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

Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

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

  • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

    If we want to go small, Solo should be the starting PF. But I'm all for J. Hill starting 4. Paul just doesn't have the bulk. Playing him out of position at the begining of his career did him no justice. PG-13 is best suited for the SF position, end of story.

    Comment


    • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

      Originally posted by timid View Post
      I definitely disagree. I agree PG should try it and give 100% but I'll NEVER agree with this whole, "well he's the boss so just shut up" opinion. Is this like an old-school thing? Because a lot of the things in this country would never have progressed to the levels they have with that mentality. We'd still be stuck in the pre-civil rights era.

      But I do think his perimeter defense will be wasted when he's at the 4. Someone earlier said he could still have the same impact in this area. How so?
      While I agree Paul's opinion should be respected if not dictate the final decision, I sure wish I could dictate to my boss. IOW, NBA players are an exception to the rule...a rule the rest of us without a 40 inch vertical, dead eye from 3 or a 7 foot wing span must follow.

      Of course, since I own my own business, that's not really a problem for me...

      Comment


      • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
        Guarding him 4 times per year is one thing. Guarding guys bigger every night is another, though. I've listened to Shane Battier and Jared Dudley speak about this, and they both said it's going to make him dead tired, it's going to beat him up, and it probably won't work out in the long term. I'm listening to the guys who have very recently been there and done that. Heck, LeBron himself doesn't seem to like playing PF as much as he does, either, and he has the best body of any NBA player to handle being a "small ball PF". I don't want this for Paul. Dudley is currently out because of a back injury, by the way. Usually the big guys get the bad backs, not the small guys, don't they?
        I would be really concerned about his health. I have played PF and defending the post beats you up. Guys have a way of being very physical without fouling and it takes its toll.

        The fact is, IMO that is, Paul isn't going to play PF much because I don't think it's going to work. I just hope they don't push him too far on it.

        Comment


        • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

          Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
          As Nene has been brought up as someone that PG can't guard, I found this from WaPo Gorat story interesting…



          https://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...31444046772949
          But still, both of those guys are stronger and heavier than PG is...

          Comment


          • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

            How'd we go from "Solo was bad last year and awful in Summer League, he's the odd man out." To Solo should start at PF in small ball?! I'd prefer Solo wasn't playing at all! If he's our PF, we are well and truly screwed.
            Danger Zone

            Comment


            • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

              Originally posted by Rogco View Post
              How'd we go from "Solo was bad last year and awful in Summer League, he's the odd man out." To Solo should start at PF in small ball?! I'd prefer Solo wasn't playing at all! If he's our PF, we are well and truly screwed.
              I couldn't watch it, but I believe Solo had a good game against NO.

              Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

              Comment


              • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

                Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                Slick has spoken


                But, he can't guard Lebron in the post......

                Comment


                • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

                  Originally posted by BillS View Post
                  I just don't get why we jump to the conclusion that PG talking to his teammates is about getting them on his side to go against Bird and Vogel when it could just be checking with them to see if they feel and see the same things he does about it. You know, working as a team?

                  Did I miss a quote where he said anything specific about how his teammates FELT?
                  And on top of that, he didn't mention ANY names...So I don't see the big deal...

                  Comment


                  • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

                    Originally posted by timid View Post
                    I definitely disagree. I agree PG should try it and give 100% but I'll NEVER agree with this whole, "well he's the boss so just shut up" opinion. Is this like an old-school thing? Because a lot of the things in this country would never have progressed to the levels they have with that mentality. We'd still be stuck in the pre-civil rights era.

                    But I do think his perimeter defense will be wasted when he's at the 4. Someone earlier said he could still have the same impact in this area. How so?
                    Old school? No...it's not. To me, that's reality. Having been in Upper Management, if I decide to make changes, then I'm going to make the changes if I believe if it's in the best interest of the company. I'll gladly accept feedback from my employees, but once I said "This is what we're going to do." then I expect my employees to fall in line.

                    This is not a democracy. Employees don't have a say in what the company is and isn't going to do. When you reach my level of management, THEN you can have a vote. Until then...accept the change or be unemployed. I need people who can adapt to change and not fight it. Granted, this is the NBA so the rule might be different from reality, but not by much. To me, Paul George is fighting the change, and not adapting to it. Worse...it's basically sounds like he don't even want to give the change a chance, so he can give FAIR feedback on it. THAT's what's irking about Paul George right about now.
                    Last edited by ksuttonjr76; 10-06-2015, 03:03 PM.


                    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: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

                      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                      While I agree Paul's opinion should be respected if not dictate the final decision, I sure wish I could dictate to my boss. IOW, NBA players are an exception to the rule...a rule the rest of us without a 40 inch vertical, dead eye from 3 or a 7 foot wing span must follow.

