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

Frank's Future

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

  • Re: Frank's Future

    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
    He doesn't want to air dirty laundry, while he tells the media how Frank begged for his job. Good point.

    Bird got roasted all over the media for being unprofessional in the way he handled the whole affair and you think he was being a gentleman.
    media members in attendance also said Bird was emotional about the whole thing.

    IMO it seemed Bird, getting choked up, was trying to convey how hard the decision as he really cared about Frank and his family was and devulged too much information about Vogel calling him to keep the gig. Or one can believe Bird purposely was trying to show Vogel as a weak beggar, and wanted to kick Vogel while down because Bird is evil.

    I guess either way, still a mistake to say all that, but I don't think it matters at all.

    Comment


    • Re: Frank's Future

      Yeah, I've called/implied Bird was "evil."

      Good luck with that.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • Re: Frank's Future

        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
        The three years thing is crap too. The list of Pacer players that played for Frank at least three years: Paul. GHill. Ian. Solomon Hill. That's it. Two of the four, Ian/Solo, just had great seasons. (well once Solo got PT) and PG was full of motivation just due to the fact he missed all last season.

        So the only argument that even could be made is GHill, and IMHO it's crap.

        Larry wanted a new direction, which is why all the reasons he gave for the decision don't live up to the sniff test. He threw crap at the wall hoping no one would notice when it slid down into a puddle.
        The new voice still could stick. Bird has said, and it's been reported, that Vogel wasn't holding players accountable. Nate and Bird seem to have made this a priority. Thus a new voice. Unless you're around the team everyday, hard to know when/if something wears thin. You don't have to be here for as long as PG for something like this to be a problem. Hell, the players mentioned could have issues with how newer players are motivated/treated. Several scenarios could fit under the "new voice" comment.

        But I just think it was a vague way of saying Bird was done with Vogel for many reasons. Some of which could fall under "new voice."

        Comment


        • Re: Frank's Future

          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
          Yeah, I've called/implied Bird was "evil."

          Good luck with that.
          Sarcasm, referencing GOT post.

          Comment


          • Re: Frank's Future

            Why am I the only that thinks this is a bad fit? Orlando has a bad offense, bad shooting and about average defense already. I wish he would have waited a year for the perfect situation like Thib.

            Comment


            • Re: Frank's Future

              Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
              Why am I the only that thinks this is a bad fit? Orlando has a bad offense, bad shooting and about average defense already. I wish he would have waited a year for the perfect situation like Thib.
              The Magic have Cap Space while stocking up on solid rookie contracts for the next couple of seasons with Fournier being the only one to re-sign as a RFA. The Magic have room to grow and the opportunity to add to their foundation due to their Salary Cap situation. Worse comes to worse, they can trade one or more of their many promising rookies to improve the offensive makeup of this Team.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • Re: Frank's Future

                Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                The Magic have Cap Space while stocking up on solid rookie contracts for the next couple of seasons with Fournier being the only one to re-sign as a RFA. The Magic have room to grow and the opportunity to add to their foundation due to their Salary Cap situation. Worse comes to worse, they can trade one or more of their many promising rookies to improve the offensive makeup of this Team.
                I think the expectation is the Magic "take the next step" and are a playoff team next year under Vogel. Even if they land a big player, I don't see it.

                If I'm Vogel, I'm looking for an offense ready team that just needs defense to put them over. Like Thib walked into.

                Comment


                • Re: Frank's Future

                  Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                  I think the expectation is the Magic "take the next step" and are a playoff team next year under Vogel. Even if they land a big player, I don't see it.

                  If I'm Vogel, I'm looking for an offense ready team that just needs defense to put them over. Like Thib walked into.
                  Why wouldn't Frank want to show that with different players he can be successful offensively as well?
                  BillS

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

                  Comment


                  • Re: Frank's Future

                    Originally posted by BillS View Post
                    Why wouldn't Frank want to show that with different players he can be successful offensively as well?
                    I'm coming from the angle that he can't do that because he struggles with offense. But if he can turn around the Magic offense then absolutely, great move.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Frank's Future

                      Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                      Why am I the only that thinks this is a bad fit? Orlando has a bad offense, bad shooting and about average defense already. I wish he would have waited a year for the perfect situation like Thib.
                      Play to your strengths... Frank has a formula for turning young players with defensive potential into an elite defensive team and winning lots of games. Why mess with that?

