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 BlueNGold View Post
    In many ways he is like a specialist who appears to be a generalist. Not a great shooter but he is a great penetrator, passer, rebounder he is great in the break and he is a pretty good defender. All things considered he is borderline all star. He smply needs shooters around him just as shooters need penetrators around them. But one thing you cannot deny is that this is a confidence league and he has all of he needs to perform at the highest level where many other players crack.
    Lance seems to be more of a jack of all trades, master of none type of player IMO. If he's playing with guys that can garner the attention of the defense, then he's quite good at filling in the blanks, and taking advantage of opportunities/mismatches, especially on the weak side when defenses are scrambling.

    Its not really fair to say "Lance just needs shooters around him". We've never seen him play with an abundance of shooters, with him as the centerpiece, so we dont really know how well he would thrive in that situation. We can assume, but shouldn't automatically pass it off as fact.

    To call Lance a borderline AS right now would be to completely dismiss the type of season he's currently having. If someone wants to utilize last year as the end all be all for rating Lance, they should refer to him being a borderline AS in past tense. So far this year. It doesn't seem to be in the cards. It'll be interesting to see how well or poorly he plays once he's traded to a different team

    Comment


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

      Originally posted by presto123 View Post
      All I hear are crickets out of the "Lance Future All Star" people now. I love it.
      Nah, they're still here. Loud and proud. Even in a terrible 1/4th of the season nearly complete, they still support and believe that Lance is a star. It takes strong beliefs to still argue that point in spite of Lance's play thus far this year. Kudos to those guys

      Comment


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

        Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post

        To call Lance a borderline AS right now would be to completely dismiss the type of season he's currently having. If someone wants to utilize last year as the end all be all for rating Lance, they should refer to him being a borderline AS in past tense. So far this year. It doesn't seem to be in the cards. It'll be interesting to see how well or poorly he plays once he's traded to a different team
        Apart from his shots not falling, he's having almost the same year, statistically. He shot 46% two years ago and 49% last year, so I don't think it's a stretch to suggest that the aberration is his current shooting slump (which he's been slowly fighting his way out of, despite having the worst coach in the league working against him).

        But yeah, you have guys like presto123 who are literally giddy at the guy's struggle so far. And that's fine, get the jabs in now before the stats start to normalize. Then go back to saying it's not a stats thing.

        Comment


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

          Originally posted by 3rdStrike View Post
          Apart from his shots not falling, he's having almost the same year, statistically. He shot 46% two years ago and 49% last year, so I don't think it's a stretch to suggest that the aberration is his current shooting slump (which he's been slowly fighting his way out of, despite having the worst coach in the league working against him).

          But yeah, you have guys like presto123 who are literally giddy at the guy's struggle so far. And that's fine, get the jabs in now before the stats start to normalize. Then go back to saying it's not a stats thing.
          Idk if you've watched the Hornets but things are getting worse, not better. Lance isnt playing with that youthful exuberance that made him a fan fave to some. His assists and rebs are there, but they're also falling from where they were earlier in the season. The longer he's there, the more they may come down.

          Lance has never been a good nor consistent shooter. His FG% was always high because he shot a great percentage at the rim. Between Big Al clogging the lane and teams basically daring Lance to shoot a J, he's not getting the easy lanes to the rim that he got last year when teams were concentrating on PG and West. Lance needs to develop some type of consistent shot if he's ever gonna be what a lot of you want him to be.

          As far as guys being giddy that he isn't doing well, I think some take solace in Lance playing poorly because it sort of justifies anyone who believes he's not as great of a player that many argue that he is.

          Me personally, now that he's not on the Pacers, IDC if he plays well or not, as I have my own opinions of his game. I enjoy analyzing and discussing him and his game because there are often times strong argumentd on both sides of the coin. Some are stubborn to the point that they're gonna believe what they believe no matter the stat, video, report, etc that says different. But most genuinely are able to discuss their opinion and back it up with good facts, again on both sides of the coin.

          I will say, I do think its good for Lance to taste some humble pie and realize he needs the right talent around him to be in the situation he was last year. It could potentially help with his immature/selfish issues that he seems to have
          Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 12-18-2014, 08:47 PM.

          Comment


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

            Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
            For every Spree and Sheed there's a Ruben Patterson and JR Rider. I honestly don't fully think that Lance is anywhere near as bad as the latter, but I also don't think he's as talented as the former.

            For his sake, hopefully he is able to eat the humble pie and like it. Lance has been humbled (IMO) several times in the past however, and yet the same issues seem to arise. Most of the obstacles that Lance has endured from a pure basketball standpoint, have been self inflicted for the most part:

            (to name a few)
            HS Recruiting fiasco
            Being drafted in the second round despite having first round talent
            Driving down his FA market value with selfish play
            Going to a team that wasn't a good fit for his skills
            Driving down his current trade value with poor play/decisions

            How many times does a guy with supposedly so much talent, have to be humbled before he understands.

