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 Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

    Originally posted by tadscout View Post
    Mark Joseph Boyle@Mark_J_Boyle 2h2 hours agoSouth Yarmouth, MA
    @1070Bruno with a spot on assessment of soon-to-be-former-Employee #55.http://www.1070thefan.com/blogs/brun...what-they-need

    Pacers, Hibbert both get what they need

    By: Conrad Brunner

    When no one, especially the Pacers, wanted Jermaine O’Neal because of an onerous contract, declining performance and questionable health, Larry Bird somehow turned him into Roy Hibbert.
    When no one, especially the Pacers, wanted Hibbert because of an onerous contract, declining performance and questionable (mental) health, Bird somehow turned him into, well, we’ll just have to see about that, won’t we?

    Mainly, what Bird turned Hibbert into was an ex-Pacer.

    That’s what mattered most, shedding a player who not that long ago was no worse than the second-most important player on the roster; who not that long ago was the foundation of the NBA’s most monolithic defense; who, for reasons we may never know, devolved into a sullen, pouting, disengaged, 7-foot-2, 280-pound problem child.

    The biggest boom we heard on the Fourth of July was this: Hibbert will be traded to the Lakers.

    Both sides got what they needed from this deal.

    Hibbert gets the opportunity for a fresh start, as far away from Indy as the NBA allows. An aside: if Roy thought Jim O’Brien was tough love, wait till he gets a load of Kobe. Another aside: Yo, Kareem, guess who’s in town?

    What the Pacers get is a boatload of cap space, while ditching the anchor whose weight threatened to swamp the franchise. Rodney Stuckey, come on down. Luis Scola, maybe think about unpacking.

    The only thing sad about the situation is how suddenly and how obvious it was beyond salvage. Any time a franchise has to effectively dump a once-prized asset, it’s a time to reflect on everything and everyone one that contributed to the devaluation, learn from it and try to prevent it from happening again.

    This is where I’m supposed to criticize Bird for throwing Hibbert under the bus in that postseason presser, but here’s the thing: he really didn’t.

    Bird said he was disappointed in Hibbert’s season, that he was likely to have a diminished role with the team changing offensive styles, and yet he was still considered an important part of the team. That’s not throwing somebody under the bus, that’s offering an honest analysis. Even the line about Hibbert not being able to blame Lance Stephenson for stealing his rebounds was more humorous than pointed.

    To harbor any hope Hibbert would suddenly grow up, realize he was in a contract year, play the good citizen and actually help this team – or not hurt it – would be to display an incomprehensible level of naivete.

    Hibbert chose to become malignant. The pall he cast over the locker room every … single … night … was palpable. The energy he sapped from the court every … single … night … was singularly destructive.

    He was a living, breathing, Joe Bftsplk.

    (If you don’t know, Google).

    He had to go, which was a lot easier said than done. For that, Bird must be given credit. The Lakers thought they were going to get LaMarcus Aldridge. Strike one. They thought they were going to get Greg Monroe. Strike two. They got Hibbert. Strike three.

    That doesn’t make this a home run for the Pacers. But it’s a productive at-bat, a quality start, a save more than a win.

    Ian Mahinmi can give them 24 athletic minutes. Myles Turner, some nights he’ll foul out in the first quarter, some nights (or mornings, as in that 20-point, eight-rebound, three-block show in Orlando for openers) he’ll make everybody want to sing. Mix in Lavoy Allen, maybe Scola, and there you go.

    If no more moves were made, this would be the unit used most by the Pacers: George Hill, Monta Ellis, C.J. Miles, Paul George and Mahinmi. They’ll probably start with two bigs, depending on their opponents, but Frank Vogel is serious about using George at power forward when it’s time to go small.

    And the bench, for those that choose to worry about such things in July: Turner, Allen, Joe Young, Solomon Hill and Damo Rudez. And that’s before they set about investing all that cap space.

    They’re not ready to hang any banners, but the Pacers are moving swiftly and comprehensively toward their new, faster-paced, more aggressive identity.

    And Bird, once again, found a way to make a move many of us assumed was impossible.
    These are probably two of the people around the team/players the most (and by far the longest), so this is probably the best assessment of the Hibbert trade you'll see.
    x

    [QUOTE]
    Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
    We don't all know that because that is just your opinion, nothing else. Well, we do know that you clearly hate him and will use whatever you can as a so-called "fact" -- even when it doesn't support your opinion.
    What about Mark Boyle's opinion. Here he endorses Conrad Brunner as "spot on assessment." Not one comment from anyone except Blue&Gold on this? I believe it must be the elephant in the room.

    All things Indiana Pacers Mark Boyle's word is good as gold in my book.
    Last edited by PacersPride; 09-03-2015, 08:04 PM.

    Comment


    • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

      Here is just one word being used to describe Roy Hibbert in Brunner's article. No way getting around it. That is harsh.

      I wouldn't personally use the word to describe any NBA player, but the fact is he is calling Roy cancer and Boyle is concurring.

