson and Cope dont seem like it'd get it done IMO. Especially of there are somehow other suitors
                        Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 12-14-2014, 07:46 PM.

                        Comment


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

                          Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                          Its not as sexy as the dream trades some have thought up, but realistically its probably something like West and Cope for Lance and Biyombo. I'd doubt CHA gives up a first or Vonleh just to get rid of Lance.

                          West gives them a vet post scorer that can play with Jefferson or Zeller, and Cope can give them a bench shooter to replace what Anthony Toliver brought to the table last year.

                          Though I doubt Lance's value is super high right now, trades for Scola, Watson and Cope dont seem like it'd get it done IMO. Especially of there are somehow other suitors
                          If Charlotte wants to take a mulligan on free agency this summer, Scola, Watson, and Cope would give them that chance. Thats the selling point for Charlotte.
                          "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                          "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                          Comment


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

                            Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                            What do you mean by saying "some of you"? I have never said anything negative about Lance. I do not consider him to be a cancer at all. I believe that he's a well-intentioned guy who just gets over-competitive (even against his teammates) from time to time. I've said time after time that I do like Lance.

                            The reason I post in this thread is to defend our current players and FO from the people that were so pissed off when Lance signed in Charlotte that have turned on the team and blame everything on the current players and FO in order to champion Lance. I do not have anything against Lance as a person or as a player. My main problem is with the people that are trying to bring everyone else (current players, FO, even fans) down in order to prop up Lance.
                            Nuntius my friend why is it that people in this forum including you can use terms like stealing rebounds, ball stopper, selfish, stat chaser, locker room cancer as terms to describe Lance but when someone calls Roy mentally weak, overpaid, overrated, slow they are somehow demeaning our teams players just because they are championing Lance. There are some truths to everything I said about Lance and there are truths to what I said about Roy. It is the truth that GH is not a point guard and it is an opinion shared by many of the experts around the league but if someone on here says it we are demeaning Hill. I just happen to believe that Lance was a huge asset to our team last year and could have been in the future even more. Apparently Larry Bird feels the same. I also believe that the team without him is not as promising. Some don't like Lance, I don't like what Hibbert is as a person and a player. I also think the team would be better with a true point guard and I don't believe for one minute that our system doesn't require one. I am only interested in the success of the franchise and if you don't recognize its weakness you cannot improve it. This is what I think are their weaknesses. Also Lance has been blamed as being the ball stopper well the ball has stopped again and that happened when certain people came back and others were sent to the bench.

                            Comment


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

                              Originally posted by Sandman21 View Post
                              If Charlotte wants to take a mulligan on free agency this summer, Scola, Watson, and Cope would give them that chance. Thats the selling point for Charlotte.
                              While true, they still have the rest of this season to think about. I think they have enough small guards, so idk that CJ fits. If they're truly ready to say **** this season, then I could see it I guess. I just dont think any team should do that when you play in the EC.

                              Comment


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

                                Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                                In all honesty without being biased, does it really surprise anyone? Outside of maybe Danny being a distant second, LB has been closer to Lance than any other player during Birds tenure.

                                Whether or not he fits here, is overpaid, or has any type of extra curricular issues is probably moot to Bird when it comes to Lance. Guess we will see what happens.
                                Why would you say it would be moot to Bird I would give him more credit than that. I personally think Bird would get rid of Hibbert in a heartbeat if anyone would take him but that contract and his production make it nearly impossible to deal him. That could be one of our problems going forward.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X