                      OTOH, give him a team full of scorers and who's to say he can find success with that? Maybe he will, maybe he won't.

                      I mean, for Frank's own development sure it might be interesting. But I think most people (hopefully including Frank!) aren't stressing over Frank's offense as much as Frank's W/L.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Frank's Future

                        Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                        Play to your strengths... Frank has a formula for turning young players with defensive potential into an elite defensive team and winning lots of games. Why mess with that?

                        OTOH, give him a team full of scorers and who's to say he can find success with that? Maybe he will, maybe he won't.

                        I mean, for Frank's own development sure it might be interesting. But I think most people (hopefully including Frank!) aren't stressing over Frank's offense as much as Frank's W/L.
                        For sure, Vogel could be perfect to come in with the nice guy routine after a rigged Skiles. Then do the exact same thing with the young core he did here.

                        But unlike JOB, I think Skiles was maximizing talent and even if you do get the defense to elite, offense will be a league worst now. And interesting Skiles left a team with a better record this year. I read he was miserable with the personalities. I'm curious to see how Vogel handles that.

                        We'll see. I wish he would have waited for a better gig.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Frank's Future

                          Vogel says he wasn't begging. Just a poor choice of words from Larry that I'm sure he regrets.

                          https://www.yahoo.com/sports/blogs/n...211358806.html

                          Comment


                          • Re: Frank's Future

                            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                            The three years thing is crap too. The list of Pacer players that played for Frank at least three years: Paul. GHill. Ian. Solomon Hill. That's it. Two of the four, Ian/Solo, just had great seasons. (well once Solo got PT) and PG was full of motivation just due to the fact he missed all last season.

                            So the only argument that even could be made is GHill, and IMHO it's crap.

                            Larry wanted a new direction, which is why all the reasons he gave for the decision don't live up to the sniff test. He threw crap at the wall hoping no one would notice when it slid down into a puddle.
                            But, but, but...


                            Lol... Wish I could thank your post multiple times!
                            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: Frank's Future

                              http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap...in-With-Pacers


                              Frank Vogel Denies 'Begging' Larry Bird To Remain With PacersMAY 25, 2016 7:56 PM




                              Frank Vogel denied comments made by Larry Bird that he begged to remain head coach of the Indiana Pacers during the morning before he was let go. Bird made those remarks during his press conference explaining the decision.


                              "I was OK with that. Larry's going to speak his mind. A lot of people talked to me about it who didn't like that and it's probably an inaccurate perception that I was begging him to stay. ... I fully respect Larry and the process. He knew it was going to be an unpopular move but he did what he had to do.


                              "I felt like we were on the verge of some big things. We stood toe-to-toe with a 56-win team. I told my team after the series that were poised ... I felt like I was going to be able to do that with this group. That was my only mention to Larry."


                              Vogel said he and Bird shared the same philosophy on how they wanted the Pacers to play.


                              That’s a misconception about this whole view. Larry and I have been very well aligned all the way through these six years, including the decision to try to play faster and smaller this year," Vogel said. "This is not something I was resistant to. It’s a style of play I’m going to try to implement with the Orlando Magic. ... There was a lot made about Larry vs. Frank and the differences. But throughout the whole process, we were very well aligned.


                              'It wasn't about difference of opinion or difference of philosophy. It was about change."


                              Vogel has since been hired as head coach of the Orlando Magic.
                              "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

                              Comment


                              • Re: Frank's Future

                                I still wonder if some of you would've been happier if Bird had actually dumped dirt on Vogel and gave you specific reasons he didn't want him back, regardless if those reasons would've tarnished his image and hurt his ability to find another job.
                                So instead of giving him credit for not doing that, some are complaining because they don't like the reasons he gave. I suspect for some it would've been damned if did and damned if he didn't.... A no win situation.
                                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

                                Working...
                                X