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

    I feel for Lance and just about anyone on that team right now. Watching them is pretty frustrating, especially after how well they played for the majority of the first half tonight.

    Comment


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

      I wonder what happens to both Lance and the Hornets once he's traded. Does he continue his disappointing season, or does he turn it around? Do the Hornets find some cohesion and catch lightning in a bottle like they did last year? Both? Neither?

      Should be very interesting

      Comment


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

        Originally posted by Kuq_e_Zi91 View Post
        The offense down the stretch is simply inexcusable, and there's no blaming Lance for this one. Clifford even had a timeout left. Instead we get another stand around and watch Kemba dribble in place and step back.
        I'm not blaming Lance for this one. He has to be on the floor in order to accept any blame. Kemba is the one to blame......that guy really has no problem being "The Man" and taking the shot.....EVERY FRICKIN' SHOT.

        At least when he was on the Pacers......if Lance passed the ball to PG13, GH, West or Hibbert....there's a good chance of the ball getting back to him.

        Once the ball goes to Kemba.....it stays with him unless the defense collapses on him.
        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
          What a train wreck. Terrible fit. Terrible coach. Terrible owner.
          Terrible Agent and Advisor to Lance as well.
          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
            Terrible Agent and Advisor to Lance as well.
            I dont get this line of thinking. His agents job is to find the best deal for him. Lance is the one that makes the final OKAY on any signings. Yes his advisors maybe should have advised him to not sign in CHA, but Lance reportedly didn't have many other options. DAL signed their first choice in Parsons, he assumed it was a wrap in IND, and MJ wanted a decision in 24 hours.

            Maybe he made a rushed decision, but it was still his decision to make. He decides where he plays, not his agent nor his advisor (both of whom obviously gave Lance bad advice)

            Comment


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

              Perhaps we can get Vonleh and the pick

              Comment


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

                If I'm Clifford at this point why not bring Lance off the bench? You can start Henderson, or even Gary Neal if you want. Sure you give up some size defensively, and its tough bringing a $9Mil/yr guy off the bench, but it balances your team out so much better.

                Let Lance "be Lance" with the second unit against second teamers. Let them play a little more uptempo, and really pressure the opposing teams second units. It also limits Kemba and Lance starting the game together, and let's each get in an offensive rhythm.

                As far as finishing games -- I dont even know where to begin. But i can say ISO ball with Kemba isn't going to win a lot of games.

                Comment


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

                  Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                  I haven't been a fan of Doyle's work since he started, and I agree that calling Lance a loser is...a stretch. But we've seen plenty of second round picks as well as undrafted guys that make something of themselves.

                  Sure, over the course of history you'll have a decent amount of second rounders/undrafted guys in the league since at any given time you have a league full of players who were taken over a 15 or so year stretch. Still, look at all of the second round picks over the last decade or so and only a very few of them ever make a name for themselves. Look at all of the guys taken around Lance in the 2010 second round. Bunch of no-names for the most part who didn't do squat. Making any sort of career in the NBA as a second rounder is always going to be defying the odds. Like him or not, Lance has defied the odds.

                  Comment


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

                    Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                    As far as finishing games -- I dont even know where to begin. But i can say ISO ball with Kemba isn't going to win a lot of games.
                    That's really the problem. I think who starts isn't really as important as how Clifford finishes the game. He has no clue. If you just search "Steve Clifford" or "Clifford Hornets" on Twitter you see a bunch of people sitting near the Hornets bench basically saying he's completely lost on the sidelines and just mumbles to himself. It feels like this team's problems are much deeper than shuffling lineups when they keep blowing leads and collapsing over and over. It's either that or they get blown out.

                    I can't even say I blame Kemba personally. He dribbles the ball and no one moves. A part of me thinks he's waiting for some movement and he sees no one moving so he just does it himself. A few times I saw him looking back to Clifford for a play and Clifford just says "Go, Go!" And Kemba's like, "WTF is Go, Go?!" There's gotta be some direction there. You can't just freelance every time down in clutch time. What happened to working Al against Len like in the first quarter? Such a mess.
                    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 Heisenberg View Post
                      I tried to tell you guys Doyle's nothing but a clickbait artist. Say what you want about Kravitz, I never got the vibe he ever wrote anything he didn't believe. Doyle is following the Skip Bayless path which is exactly why the Star hired him.
                      This is a textbook example of the old saying, "The devil you know is better than the devil you don't know." Kravitz was a respected writer who was able to get good info from a lot of important people in the local sporting community. When Peyton Manning wanted to have a crafted message through the media, he went to Kravitz. Remember the January 2012 article when Manning said that the Colts complex wasn't a good place for healing, etc etc? He could have easily gone to ESPN or any of the big national outlets with that sit down at the Colts complex, but he went to Kravitz.

                      Let's see if Doyle ever develops this sort of credibility from the big names. His columns so far have been overly forced and dramatic stuff that doesn't really get into the nitty gritty of the things that matter locally.......whining about the Redskins name, saying that the head of the PGA deserved to be axed for calling a golfer a "little girl", moaning about the Colts allowing a legend to continue his streak, etc etc. The feel good stories are nice, but outside of that I haven't read anything substantial in any of his columns. He's one of those sports writers who loooooooves going for the faux outrage designed to get him clicks.

