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

Roy Hibbert opting in

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

  • Re: Roy Hibbert opting in

    Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
    Who is "they"? Clearly we're talking about separate groups of people. I'm talking about Naptown's current post about fans, not so anonymous Twitter idiots. Why would I be defending people like that? I would think it's obvious that I'm defending immature trolls. I'm talking about people who root for the team and just want to go another direction.
    Do you really see them as internet trolls? I see them as the stereotypical Twitter/Facebook guy who always supports the popular opinion. Do you think that they'd do that if the Pacers fan base respected Roy?

    You know, we give a lot of crap to the Lakers fan for running Pau Gasol out of town and to the Knicks fans for booing Kristaps Porzingis when he was picked but this fan base's attitude towards Roy isn't any better.

    You can go another direction while still being classy about it. There's no need to burn your bridges.
    Originally posted by IrishPacer
    Empty vessels make the most noise.

    Comment


    • Re: Roy Hibbert opting in

      Most people are fed up with Roy same way fans would complain about Croshere and his contract. Roy is worse because of money and expectations.

      The extreme rude stuff on Twitter isn't normal stuff. I have conversations with fans all the time and most people feel bad for Roy, like myself, but still want to move on.

      Comment


      • Re: Roy Hibbert opting in

        Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
        Most people are fed up with Roy same way fans would complain about Croshere and his contract. Roy is worse because of money and expectations.

        The extreme rude stuff on Twitter isn't normal stuff. I have conversations with fans all the time and most people feel bad for Roy, like myself, but still want to move on.
        Honest question. Do you think that those stuff would still be said if Roy was well-respected among our fan base? Do you think that anyone would tweet those things to PG?

        No, they wouldn't. People like to vent their personal frustrations to the unpopular members of the team. Kicking the dog that's down makes them feel powerful.
        Originally posted by IrishPacer
        Empty vessels make the most noise.

        Comment


        • Re: Roy Hibbert opting in

          Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
          Honest question. Do you think that those stuff would still be said if Roy was well-respected among our fan base? Do you think that anyone would tweet those things to PG?
          Have you read some of the stuff tweeted at Paul George? Or comments on his Instagram? Some pretty nasty stuff. It's apart of being famous these days.

          Comment


          • Re: Roy Hibbert opting in

            Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
            Have you read some of the stuff tweeted at Paul George? Or comments on his Instagram? Some pretty nasty stuff. It's apart of being famous these days.
            Honestly, I haven't. It has never been talked about in these forum that people are attacking PG on social media. Can you redirect me to some of those stuff that you're talking about?
            Originally posted by IrishPacer
            Empty vessels make the most noise.

            Comment


            • Re: Roy Hibbert opting in

              Originally posted by kent beckley View Post
              Just because somebody makes a certain amount of money, or is on TV, or is the president, etc. Doesn't make it okay to be a jerk. People act like these players took 15 million dollars out of their personal bank accounts. It is a sign of immaturity.

              Btw this does not include saying in a message board that you no longer want a player on your team for reasons XYZ, but speaking directly to a person in a tweet or whatever to leave cause we dont want you here anymore, come on. That is classless and stupid.
              Mean Tweets...

              https://youtu.be/F_0wjFP3YsQ

              Kinda off topic.


              Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

              Comment


              • Re: Roy Hibbert opting in

                Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                Mean Tweets...

                https://youtu.be/F_0wjFP3YsQ

                Kinda off topic.
                It's on topic in that it shows that being a high profile athlete or celebrity.....it comes with the territory. Shouldn't be that way, but it is. People hate you for being what they are not.
                Last edited by presto123; 06-30-2015, 01:12 AM.

                Comment


                • Re: Roy Hibbert opting in

                  Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                  Lowe just said nobody wants him. Bird has been trying to trade him for 2 years.
                  Lowe said that 20 months ago multiple GMs stated that Roy was worth $25 million a year. If Bird has been trying to trade him for 2 years, he's pretty damn bad at his job.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Roy Hibbert opting in

                    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                    That's just JayRedd being his comical self. I think the joke represents the situation more than Jared's own option that it's destroying the team. Maybe hurting, but everyone knew this was obvious. Roy would be an idiot not to take that money.


                    Anyway, Roy has been okay. He made 2 AS teams on defense alone and every season he's had runs of 5-6 weeks of DPOY caliber play. That's how he got his deal - potential if he could ever do it for a full season. Buying potential always costs and often doesn't pan out, but when it does...

                    So it's tough to bash his deal even, and I certain wouldn't bash Roy. For a guy that slumps and sees 4th quarter bench time and carries a deal like an albatross around his neck, he's been pretty low key. Certainly he's had his public moments, but compared to guys like Artest and JO and many others, he's been great. Can you imagine a 2003-2005 Pacers team with Twitter around?

                    His per 36 runs 15-10-2.5 blocks. Compare this with Dale Davis per 36 of 11-11-1.5 blocks even in his prime. You hear that Peck, for all the epic defense and rebounds you just know you remember as truth, when people actually counted up the FACTS it turns out that Roy was being just as productive per minute as Dale. It FEELS like he isn't, but that's your lying brain cherry picking moments and romanticizing the past, which is common for people to do. Plus after his deal people wanted Roy to be a perennial AS and as good as Dwight Howard. No one minded that Dale only made 1 ASG very late in his career. Why? Because EXPECTATIONS, even though Roy was a lower pick than Dale people were comfortable with Dale being a role player.