                      Of course, since I own my own business, that's not really a problem for me...
                      I feel you...I'll get there one day : )

                      Comment


                      • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

                        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                        Guarding him 4 times per year is one thing. Guarding guys bigger every night is another, though. I've listened to Shane Battier and Jared Dudley speak about this, and they both said it's going to make him dead tired, it's going to beat him up, and it probably won't work out in the long term. I'm listening to the guys who have very recently been there and done that. Heck, LeBron himself doesn't seem to like playing PF as much as he does, either, and he has the best body of any NBA player to handle being a "small ball PF". I don't want this for Paul. Dudley is currently out because of a back injury, by the way. Usually the big guys get the bad backs, not the small guys, don't they?
                        Not to mention that one of the biggest criticisms leveled at LeBron throughout his career is his lack of a post game. LeBron is a "4" in name only. In how he plays, he is, was, and always will be a wing.

                        Reading through this thread isn't kind of interesting that the complaints about more about PG speaking through the media as opposed to Bird speaking to PG privately. Bird and PG have been on different pages about this move from the get go. Either PG is forgetting their conversations/doesn't care about them, or they never really sat down and had one. How do you have to "clarify" something after ONE preseason game? This is 100% on Bird, and it goes back to his attitude and how defensive he got this summer when initially talking about it.
                        Last edited by Since86; 10-06-2015, 02:51 PM.
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

                          Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                          Old school? No...it's not. To me, that's reality. Having been in Upper Management, if I decide to make changes, then I'm going to make the changes if I believe if it's in the best interest of the company. I'll gladly accept feedback from my employees, but once I said "This is what we're going to do." then I expect my employees to fall in line.

                          This is not a democracy. Employees don't have a say in what the company is and isn't going to do. When you reach my level of management, THEN you can have a vote. Until then...accept the change or be unemployed. I need people who can adapt to change and not fight it. Granted, this is the NBA so the rule might be different from reality, but not by much. To me, Paul George is fighting the change, and not adapting to it. Worse...it's basically don't even want to give the change a chance, so he can give FAIR feedback on it. THAT's what's irking about Paul George right about now.
                          I completely understand this is how the real world works, myself included. But I have and will always hate it. I'm not in the camp that always feels the boss is right just because he owns the company. It feels like a lot of jobs I've had, the employees know more about the actual job because they're ones doing most of the heavy lifting.

                          Now in this case, Bird has actually played the game too and he's not just the owner of some company simply because he has the money to do so(not saying you are, just making an example). But I feel like he's mainly doing it because it benefit him during his career. But he and PG are 2 different players at different stages of their careers.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

                            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                            Not to mention that one of the biggest criticisms leveled at LeBron throughout his career is his lack of a post game. LeBron is a "4" in name only. In how he plays, he is, was, and always will be a wing.

                            Reading through this thread isn't kind of interesting that the complaints about more about PG speaking through the media as opposed to Bird speaking to PG privately. Bird and PG have been on different pages about this move from the get go. Either PG is forgetting their conversations/doesn't care about them, or they never really sat down and had one. How do you have to "clarify" something after ONE preseason game? This is 100% on Bird, and it goes back to his attitude and how defensive he got this summer when initially talking about it.
                            Bird kind of addressed that…

                            Pacers, George believe new offense can be recipe for success

                            "Paul will play everywhere," Bird said. "When you say something to Paul, sometimes he hears what he wants to hear, but Paul will be playing everywhere except point guard."
                            http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports...cess/72977074/

                            It's just all overblown. PG was speaking his mind after a loss where he was having trouble getting position and rebound and felt he got worked. It's one game. It's nobodies' "fault" just a little resistance to change. When LeBron used to say how he hated playing the 4, didn't want to, it was big news. Now it's not even a story. This will pass with PG either being comfortable with the role, or not. And if he's not comfortable, like Vogel said he won't be playing PF.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

                              Yeah, count me not in the "it's overblown" camp. When your star player comes out that strongly after one preseason game, after he was wishy-washy (at best) throughout the summer, you can pretty much chalk it up to him not being on board with the decision.

                              If one preseason game gets him talking like that, just wait until there's a few games where the Pacers get pounded in the paint/on the boards and PG had to bang all night down low. Think about it as a relationship, if you're *****ing about a girl after your first date, I doubt the relationship has much chance. This should be the grace period. This should be when we're hearing the "yeah we struggled but we'll get it figured out" comments, not the "I hated it, and my teammates don't get it either*" lines.


                              *Fake quote.
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Indiana Pacers 2015/16 Pre-Season Thread

                                That could all happen, I just don't see it as a problem now. Most players complain when they are asked to play a different position.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X