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

Bench, trade, or reign in Monta Ellis

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

  • Re: Bench, trade, or reign in Monta Ellis

    This is ridiculous... the whole basis of the thread is that Monta needs to shot less in order for the team to be successful and now that there's been 2 straight games of Monta shooting more and the team winning, the argument gets changed from he needs to be less involved to he wasn't agressive enough before and the team doesn't mesh well. Quit changing the narrative...
    Did you know Antonio and Dale aren’t actually brothers?

    Comment


    • Re: Bench, trade, or reign in Monta Ellis

      This win courtesy of Monta and JHill. Thanks, boys.
      I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

      -Emiliano Zapata

      Comment


      • Re: Bench, trade, or reign in Monta Ellis

        Originally posted by TheDavisBrothers View Post
        This is ridiculous... the whole basis of the thread is that Monta needs to shot less in order for the team to be successful and now that there's been 2 straight games of Monta shooting more and the team winning, the argument gets changed from he needs to be less involved to he wasn't agressive enough before and the team doesn't mesh well. Quit changing the narrative...
        Gotta make the narrative fit us not looking reactionary, which we love to accuse everyone else of!
        I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

        -Emiliano Zapata

        Comment


        • Re: Bench, trade, or reign in Monta Ellis

          Originally posted by TheDavisBrothers View Post
          This is ridiculous... the whole basis of the thread is that Monta needs to shot less in order for the team to be successful and now that there's been 2 straight games of Monta shooting more and the team winning, the argument gets changed from he needs to be less involved to he wasn't agressive enough before and the team doesn't mesh well. Quit changing the narrative...
          I think I've stuck up for the guy a little extra this year, b/c he defied my expectations this year, to be honest... I've always seen him as a ball-dominant guard who was largely an empty stats guy with excellent athleticism.

          What I've seen in the guy is: helping Mahinmi get over his FT% confidence rut, willingly taking a back seat on offense earlier in the year, being deferential and supportive to the other starting 4, and even being a vocal leader where PG seems incapable of stepping in thus far. Pretty solid team-first attitude. I dunno, seems like one of the last people I'd "reign in".

          Comment


          • Re: Bench, trade, or reign in Monta Ellis

            Monta's far from great, but I don't think he's been a problem on this team. More of a positive than some want to acknowledge.

            EDIT: And admittedly positive in ways I never would have imagined. I agree. I didn't anticipate getting this out of Monta Ellis. I'm peasantly surpirsed (so far) and rather blindsided.
            Last edited by D-BONE; 01-30-2016, 10:59 PM.
            I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

            -Emiliano Zapata

            Comment


            • Re: Bench, trade, or reign in Monta Ellis

              Originally posted by docpaul View Post
              Seriously? This entire board was taken siege by numerous threads wanting to get rid of the front office, players, etc.

              The guy got totally disrespected as a player despite the fact that he's played less than half a year here.

              Feel free to call me out if you like. But the negativity on this board gets tiring.

              This is a transition year.
              I think saying he was totally disrespected as a player is a bit much. I think Joe and other posters (myself included) saw a correlation between the team's success and the way he played. Just because he's had two good games doesn't all of a sudden put those questions fully to rest. Even tonight, while he was aggressive--he nearly cost is the game with some mistakes and poor play on both sides down the stretch. If we were playing a better team than the Nuggets, then things would be different.

              But I digress, I dont think ANYONE thinks Monta is a bad player by any means. Just a matter of figuring out how he fits.

              I will agree on one thing though, the negativity does bring down the board at times. But that's the nature of PD a lot of the time

              Comment


              • Re: Bench, trade, or reign in Monta Ellis

                Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                Monta's issue was not that he was off early in the season.

                He had gone COMPLETELY away from what he made a career out of doing. His entire career he has been a slasher who gets to the basket and finished through contact. His first 2 months here, he barely even attempted to attack the basket and instead just settled for contested jump shots. This becomes especially worrisome when you have a guy who just turned 30 coming off knee surgery. When you have a player who has relied on his athleticism and ability to attack the basket his entire career all of a sudden look like maybe he doesn't have the extra step anymore, then of course you are going to question whether or not he will get that back.

