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 Bball View Post
    That might be your takeaway but I think you are painting things with an awfully broad brush in the first place just to try and pigeonhole people and the recent complaints into that overall view.
    I see it as more of a round peg and a round hole kind of thing...
    Abba Zaba, your my only friend.

    Comment


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

      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
      I supported his contract at the time and at one time thought he was our most important player. Also, I don't see any of that as a reason to lock this thread unless you want this discussion to spread throughout the forum. I think what you have coming out are facts that don't match people's preconceived notions about Roy and they might just explain why Roy is 2000 miles away now.
      Then move this **** to a different forum. The conversation in this thread has absolutely nothing to do with the Pacers or basketball. I'd be happy to discuss Roy's defensive capabilities, but that's not what this thread has turned into.

      At least the conversations about Lance's attitude reflected a reason people thought made him a liability on the court.
      Time for a new sig.

      Comment


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

        Mark had a lot more to say. He was pretty fair to Roy here, while also saying he regressed since his peak:

        http://www.foxsports975.com/onair/qu...ssed-13510329/
        Source: Fox Sports

        Comment


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

          Originally posted by bballpacen View Post
          I see it as more of a round peg and a round hole kind of thing...
          I think people don't know where to place the significance of losing Roy Hibbert and the value he had to the team. I think all the bantering is just that. Roy was either the problem or the solution and nearly every significant pacers player in history has faced the same gauntlet of the fans. For JO it was was health. For Artest his mental stability. Lance was maturity. For Dale Davis it was his offense. The new age social media just magnifies the banter back and forth but one thing is for sure though. Roy and the Pacers were not good enough to be champions so there will always be something that merits a bit of criticism from the fan base.

          Comment


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

            Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
            Boyle and Brunner have been around the team a long, long time. Candace Buckner needs a pay check and probably isn't going to rock the boat at this point and Monteith would never say a negative word about a Pacer.

            David West backing Roy does have some weight, but he normally backs the players over management and the team is moving away from his style as well. David's game wasn't going to translate either. I would consider Brunner and Boyle more objective. JMHO but I think Brunner's piece was accurate. I just don't think both he and Boyle would stake their reputation to what would amount to libel.
            Minor correction here. IIRC, Bird said that the changes were caused by David not exercising his option. That would seem to imply that, if David came back, none of the changes made would have been made. ie, Roy would not have been traded is one of them and that the original plan was to get the band back together for one more run. David's opinion should have more value and not be thrown out just because it doesn't fit the narrative.

            Comment


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

              Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
              Minor correction here. IIRC, Bird said that the changes were caused by David not exercising his option. That would seem to imply that, if David came back, none of the changes made would have been made. ie, Roy would not have been traded is one of them and that the original plan was to get the band back together for one more run. David's opinion should have more value and not be thrown out just because it doesn't fit the narrative.
              David left because of PG injury. That was my take. His opinion on Roy and the gang was that they weren't good enough to win it all and not Roy was treated unfairly so it was a career move based on a bird presser.
              Last edited by Gamble1; 07-19-2015, 09:09 PM.

              Comment


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

                I should also note that west also said he wouldn't be chasing a ring at the start of the 2014 season. Implying what he says only has face value when the guy can't go a year without going back on what he says to the media in 9 months. I like West but his opinion like most players is self serving. I trust neither West or Pacer FO opinions. The chips end up falling where the truth is and they were right about Lance and West I guess.
                Last edited by Gamble1; 07-19-2015, 09:15 PM.

                Comment


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

                  Originally posted by Bball View Post
                  Ignorance is a rather harsh word. Made more so when I happen to be right
                  I'll admit, you have an excellent track record. You called it when we fired Frank Vogel after 2014 ended.

                  Comment


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

                    Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
                    Minor correction here. IIRC, Bird said that the changes were caused by David not exercising his option. That would seem to imply that, if David came back, none of the changes made would have been made. ie, Roy would not have been traded is one of them and that the original plan was to get the band back together for one more run. David's opinion should have more value and not be thrown out just because it doesn't fit the narrative.
                    This is an important point. Bird did say that. I don't think it implies none of the changes would have been made though, because he also said the team was going to play a faster pace and Paul George would play PF. How do you reconcile that when Hibbert is slow as molasses and PF is David's position? It would make more sense that we planned to sit Roy Hibbert more and DWest would play C while Paul was at PF. Also, the bridge between Hibbert and the Pacers was thoroughly torched by that time: DWest after opting out:

                    “That’s one thing where I wish they would have handled better was the situation with Roy,” West said. “I’ll be honest with you, that bothered me a little bit, and I told Roy that. I’m the type of guy who feels like we’re all in this fight together and I’m not designed in that way to put it all on one guy. That did rub me the wrong way. That threw me off. I started reading some of that stuff, I started thinking, ‘Whoaa.’ I just didn’t feel good about that. I told Roy that it bothered me, that he’s still my teammate.”