            I think of J.R. Rider when I think of Lance but Lance isn't nearly as talented as J.R. was. As talented as he was Rider over valued his talent, didn't care about his team and soon became a player that no team would touch because he was viewed as a cancer, which he was. Lance isn't as bad as Rider but if he continues with the pattern of distrubting chemistry that he's shown at the end of last season and now his time in Charlotte, Lance could easily find himself on the J.R. Rider path.
            Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

            Comment


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

              Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
              Lance seems to be more of a jack of all trades, master of none type of player IMO. If he's playing with guys that can garner the attention of the defense, then he's quite good at filling in the blanks, and taking advantage of opportunities/mismatches, especially on the weak side when defenses are scrambling.

              Its not really fair to say "Lance just needs shooters around him". We've never seen him play with an abundance of shooters, with him as the centerpiece, so we dont really know how well he would thrive in that situation. We can assume, but shouldn't automatically pass it off as fact.

              To call Lance a borderline AS right now would be to completely dismiss the type of season he's currently having. If someone wants to utilize last year as the end all be all for rating Lance, they should refer to him being a borderline AS in past tense. So far this year. It doesn't seem to be in the cards. It'll be interesting to see how well or poorly he plays once he's traded to a different team
              I'm not going to dismiss how he has done this season....but as I said earlier....being on the Hornets and playing next to Kemba and AlJeff has done the opposite of what he wanted to go when leaving Indy....highlight his weaknesses ( which in the end, simply lowers his trade value....despite whatever potential he may have ).

              I think that it is clear that Lance will excel more in a System and environment that fits his strengths while having the pieces in place to mask his weaknesses. This is pretty much true of most Players, but it is abundantly clear that he's not a "plug and play" type Player that can fit any system.
              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 Ace E.Anderson View Post

                I will say, I do think its good for Lance to taste some humble pie and realize he needs the right talent around him to be in the situation he was last year. It could potentially help with his immature/selfish issues that he seems to have
                I would agree with this if his coach didn't continually do things to sabotage him and the rest of the team. His coach is actually letting Lance be himself significantly less than Vogel did, and I don't think anyone saw that coming. He's in a nightmare situation right now, as are the rest of the Hornets to a lesser degree (until the coach starts singling out other people for stuff that everyone else on the roster is doing).

                Comment


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

                  Source: Hornets haven't received good offers for Lance Stephenson. Have decided to "keep him for now." Indiana, Miami among teams w/interest
                  8:54pm - 18 Dec 14

                  Comment


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

                    Originally posted by granger4mvp View Post
                    Source: Hornets haven't received good offers for Lance Stephenson. Have decided to "keep him for now." Indiana, Miami among teams w/interest
                    8:54pm - 18 Dec 14


                    The longer the boat is allowed to burn, the greater chance the boat could sink....the more desperate they will become to move him.

                    If anything, this just tells us what we already learned in the offseason.....the market isn't as strong for Lance as the Hornets think it is. There is interest in acquiring him.....but not anywhere the price tag that MJ is asking for.
                    Last edited by CableKC; 12-18-2014, 10:19 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

                      Anybody think Lance might be a good fit in Miami?
                      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                      Comment


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

                        Originally posted by 3rdStrike View Post
                        I would agree with this if his coach didn't continually do things to sabotage him and the rest of the team. His coach is actually letting Lance be himself significantly less than Vogel did, and I don't think anyone saw that coming. He's in a nightmare situation right now, as are the rest of the Hornets to a lesser degree (until the coach starts singling out other people for stuff that everyone else on the roster is doing).
                        It's obvious that both have differing personalities and that they don't share the same type of relationship that Vogel/Lance had, but I don't think that Clifford is intentionally trying to sabotage the Team. Kemba and Lance simply aren't a good fit.
                        Last edited by CableKC; 12-18-2014, 11:08 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 McKeyFan View Post
                          Anybody think Lance might be a good fit in Miami?
                          Not with Wade still there.
                          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

                            Trade talks are "dead" and Lance isn't playing the next 2 games. We'll see what happens next, but I don't expect anything.

                            Comment


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

                              I just want Pacers to trade for someone to make this season somewhat interesting.

                              Comment


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

                                Originally posted by CableKC View Post


                                The longer the boat is allowed to burn, the greater chance the boat could sink....the more desperate they will become to move him.

                                If anything, this just tells us what we already learned in the offseason.....the market isn't as strong for Lance as the Hornets think it is. There is interest in acquiring him.....but not anywhere the price tag that MJ is asking for.
                                What could Miami offer? McBob is done for the year, Granger is just done. I don't think they'd trade Shabazz Napier for Lance.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X