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'm about to leave work, so just wanted to say I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on this, and only time will tell in the end anyway. But the medical experts and athletes who have experienced the same injury have pretty much universally said they believe Paul will return to his previous form so I am comfortable with that. If you aren't then you're more than entitled to your opinion.
    Joe if you read back through this thread I never said PG wouldn't come back as good as he ever was. All I said was that expecting that is nuts, and it is.

    He might, he might not. But either way it's probably gonna take a long time.

    After the injury happened I posted that it was time to move West and rebuild. My reasoning was that it was gonna take Paul at least a year of playing time to regain his confidence in the leg, and regain the strength he will lose and by that time West would be ready to hang it up. I didn't ever post a proclamation Paul was done, never even implied that. I think he will make it back, but when basketball players suffer leg injuries you just never know.

    I don't fallow soccer at all and have never even heard of him. But that article did nothing but confirm my opinion that he's gonna be in for a long road.
    "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

    Comment


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

      I don't know how it is "nuts" when it is the opinion of every single medical expert I've read or professional athlete who has experienced the injury. I've provided multiple links saying it isn't nuts. Can you provide even one that says it is? I have literally not read a single article on Paul's injury where a medical expert has said "I don't think Paul George will return to the level he was at". So when I have the medical experts, people who have experienced the injury, and Paul himself saying he'll be fine I'm pretty confident in that I'm not nuts.

      I'm not saying even that Paul will necessarily be at a star level right when he returns (which is why I do believe it is essential he plays some this year if he is physically capable), but I do believe that by the end of the 2015-2016 season Paul will be playing at close to an all star level once again, and that by the 2016 season start it will be well in his rearview mirror.

      Like I said you're sitting on top of an elephant telling me it's a mastodon and when I provide a bunch of information saying no it's an elephant you just say no, it's a mastodon, don't be nuts.
      Last edited by Trader Joe; 12-17-2014, 06:55 PM.


      Comment


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

        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
        If Paul was healthy this year, do we really think the Stuckey/Miles/Solo brigade wouldn't be at least passable as a Lance replacement?
        I think that you should clarify what you are saying here.

        When you refer to "Lance Replacement", are you referring PURELY on a #s and Stats perspective ( as in, somehow replace the 14ppg/7rpg/4.6apg numbers that Lance produced )?

        or

        Are you referring to whatever contributions that Lance provided ( intangibles like energy, dynamism, untapped potential and passing )?

        Part of the problem is that many people confuse one for the other and the difference is what Anti and Pro Lance supports rail against.

        I think that Stuckey/Miles/Solo can produce enough from a Statistical perspective that we wouldn't miss Lance's Offensive production. For the Pro-Lance supports, I can see how they can argue that we won't be able to re-produce any of the intangibles that Lance gave this Team.
        Last edited by CableKC; 12-17-2014, 06:54 PM.
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


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

          Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
          Meh I happen to think they would do more than OK when getting to play with a guy like Paul, but that's something we won't know til next year, and may never know at all based on how the future of the roster unfolds.
          Are we honestly at a point where Paul makes his teammates better? I get that he draws the focus of the defense, but can't we say that about every #1 option on a given team? Granger drew the other team's best defender for years, put up some great numbers, defended the other team's best player and I don't think we'd ever mistake him for the kind of player that makes his teammates better. Kevin Love's another example, minus the defense part. Lots of guys are good to great players, whatever adjective you want to use, but they don't make the game easier for their teammates. Is Paul there yet? I'm not so sure, at least not on a consistent basis. And that's not saying he can't, or won't, be there one day.
          2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

          Comment


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

            Did Paul make Lance better? I would say just by virtue of playing next to a guy who can draw attention on the level of Paul could make teammates better.

            Offensively I suppose we can debate, but I would say there is no doubt Paul George made all of his teammates better defensively.


            Comment


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

              Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
              Did Paul make Lance better?
              I don't know if we can credit Paul for Lance's development. A lot of different people went into it. Bird's belief, Vogel's patience, Shaw's inspiration, Hill taking a back seat, West being that tougher figure he respects, and so on. Paul would certainly be on that list, but it's a long list. So not in a sense where I can say, "yeah Lance is Lance because Paul made him better." And that's a long list without giving Lance at least a little bit of credit himself.
              2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

              Comment


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

                Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                I don't know how it is "nuts" when it is the opinion of every single medical expert I've read or professional athlete who has experienced the injury. I've provided multiple links saying it isn't nuts. Can you provide even one that says it is? I have literally not read a single article on Paul's injury where a medical expert has said "I don't think Paul George will return to the level he was at". So when I have the medical experts, people who have experienced the injury, and Paul himself saying he'll be fine I'm pretty confident in that I'm not nuts.