                    West is basically saying the Pacers were ditching Hibbert. Maybe dissing him. Opting out the day before the draft due to a team mate getting thrown under the bus probably did cause some domino's to fall, so I agree, but I don't think that means all the dominos (especially Hibbert) would be in the same place nor do I think Hibbert was ever going to be an important part of this coming year's team. JMHO. Instead, I suspect the Pacers planned to shift DWest over to C when Paul was in at PF.

                    Comment


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

                      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                      I told Roy that it bothered me, that he’s still my teammate.”
                      "Then I bailed on Roy and found myself some new teammates!"
                      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                      ------

                      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                      -John Wooden

                      Comment


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

                        Originally posted by BenR1990 View Post
                        I'll admit, you have an excellent track record. You called it when we fired Frank Vogel after 2014 ended.
                        There's quite the difference in predicting Vogel wouldn't survive the Pacers falling off the cliff in 2014 versus being able to see that Roy snubbing Pacers fans and community on his way out the door is not the best PR move he's ever made.
                        Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                        ------

                        "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                        -John Wooden

                        Comment


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

                          I think Roy is a front-runner. When the going was good, he was pleasant and humorous. When the going got tough, instead of being humble and taking accountability, he turned into a pouting baby. Instead of being a man, and taking accountability for his struggles, he actually had the balls to blame his teammates. Seriously, when he inexcusably got benched vs Atlanta, where was the accountability? Roy did not get benched because of the matchup, he got benched because of poor play. When we lost to the Kings without Cousins, and Roy did not step up, and got outplayed by a D league player named Ryan Hollinger, did Roy apologize for letting his team down? He probably just sulked in the locker room, and acted like it wasn't his fault. Locker room distraction defined.

                          Whenever the Colts lose, Andrew Luck is the first guy to take accountability for the loss. Even if the loss wasn't really his fault, he will still admit several errors he made, thus leading to the loss. This is called leadership. Larry Bird wants leaders on his team. Roy Hibbert refusing to take accountability after losses where he didn't play well, and refusing to thank loyal Pacer fans is not leadership
                          Last edited by Pacergeek; 07-20-2015, 12:10 AM.
                          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 cdash View Post
                            Seriously...who cares? I cannot wrap my head around that. Roy is gone; I wish him the best. He doesn't owe me a ******* thank you for being a fan over the past seven seasons.
                            I thought that Hibbert said that he thanked the Pacers for taking a chance on him That shows that he recognized that the Pacers took a gamble on him, decided to have patience with him at the start and that it eventualy paid off for both the Team and Player. That's good enough for me.
                            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....

                              Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                              yeah, if you don't think Roy owes you a thank you, you're classless too!

                              I have never in my life met a person in any walk of life who felt they deserved a thank you card that actually deserved one. It's arrogance and entitlement dressed in courtesy.

                              Why are you still making this first person? I've already stated a long time ago that I could care less personally. Roy should thank the city and the organization. He portrayed himself as an ambassador of the city in some respects and now is flipping a middle finger at the city and organization when they got rid of him based on his own actions both on and off the court. Somebody needs to buy him a mirror pronto. His inability to accept responsibility is partly what lead to the locker room problems in the first place.

                              Comment


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

                                Originally posted by presto123 View Post
                                Why are you still making this first person? I've already stated a long time ago that I could care less personally. Roy should thank the city and the organization. He portrayed himself as an ambassador of the city in some respects and now is flipping a middle finger at the city and organization when they got rid of him based on his own actions both on and off the court. Somebody needs to buy him a mirror pronto. His inability to accept responsibility is partly what lead to the locker room problems in the first place.
                                Awesome, yeah, great, nobody cares--or at least nobody should care. He's the Lakers' problem now.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X