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

The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

    Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
    Espn reported that his agent wanted 14 mil.
    And I'd like $15 million. No NBA team is going to offer him that. He's an investment on potential, but that doesn't give you max money.

    We're 100% bringing him back. SVG already went public with that. It just a matter of what his best offer is. I don't see it being anywhere near $14 million per.
    Last edited by Kstat; 03-08-2015, 10:54 PM.

    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

    Comment


    • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

      Originally posted by Grimp View Post
      KCP was banging them in earlier this season what happened?
      Just too inconsistent. One day he's red hot then the next three games he shoots us out of it.

      Defensively he's one of the better SGs in the NBA. Offensively I can't stand to watch him miss brick shot after shot anymore. Charlotte put a 3-man fence around reggie Jackson in the 2nd half and KCP kept missing wide open shots when he passed out of it.

      I'd be perfectly fine with KCP as a 6th or 7th man. He has real value. He just can't be allowed to play starters' minutes when he's so ****ing unreliable. A starting SG has to shoot better than he does.

      Honestly for all I care you can dump the entire roster outside of Drummond, jackson and possibly dinwiddie, and start fresh from there. Everyone else is expendable.

      Jennings I wish we could find a way to keep but the fact is you can't pay $8 million for a backup PG and he's got trade value that we can use to address out gigantic holes at the 2/3 positions.

      Our season is definitely over after last night. Time to experiment with different combos and figure out who to keep/dump this summer.
      Last edited by Kstat; 03-08-2015, 11:00 PM.

      It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

      Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
      Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
      NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

      Comment


      • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

        Originally posted by Kstat View Post
        And I'd like $15 million. No NBA team is going to offer him that. He's an investment on potential, but that doesn't give you max money.

        We're 100% bringing him back. SVG already went public with that. It just a matter of what his best offer is. I don't see it being anywhere near $14 million per.
        I agree, I don't see him getting that much. I think they should just wait and match what he gets, if he gets an offer. I doubt a team makes him an offer unless it's one they think the Pistons won't match which means overpaying.
        Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

        Comment


        • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

          Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
          I agree, I don't see him getting that much. I think they should just wait and match what he gets, if he gets an offer. I doubt a team makes him an offer unless it's one they think the Pistons won't match which means overpaying.
          It's probably gonna play similar to the Eric Beldsoe situation with Phoneix last year. Teams won't offer a contract knowing Detroit will match, giving Detroit plenty of time to haggle to a certain price point. He'll probably get a Kemba Walker like deal (48M/4)

          Comment


          • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

            Yet another triple double by Westbrook tonight. He's playing out of his mind during this stretch.

            http://scores.espn.go.com/nba/recap?gameId=400579228
            Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

            Comment


            • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

              Originally posted by immortality View Post
              It's probably gonna play similar to the Eric Beldsoe situation with Phoneix last year. Teams won't offer a contract knowing Detroit will match, giving Detroit plenty of time to haggle to a certain price point. He'll probably get a Kemba Walker like deal (48M/4)
              I think the odds are on 4/48. I can live with that number.

              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

              Comment


              • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                Draymond's postgame interview about Dahntay Jones bumping into him was classic.

                Comment


                • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                  Detroit needs to play up-tempo. When they slow the game down their defense becomes exposed and the offense can't make up for it.

                  Comment


                  • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                    Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                    I'm hoping they do. It isn't his fault no one can make an open shot when he's got 2-3 guys collapsing on him.

                    This losing streak isn't his fault. There's just no shooting at the 2/3 spots.
                    This sounds a lot like your Josh Smith posts


                    Comment


                    • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                      Originally posted by Shade View Post
                      Detroit needs to play up-tempo. When they slow the game down their defense becomes exposed and the offense can't make up for it.
                      Which is silly because we have good defenders at 4 of 5 positions. Our problem right now is our outside shooting is terrible and eventually everyone packs the paint and forces us to take outside shots at the 2/3 positions that we aren't making. Offensively we're putting our defense in very bad situations.

                      The truth is while we got a talent upgrade in Reggie Jackson, outside of Drummond nobody really fits his style of play, which hurts us in the short term. That's fine because we can bring in a new crop of players with the cap room we'll have this summer and next, but this season is basically done.

                      I will say I'm very happy with Reggie Jackson. He's not a seasoned player by any means but I'm thrilled with what he brings defensively and his combo of size/athleticism. He meshes extremely well with Drummond.
                      Last edited by Kstat; 03-09-2015, 11:19 AM.

                      It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                      Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                      Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                      NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                      Comment


                      • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                        I mean Jackson himself is a huge part of the spacing issues. He's not a good shooter from the outside and it's hurting them. And if Jackson get's 4/48 this summer, I'm going to go give that George Hill contract a hug.


                        Comment


                        • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                          Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                          I mean Jackson himself is a huge part of the spacing issues. He's not a good shooter from the outside and it's hurting them. And if Jackson get's 4/48 this summer, I'm going to go give that George Hill contract a hug.
                          In one sense you're right. Previously with DJ and Jennings we got very good outside shooting from the PG position, and now we have a guy that specializes in getting inside the paint and collapsing a defense, so he relies on others to space the floor for him. Right now our perimeter shooting situation is a total mess.

                          In another, he's a plus almost everywhere else. Plus defender, plus ballhandler, plus athlete, plus passer. He also needs to learn the nuances of running an offense and he has to compose himself a bit better when things are going downhill. He's got a lot of responsibility he's never had before but I think he's got way too much upside to dwell on what he can't do right now.

                          Last night was a perfect example of this:



                          21 points at halftime, then just 4 in the 2nd half after they switched MKG on him and sent help every time he put the ball on the floor. Notice all his assists after halftime were for dunks, because we didn't hit a single perimeter shot in the 2nd half. He did a lot of kicking the ball out to open shooters that couldn't throw the ball in the ocean. We hit just 3 threes the entire game, and 2 of them were actually from Reggie Jackson.
                          Last edited by Kstat; 03-09-2015, 11:48 AM.

                          It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                          Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                          Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                          NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                          Comment


                          • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                            [QUOTE=Kstat;1973638]

                            Honestly for all I care you can dump the entire roster outside of Drummond, jackson and possibly dinwiddie, and start fresh from there. Everyone else is expendable. /QUOTE]


                            SVG probably has a different view than you!

                            Hasn't SVG already said he wants Monroe back?

                            Comment


                            • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                              I'm sure he'd like Monroe back. Personally I don't care either way. The money freed up from not signing him can be used elsewhere. I'm done hoping he finally develops the ability to make a wide open 10-footer.

                              If you're going to suck on defense as much as
                              Monroe does you had better be an elite offensive player. Monroe is a mid range shot away from being zach Randolph 2.0 but he's no closer to that now than he was 5 years ago. He's a pretty good offensive player and rebounder but it isn't enough to make me overlook the fact he can't defend the rim as a 5 and can't guard 4s away from the basket.
                              Last edited by Kstat; 03-09-2015, 01:14 PM.

                              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                              Comment


                              • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                                Looks like Paces are also doing well offensively according to Marc Stein:

                                The NBA's best record since Feb. 1? Something tells me you've heard it belongs to the Paul George-less Pacers, who rank as a top-five team in both offensive and defensive efficiency while going 11-2.
                                http://espn.go.com/nba/powerrankings...r/2015/week/19

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X