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
    He even has me shaking my head.

    "when my players learn my instincts we’ll be a better team.”
    Maybe it's poor wording on his part, but I'm wondering if he means that once there is greater chemistry/familiarity among Kemba/Lance/BigAl/Clifford ( such as the season progressing from game to game and month to month ).....they will play better?
    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 BlueNGold View Post
      I can tell you already miss him. You're not like Ace. You want him back, don't you?
      Ill tell ya what. When someone is as passionate about a player as you are, it makes me interested in trying to see what they see. With me arguing and analyzing his game so much, my thoughts have began to change a bit. Now that Lance isn't here, I appreciate his game a bit more only because I'm not angry about the "bad Lance" moments.

      I don't necessarily want him back, and still dont think he's a star player, but I'll concede that he's a (much?) better player than I gave him credit for last year. And thats after a few subpar games with the Hornets.
      Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 11-03-2014, 10:36 PM.

      Comment


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

        Originally posted by cdash View Post
        I think Lance's biggest problem in Charlotte is the lack of spacing on offense.
        Lance's problem in Charlotte is there's no shooters. Outside of Gary Neal.... they also lack a superstar. PG is a superstar and still evolving. Charlotte doesn't have one. Nor do they have a PF who can play in the post like West. And their bench is a disaster. Hairston is a rookie so I don't know how much they get out of him yet. They really miss CDR and McBob.

        Comment


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

          Lance reminds me of Stephon Marbury. Lance may not reach Starbury's great career numbers or lead a team in the playoffs, but I think there are similarities. Especially in their gaudy versatile stats from their position and yet people/coaches still believe they hurt the team.

          Comment


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

            Originally posted by Grimp View Post
            Lance's problem in Charlotte is there's no shooters. Outside of Gary Neal.... they also lack a superstar. PG is a superstar and still evolving. Charlotte doesn't have one. Nor do they have a PF who can play in the post like West. And their bench is a disaster. Hairston is a rookie so I don't know how much they get out of him yet. They really miss CDR and McBob.
            They have AlJeff as their Low Post Player....whose a much deeper low post threat than West or Hibbert.

            I agree that if McBob was there.....he'd make a big difference.
            Last edited by CableKC; 11-03-2014, 10:54 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 Grimp View Post
              Lance's problem in Charlotte is there's no shooters. Outside of Gary Neal.... they also lack a superstar. PG is a superstar and still evolving. Charlotte doesn't have one. Nor do they have a PF who can play in the post like West. And their bench is a disaster. Hairston is a rookie so I don't know how much they get out of him yet. They really miss CDR and McBob.
              Yep, that's what I meant by lack of spacing on offense. Gary Neal is their best shooter but if he's in the game, it's in Lance's place.

              Comment


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

                Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                I think it was the "my players" part of the quote that had him shaking his head.
                Yeah, you're probably right. Damn, this post-graduate is killing me
                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                Comment


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

                  Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                  I noticed that too. Cant knock his confidence lol but probably could've used a better choice of words
                  Yes, it was poorly worded. With that said, I think if someone tried to play with Larry Bird they better learn his instincts as well. Otherwise, they're going to have the word Spalding on their forehead.

                  ...and yes, the bit about "my players" is probably most of what I was talking about. Maybe he did want to be "the man"...although this is really the first clear indication of that.

                  Comment


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

                    Originally posted by cdash View Post
                    I think Lance's biggest problem in Charlotte is the lack of spacing on offense.
                    Yep.

                    Lance is also learning that it is a lot easier playing next to one of the 5 best players in the NBA (which PG was for much of the season last year) versus playing next to an under sized point guard who as Lance pretty astutely points out does basically the same sort of things Lance does.


                    Comment


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

                      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                      Yep.

                      Lance is also learning that it is a lot easier playing next to one of the 5 best players in the NBA (which PG was for much of the season last year) versus playing next to an under sized point guard who as Lance pretty astutely points out does basically the same sort of things Lance does.
                      Also, not all point guards are as unselfish as George Hill. People will call it passive and that's true to an extent, but I think Hill was being a true team player by taking a smaller role in the offense once Lance emerged.