                      Kravitz is really pretty solid. Had a lot of respect nationally too.

                      Comment


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

                        Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                        Sure, over the course of history you'll have a decent amount of second rounders/undrafted guys in the league since at any given time you have a league full of players who were taken over a 15 or so year stretch. Still, look at all of the second round picks over the last decade or so and only a very few of them ever make a name for themselves. Look at all of the guys taken around Lance in the 2010 second round. Bunch of no-names for the most part who didn't do squat. Making any sort of career in the NBA as a second rounder is always going to be defying the odds. Like him or not, Lance has defied the odds.
                        Anyone who's drafted and makes a name for themselves defies the odds to be honest. A lot of guys drafted in the first round never become anything.

                        About half the teams in the league start guys that were drafted in the second round or were undrafted. Even more than that has guys that are at least within the rotation.

                        I just dont think its as much of a long shot as it once was

                        Comment


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

                          Originally posted by Kuq_e_Zi91 View Post
                          That's really the problem. I think who starts isn't really as important as how Clifford finishes the game. He has no clue. If you just search "Steve Clifford" or "Clifford Hornets" on Twitter you see a bunch of people sitting near the Hornets bench basically saying he's completely lost on the sidelines and just mumbles to himself. It feels like this team's problems are much deeper than shuffling lineups when they keep blowing leads and collapsing over and over. It's either that or they get blown out.

                          I can't even say I blame Kemba personally. He dribbles the ball and no one moves. A part of me thinks he's waiting for some movement and he sees no one moving so he just does it himself. A few times I saw him looking back to Clifford for a play and Clifford just says "Go, Go!" And Kemba's like, "WTF is Go, Go?!" There's gotta be some direction there. You can't just freelance every time down in clutch time. What happened to working Al against Len like in the first quarter? Such a mess.
                          If anyone has followed Kemba they know he's not a selfish player and is actually a pretty decent distributor/facilitator. I just can't tell what the Hornets are running half the time.

                          Half hearted P&R, very little off the ball movement, and half added post ups for Al on the right block short corner.

                          Idk, like I said, I really have a hard time figuring out what they are trying to run.

                          Edit: Most NBA teams play a lot of P&R with the weak side spaced with 3pt shooters. Teams with strong post players tend to run a bit of a Flex type of action, with the option of high/low option or guys running off of weak side screens (depending on how the defense plays). My point is, NBA offenses tend to keep it simple with playcalling, and utilize more concepts to fit their team/strategy.

                          CHA does none of this lol. And the longer the game wears on, the less they run ANYTHING. Its Kemba, or Al with 3 other guys watching/waiting their turn
                          Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 12-17-2014, 11:01 PM.

                          Comment


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

                            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                            I'm not blaming Lance for this one. He has to be on the floor in order to accept any blame. Kemba is the one to blame......that guy really has no problem being "The Man" and taking the shot.....EVERY FRICKIN' SHOT.

                            At least when he was on the Pacers......if Lance passed the ball to PG13, GH, West or Hibbert....there's a good chance of the ball getting back to him.

                            Once the ball goes to Kemba.....it stays with him unless the defense collapses on him.
                            This is exactly why the coach has no business trying to single out Lance (or any individual) when anybody with a functional brain can see that he is giving free passes to others for doing worse.

                            It's also why I can't give him any benefit of the doubt. Clifford is an awful, awful coach. I feel like he's begging MJ to fire him, but Jordan isn't paying attention.

                            Comment


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

                              Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                              I dont get this line of thinking. His agents job is to find the best deal for him. Lance is the one that makes the final OKAY on any signings. Yes his advisors maybe should have advised him to not sign in CHA, but Lance reportedly didn't have many other options. DAL signed their first choice in Parsons, he assumed it was a wrap in IND, and MJ wanted a decision in 24 hours.

                              Maybe he made a rushed decision, but it was still his decision to make. He decides where he plays, not his agent nor his advisor (both of whom obviously gave Lance bad advice)
                              I'm really gaining no pleasure from seeing Lance suffer but I have no sympathy for him either. He was an idiot for making this choice, you just can't take a situation like Indiana for granted and Lance is learning this the hard way. The offer he had on the table was more then fair but I'm really glad we aren't stuck with him for 5 years.
                              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
                                I dont get this line of thinking. His agents job is to find the best deal for him. Lance is the one that makes the final OKAY on any signings. Yes his advisors maybe should have advised him to not sign in CHA, but Lance reportedly didn't have many other options. DAL signed their first choice in Parsons, he assumed it was a wrap in IND, and MJ wanted a decision in 24 hours.

                                Maybe he made a rushed decision, but it was still his decision to make. He decides where he plays, not his agent nor his advisor (both of whom obviously gave Lance bad advice)
                                Yeah...$$$ is important....but I'd think that finding the right fit as well is important as well. They are gambling on a shorter contract with the hope that Lance will play well enough to get a better long-term contract. You're right......it was Lance's decision to make....but he received some bad advice from people that have no clue what's best for his career for the long-term as opposed to the short term. He ended up on a Team that was a poor fit which highlights that he's clearly not a Player that can fit into any system while highlighting his shortcomings due to poor advice.
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X