      • ma·lig·nant
        məˈliɡnənt/
        adjective
        1.
        (of a disease) very virulent or infectious.
        synonyms: virulent, very infectious, invasive, uncontrollable, dangerous, deadly, fatal, incurable, life-threatening
        "a malignant disease"
        2.
        malevolent.
        "in the hands of malignant fate"
        synonyms: spiteful, malicious, malevolent, evil-intentioned, vindictive, vengeful, malign, mean, nasty, hurtful, mischievous, wounding, cruel, unkind; More


      Edit: BTW, "Spot on" means exactly correct or perfectly accurate. Not simply a good or even great description of Roy. But EXACT. Perfectly Accurate. Wow! No wonder he was booted for a bag of stale chips.





      Last edited by BlueNGold; 09-03-2015, 10:02 PM.

      Comment


      • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

        Woah...sorry guys. I walked into the wrong kind of circle apparently. I'll give you some privacy.
        Time for a new sig.

        Comment


        • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

          Comment


          • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

            Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
            Woah...sorry guys. I walked into the wrong kind of circle apparently. I'll give you some privacy.
            Hey, I'm sorry too...but it's not me calling Roy malignant. I would never do that. But I'm also not one to gloss over or ignore the facts. Bird threw Roy out. Long time Pacer people bashed Roy to the point it would be hard to believe they wouldn't want to throw him out.

            Comment


            • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

              It is hilarious that the Roy fans seem to want to ignore all the speculation that Roy was a disaster in the locker room. Whenever Roy had a bad game, he would pout and cry. Whenever he had a favorable matchup, like when he had Ryan Hollinger in the Kings game, instead of manning up and playing in 'eff you mode, Roy would be a no show. Real players in this league do not tolerate getting outplayed by bums/D-league players like Hollinger. This is why I'm pumped that we have drafted Turner. By Turner's third season, if teams dare to start fourth string centers against him, Turner will have the balls to make them pay, unlike Hibbert
              Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

              Comment


              • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                Originally posted by BenR1990 View Post
                He hasn't played a single NBA game yet, so you have nothing to back that claim up in terms of what he'll be able to do against NBA competition on a nightly basis. None. I do, however, hope you're spot on right for the sake of the team. But for the time being, your comments have zero merit.

                There was this guy at Syracuse named Fab Melo who was also a "beast" at block shots. You can probably guess by now that his "beast" ability blocking shots didn't translate to real NBA games. Pretty sure he's sitting in Brazil. He was also dumber than a box of rocks, but that's another story...
                I understand that Turner has yet to play a game, so you saying that Turner will not be outstanding at blocking shots has the same merit as my own opinion. Turner blocked 2.5 shots playing half a game in college. I am confident he will be just fine at blocking shots in the NBA level.
                Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                Comment


                • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                  Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                  Woah...sorry guys. I walked into the wrong kind of circle apparently. I'll give you some privacy.
                  Come join us in our knitting circle.......
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment


                  • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                    Roy took advantage of a European woman's vagina, per my sources

                    Comment


                    • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                      Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                      I understand that Turner has yet to play a game, so you saying that Turner will not be outstanding at blocking shots has the same merit as my own opinion. Turner blocked 2.5 shots playing half a game in college. I am confident he will be just fine at blocking shots in the NBA level.
                      Yeah, but he ain't going up against Lipscomb and Alcorn State in the NBA. Just trying to temper expectations for Year One still.

                      Comment


                      • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                        Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                        AND benching Roy. We were a better defensive team with Roy OFF the court. Pacers were a top defensive team with Roy playing 23 mpg in April.

                        I can't understand why Roy gets so much credit for how good our defense was last season from you guys.

                        Vogel has even said he benched Roy in favor of Ian for defense vs the Hawks.
                        We'll see how good our defense from our C-rotation will be this year. I have no doubt it will be a LOT less, instead of just marginally less, then in previous years.
                        2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                        2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                        2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                        Comment


                        • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                          I think you guys are over rating shot blocking and rim protection. Every team has a rim protector, someone that excels at blocking shots. This doesn't mean that they are outstanding defensive players. John Henson is very good at shot blocking, and he rarely plays. With that being said, if Turner gets 25 mpg, he will easily average 2.5 blocks
                          Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                          Comment


                          • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                            Should combine this thread with the Lance thread and just make it all things x Pacers for the next year "or so"....If not we need to make a David West, CJ Watson and most definitely a Chris Copeland

                            Comment


                            • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                              Originally posted by Mourning View Post
                              We'll see how good our defense from our C-rotation will be this year. I have no doubt it will be a LOT less, instead of just marginally less, then in previous years.
                              You're dead on with this. We're gaining a great defender in PG and we'll still be a far worse defensive team then we've been in the past 4 years.
                              Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                              Comment


                              • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                                Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                                I think you guys are over rating shot blocking and rim protection. Every team has a rim protector, someone that excels at blocking shots. This doesn't mean that they are outstanding defensive players. John Henson is very good at shot blocking, and he rarely plays. With that being said, if Turner gets 25 mpg, he will easily average 2.5 blocks
                                Does every team have a player in the top 5 of rim protection?

                                That's like saying every team has a shooter, so you don't need a Klay Thompson or Stephen Curry or Kyle Korver etc. Sure every team has one, how good they compared to the rest of the league is the real issue.
                                Last edited by Since86; 09-04-2015, 09:18 AM.
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X