                    You think you see some soft dud who never gets a rebound, but in fact he gets them at a decent rate, gets a ton of blocks, and even hits a homerun on advanced defensive statistics.


                    You want another reality check?
                    In 96-97 Dale made 6.5m of the Pacers 24m salary cap, a ratio of 27% of the cap.
                    In 2014-15 Roy made $15m of the Pacers 63m salary cap, a ratio of 24% of the cap.


                    Neither team made the playoffs. No one tried to run (at the time) non-AS Dale out of town. So great job current fans. People wishing for the good old days should start by looking in the mirror and remembering how fans used to react to the team.



                    Roy isn't perfect, but people have really, really effed up where the bar should be set. Sadly it got mostly out of hand because Paul George was hurt....just like having Rose in Brown's doghouse after the Jax trade. It doesn't matter now, the earth is scorched anyway, Bird has established that Roy is playing his final year here.

                    So go ahead and declare it.

                    I beg you.

                    I want you on the record here telling everyone that Roy Hibbert is a better defender and rebounder than Dale Davis. I won't even respond I just want to see you type the words that way everyone can see them.

                    Now I don't want any soft statement with nuanced facts that allow you to say that per whatever. I want you to declare this for all to see.

                    Oh and while you are deciding how to write that up, enjoy this article with a quote by Goran Dragic telling us that Roy Hibbert is the easiest player to score over.

                    http://uproxx.com/dimemag/2015/01/go...player-finish/


                    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                    Comment


                    • Re: Roy Hibbert opting in

                      Regardless of whether or not it would have been beneficial to Roy, the Pacers or BOTH parties if we parted ways this summer (which may still happen via trade)

                      Fact is: he's still a Pacer, and he has had some damn good time here with us. Yes, some frustrating stretches. No doubt.

                      But he's been great in the community, a good ambassador for the team and despite any shortcomings he may have (Don't we all?!) he is still a critical piece of the Pacers as long as he is on the roster.

                      If he's still here come opening night, I'll be cheering him on as per usual.

                      Hoping for the best for all parties involved. WHATEVER that ends up being.


                      EDIT: Turns out my 6,000th post was in defense of Roy Hibbert. Let's go ahead and assume that's some sort of good omen or something... Yeah!
                      Last edited by TMJ31; 06-30-2015, 02:21 AM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Roy Hibbert opting in

                        Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                        Honest question. Do you think that those stuff would still be said if Roy was well-respected among our fan base? Do you think that anyone would tweet those things to PG?

                        No, they wouldn't. People like to vent their personal frustrations to the unpopular members of the team. Kicking the dog that's down makes them feel powerful.
                        Yes sadly this is a thing since celebrity's have been on social media there have been the anonymous posters who feel emboldened to talk to them as though their opinions should matter. Sadly it goes with the territory, I'm not saying it should I'm just saying it does.


                        Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                        Comment


                        • Re: Roy Hibbert opting in

                          Originally posted by Wage View Post
                          Lowe said that 20 months ago multiple GMs stated that Roy was worth $25 million a year. If Bird has been trying to trade him for 2 years, he's pretty damn bad at his job.
                          Yes, Lowe said that while the Pacers looked like the best team in the league anchored by Hibbert, Roy was worth a ton. But I don't know if you missed the second part of that, but for the past season and a half Roy has had his worst stretch of basketball making his value sink unbelievably low.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Roy Hibbert opting in

                            Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                            Bird bombing his trade value in the post-season presser is one of the biggest reasons why.
                            This is always one of the craziest things I ever hear. Anyone who thinks other teams' scouts are so incompetent as to not already know what the team's FANS know, such that a GM saying a player had a bad year and we might be going quicker bombs his trade value, is being emotional instead of rational.

                            "had a bad year" is common knowledge. "might be going quicker" means he's available. If a team needs what he brings and thinks he can overcome his last year neither of those statements would change their minds at all.

                            Now, statements about things no one knows, that would be different.
                            BillS

                            A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                            Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                            Comment


                            • Re: Roy Hibbert opting in

                              awwwwww. boo hooo. fans on "twitter" think roy hibbert sucks. omgz . can we stop with the pity party parade for roy hibbert please.

                              99% of this board would trade places with hibbert in a heartbeat. ffs - he just opted into 15.5 million dollars. regardless if roy stinks up the joint or not he is still making in one game ($190,000) what some here will take over a decade to earn.


                              if hibberts so fragile pacers fan have to treat him with kid gloves then maybe he should go out and get a real job where the spotlights not so bright. otherwise hibbert should man up and be a professional.

                              not many if any here are going to turn down trading places with roy because some fans on twitter says he sucks. professional athletes get ripped in the media and by fans all the time.. if Hibberts too s-o-f-t to deal with it then he should retire and find a 9 to 5.

                              fans dont owe roy squat.... let alone sympathy on top of his 15 million dollar salary.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Roy Hibbert opting in

                                Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                                Yes, Lowe said that while the Pacers looked like the best team in the league anchored by Hibbert, Roy was worth a ton. But I don't know if you missed the second part of that, but for the past season and a half Roy has had his worst stretch of basketball making his value sink unbelievably low.
                                I didn't miss that at all. Doesn't change the fact that 20 months is less than 2 years by my calculations. So if Bird was trying to trade Roy when he was valued at $25 million by multiple GMs and still couldn't move him, he was doing a bad job.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X