                More so, regardless of how he is playing at the moment, the fit is still a giant question mark.
                And if Monta had kept playing that way then the concerned posts and such would have made more sense. But the opposite has happened. He has returned to form, is playing damn good ball and has been for weeks. And then these posts were made. This isn't a month old thread. It's not even a week old thread. It was active yesterday. So yeah, docpaul saying smh as Monta has yet another good performance, capping off a pretty good month is pretty damn relative

                Comment


                • Re: Bench, trade, or reign in Monta Ellis

                  Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                  I think saying he was totally disrespected as a player is a bit much. I think Joe and other posters (myself included) saw a correlation between the team's success and the way he played. Just because he's had two good games doesn't all of a sudden put those questions fully to rest. Even tonight, while he was aggressive--he nearly cost is the game with some mistakes and poor play on both sides down the stretch. If we were playing a better team than the Nuggets, then things would be different.

                  But I digress, I dont think ANYONE thinks Monta is a bad player by any means. Just a matter of figuring out how he fits.

                  I will agree on one thing though, the negativity does bring down the board at times. But that's the nature of PD a lot of the time
                  Fair enough. I guess what I saw earlier in the year was someone who was largely playing deferential to the George and Miles perimeter parade. He did most of his damage playing pick/roll with Mahinmi, contributing to Ian looking like an offensive revelation all the sudden. When they started going cold, someone had to start taking shots. He didn't have Ian to dish to during most of that string of losses. In other words, correlation was not causation.

                  Like I said before, I'm not even a massive fan of his game... but, feel the need to defend someone who is trying to support this team in what I've felt are some surprising ways given his historical play and reputation.
                  Last edited by docpaul; 01-30-2016, 11:26 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Bench, trade, or reign in Monta Ellis

                    Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                    I think saying he was totally disrespected as a player is a bit much. I think Joe and other posters (myself included) saw a correlation between the team's success and the way he played. Just because he's had two good games doesn't all of a sudden put those questions fully to rest. Even tonight, while he was aggressive--he nearly cost is the game with some mistakes and poor play on both sides down the stretch. If we were playing a better team than the Nuggets, then things would be different.

                    But I digress, I dont think ANYONE thinks Monta is a bad player by any means. Just a matter of figuring out how he fits.

                    I will agree on one thing though, the negativity does bring down the board at times. But that's the nature of PD a lot of the time
                    2 good games? How about a good month? 16ppg, 6apg, 3rpg, 2spg, 46% shooting, 33% from 3. He's shot significantly better than PG on the month. Even better from 3 too.

                    That's why this thread is ridiculous. That's why docpaul posted SMH. We have one player who is stepping up and several others who had declined. But blame the guy who is playing well, not the others. PG didn't shoot 40% on the month because Monta took not even 2 more shots a game. Monta doesn't force CJ to take a bad 3 with 22 seconds left on the shot clock.

                    And for all this Monta vs Ghill talk, Hill is having his best month of the season scoring the ball with Monta running the offense more. He's scoring 3 points more on the same amount of shots. And his apg haven't dropped much, while Monta has elevated his a good bit.

                    Blaming Monta for the team's decline is just flat out wrong.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Bench, trade, or reign in Monta Ellis

                      Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                      2 good games? How about a good month? 16ppg, 6apg, 3rpg, 2spg, 46% shooting, 33% from 3. He's shot significantly better than PG on the month. Even better from 3 too.

                      That's why this thread is ridiculous. That's why docpaul posted SMH. We have one player who is stepping up and several others who had declined. But blame the guy who is playing well, not the others. PG didn't shoot 40% on the month because Monta took not even 2 more shots a game. Monta doesn't force CJ to take a bad 3 with 22 seconds left on the shot clock.

                      And for all this Monta vs Ghill talk, Hill is having his best month of the season scoring the ball with Monta running the offense more. He's scoring 3 points more on the same amount of shots. And his apg haven't dropped much, while Monta has elevated his a good bit.