                      Comment


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

                        Originally posted by cdash View Post
                        Also, not all point guards are as unselfish as George Hill. People will call it passive and that's true to an extent, but I think Hill was being a true team player by taking a smaller role in the offense once Lance emerged.

                        And some point guards can't play off ball, which Lance needs. You pretty much make Kemba Walker useless if you give the ball to Lance. So one of them needs to adjust..

                        Comment


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

                          Originally posted by cdash View Post
                          Also, not all point guards are as unselfish as George Hill. People will call it passive and that's true to an extent, but I think Hill was being a true team player by taking a smaller role in the offense once Lance emerged.
                          The problem isn't with Kemba/Lance/BigAl....it's that the Hornets need another 3pt shooter to pair with Lance and Kemba in the lineup. MKG is a very good defender to insert into the Starting Lineup ...but is a terrible shooter and can't hit the 3pt shot. All of them left last season.

                          I'd think that after X # of years that MKG has been on the Hornets......that MJ would just trade him for some solid 3pt shooter that can adequately defend. MKG is a decent Starter.....but get a 3pt shooter for Kemba or Lance to kick it out to for heaven's sake.
                          Last edited by CableKC; 11-04-2014, 01:41 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 CableKC View Post
                            The problem isn't with Kemba/Lance/BigAl....it's that the Hornets need another 3pt shooter to pair with Lance and Kemba in the lineup. MKG is a very good defender to insert into the Starting Lineup ...but is a terrible shooter and can't hit the 3pt shot. All of them left last season.

                            I'd think that after X # of years that MKG has been on the Hornets......that MJ would just trade him for some solid 3pt shooter that can adequately defend. MKG is a decent Starter.....but get a 3pt shooter for Kemba or Lance to kick it out to for heaven's sake.
                            MKG is on his way to being a sort of Shawn Marion type of hybrid. You don't trade that guy. He's been playing well and shooting that mid range J at a high clip. He's also 21 and improving. It's hard to get young, athletic, defenders with the type of motor that he has. Idk if you trade a guy like that so young. But I agree that a better 3pt shooting 3 who doesn't need the ball (Corey Brewer type) would be ideal with a backcourt of Kemba/Lance. I still don't know if that would help a bunch until those two get more time together and learn how to share the ball with one another.

                            Comment


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

                              Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                              MKG is on his way to being a sort of Shawn Marion type of hybrid. You don't trade that guy. He's been playing well and shooting that mid range J at a high clip. He's also 21 and improving. It's hard to get young, athletic, defenders with the type of motor that he has. Idk if you trade a guy like that so young. But I agree that a better 3pt shooting 3 who doesn't need the ball (Corey Brewer type) would be ideal with a backcourt of Kemba/Lance. I still don't know if that would help a bunch until those two get more time together and learn how to share the ball with one another.
                              Then maybe the Hornets should trade Gerald Henderson for a solid 3pt shooter that can get some Wing Rotational Minutes.
                              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 CableKC View Post
                                The problem isn't with Kemba/Lance/BigAl....it's that the Hornets need another 3pt shooter to pair with Lance and Kemba in the lineup. MKG is a very good defender to insert into the Starting Lineup ...but is a terrible shooter and can't hit the 3pt shot. All of them left last season.

                                I'd think that after X # of years that MKG has been on the Hornets......that MJ would just trade him for some solid 3pt shooter that can adequately defend. MKG is a decent Starter.....but get a 3pt shooter for Kemba or Lance to kick it out to for heaven's sake.
                                I guess you haven't watched them yet....MKG has been by far their best player so far. He worked with Mark Price to fix his shot and he is playing relaly good D. There was a stretch in the KNicks game after MKG fell hard but before it started to hurt where he dominated the game and pulled Charlotte back into it.

                                And he's only 21 years old. MKG is the last guy they should be trading.


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X