                I'm not saying even that Paul will necessarily be at a star level right when he returns (which is why I do believe it is essential he plays some this year if he is physically capable), but I do believe that by the end of the 2015-2016 season Paul will be playing at close to an all star level once again, and that by the 2016 season start it will be well in his rearview mirror.

                Like I said you're sitting on top of an elephant telling me it's a mastodon and when I provide a bunch of information saying no it's an elephant you just say no, it's a mastodon, don't be nuts.
                Is there a particular reason you are comparing me to some loon riding an elephant? Lol

                I don't think saying that there is a chance Paul won't come back is similar to that at all.
                "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                Comment


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

                  Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                  Did Paul make Lance better? I would say just by virtue of playing next to a guy who can draw attention on the level of Paul could make teammates better.

                  Offensively I suppose we can debate, but I would say there is no doubt Paul George made all of his teammates better defensively.
                  Just saw your edit, and I agree with the latter part. As did Hibbert for example. But our strength was always our defense, both individual and team. After all, if you have individual breakdowns all over the place, your team defense takes a hit.

                  Our weakness was always our sputtering offense. Bringing in guys like Miles and Stuckey, you're bringing them in for offense, primarily. So that's sort of where my question was coming from about Paul making them better.
                  2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

                  Comment


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

                    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                    Did Paul make Lance better? I would say just by virtue of playing next to a guy who can draw attention on the level of Paul could make teammates better.

                    Offensively I suppose we can debate, but I would say there is no doubt Paul George made all of his teammates better defensively.
                    I don't think Paul is that great offensively tbh. He was spectacular early and his play dropped off significantly late.

                    Just saw edit, and I would agree with that.

                    Why isn't there any talk about DWest missing Lance? I bet he misses those wide open jumpers right now.
                    Last edited by Taterhead; 12-17-2014, 07:14 PM.
                    "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                    Comment


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

                      On a "sort of related" topic.....is Cody Zeller better suited to play the Center or PF position?

                      I'm guessing that he is best suited to be a backup Frontcourt Player....I just don't get the sense that he has the skillset to be a Backup PF.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


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

                        Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                        Is there a particular reason you are comparing me to some loon riding an elephant? Lol

                        I don't think saying that there is a chance Paul won't come back is similar to that at all.
                        Because you keep calling me nuts for sharing an opinion with every medical expert and athlete who has experienced this injury. Meanwhile you haven't supplied even one link where someone says he won't return to form. I mean maybe you are a doctor I don't know but I'm not so I have to go off of what the medical experts say and while they all agree it is a long road to recovery, they also all agree that Paul will eventually return to form.


                        Comment


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

                          Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                          I don't think Paul is that great offensively tbh. He was spectacular early and his play dropped off significantly late.
                          He was pretty bad the second half of the season, but was pretty good in the playoffs. Especially the Atlanta and Miami series, struggled against Washington. He is definitely a work in progress on that end of the court. His mid range jumper still is inconsistent and his ball handling still needs tightened up.

                          Also, I complained about it a lot the second half of last year, but what sneakily started to kill Paul's offensive game was that instead of finishing at the rim he started to look for the call way too often. Which I hate to say I kind of blame on West because I think West encourages everyone to go for the foul and try to yell And 1.


                          Comment


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

                            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                            Because you keep calling me nuts for sharing an opinion with every medical expert and athlete who has experienced this injury. Meanwhile you haven't supplied even one link where someone says he won't return to form. I mean maybe you are a doctor I don't know but I'm not so I have to go off of what the medical experts say and while they all agree it is a long road to recovery, they also all agree that Paul will eventually return to form.
                            I never said he wouldn't return to form Joe. So I'm not sure why I need to support a statement I never made.
                            "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                            Comment


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

                              Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                              I never said he wouldn't return to form Joe. So I'm not sure why I need to support a statement I never made.
                              Because you have nothing to support your statement that it is nuts to believe he will.

                              But honestly I am chasing you in circles at this point. I'm very comfortable with my stance on this subject.


                              Comment


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

                                Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                                On a "sort of related" topic.....is Cody Zeller better suited to play the Center or PF position?

                                I'm guessing that he is best suited to be a backup Frontcourt Player....I just don't get the sense that he has the skillset to be a Backup PF.
                                PF

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X