                      Blaming Monta for the team's decline is just flat out wrong.
                      Monta has had a good month, nobody has disputed that. All the Joe was saying was there was an odd correlation between Monta's production rising while the rest of the team faltered. There was a fairly large sample size to judge as well.

                      Now if you want to argue that there is no correlation and that it is a coincidence, then that's fine. But it doesn't make the idea of there being some type of relation completely out of question. I guess I don't see why you're so up in arms at the discussion of such, especially since everyone has given Monta props for playing pretty well during this stretch.

                      As for the Hill vs Monta thing, I actually think the team plays at its best when they share the ball handling duties and lessen Paul's. They've had an interesting on and off chemistry with one another for sure. I also think the constant comparison of the two in order to involve Hill in trade scenarios hasn't helped divide the constant conversations regarding the two. Hypothetically they should be able to work well together, but it's been a mixed bag thus far

                      Comment


                      • Re: Bench, trade, or reign in Monta Ellis

                        Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                        2 good games? How about a good month? 16ppg, 6apg, 3rpg, 2spg, 46% shooting, 33% from 3. He's shot significantly better than PG on the month. Even better from 3 too.

                        That's why this thread is ridiculous. That's why docpaul posted SMH. We have one player who is stepping up and several others who had declined. But blame the guy who is playing well, not the others. PG didn't shoot 40% on the month because Monta took not even 2 more shots a game. Monta doesn't force CJ to take a bad 3 with 22 seconds left on the shot clock.

                        And for all this Monta vs Ghill talk, Hill is having his best month of the season scoring the ball with Monta running the offense more. He's scoring 3 points more on the same amount of shots. And his apg haven't dropped much, while Monta has elevated his a good bit.

                        Blaming Monta for the team's decline is just flat out wrong.

                        If anything we can blame the team's decline on our star player not playing like one for the last two months. If PG was even remotely consistent, there wouldn't be near the chatter about who is not getting the job done. It is our franchise player not living up to expectations for the most part.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Bench, trade, or reign in Monta Ellis

                          Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                          Monta has had a good month, nobody has disputed that. All the Joe was saying was there was an odd correlation between Monta's production rising while the rest of the team faltered. There was a fairly large sample size to judge as well.

                          Now if you want to argue that there is no correlation and that it is a coincidence, then that's fine. But it doesn't make the idea of there being some type of relation completely out of question. I guess I don't see why you're so up in arms at the discussion of such, especially since everyone has given Monta props for playing pretty well during this stretch.

                          As for the Hill vs Monta thing, I actually think the team plays at its best when they share the ball handling duties and lessen Paul's. They've had an interesting on and off chemistry with one another for sure. I also think the constant comparison of the two in order to involve Hill in trade scenarios hasn't helped divide the constant conversations regarding the two. Hypothetically they should be able to work well together, but it's been a mixed bag thus far
                          Correlation does not imply causation.

                          I just find the discussion a bit ridiculous. Saying we should limit our second best player when he probably has the best January on the whole team is wrong. Or better yet, trade him.

                          I also believe we are better when Monta and Hill run the offense and handle the ball more than PG. PG made a beautiful cut in the second quarter tonight. I want more of that from him. I think Hill and Monta are developing a chemistry together and both of them having their best month of the season isn't a coincidence.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Bench, trade, or reign in Monta Ellis

                            PG shouldn't be allowed to dribble.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Bench, trade, or reign in Monta Ellis

                              Again, Monta has undeniable flaws, just like all our players. To say he nearly cost us a game that he won us doesn't hold water for me. Nobody else stepped up and made a play and Monta did. If you look at the the last part of the fourth quarter, GHill, PG and Monta all had various chances to make big shots, potentially game winning shots. Yet NONE of them converted.

                              So, other people were also "nearly costing us the game" as well. But somehow Monta gets blamed even though he pulled it out for us and he would have gotten the blame for being the clutch shot taker/clutch time aggressor had we lost. Sounds a lot more like a agenda than a fair, honest analysis.
                              I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                              -Emiliano Zapata

                              Comment


                              • Re: Bench, trade, or reign in Monta Ellis

                                Originally posted by tora tora View Post
                                PG shouldn't be allowed to dribble.
                                AMEN!!!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X