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

2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

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

  • Re: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

    Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
    I still dont see why the answer to this "issue" within the league isn't simply challenging teams and franchises to do and be better.

    Put together your own roster that can compete. Stop making dumb trades and signings.

    Lebron existing isn't fair. He's that good. But the same could be said for other super a dupers stars that came before him. The onus should be on the rest of the league to improve, no on limiting the ways that he and other star players can excel.
    But you say that like most teams don't try to improve... there's only so much talent to go around in the league to get even ONE superstar talent let alone 2-3. The Raptors are this year's version of attempting to get better within their budget, and they still got spanked.


    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: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

      Originally posted by pogi View Post
      This is what I don't get...

      Every year there's only 3-4 teams that are expected to win the championship. Then, you have several teams that are 1 all-star player, or 1 borderline all-star and 1 exceptional role player from being contenders. Then, the rest is basically crap. It has always been that way since the inception of NBA.
      The issue is that you didn't quote or perhaps read the part of my post that answers your question.

      A huge part of what makes the league fair and competitive is the NBA Draft and allowing the GM's to trade players FOR VALUE. Not to allow stars to congregate on super teams.

      There isn't a problem in my book with teams dominating. The problem is when players move outside the context of the draft and fair trading to centralize the talent on a few specific teams.

      This is why I applaud teams like Golden State for the way they built their team fairly...until Kevin Durant decided to dump OKC and join a team that just broke the regular season record in victories.

      Now if we can all agree the league is really a farce, I can accept that. But let's not continue with this charade that the NBA is something other than entertainment for 90% of the games along the lines of professional wrestling. I have no problem with people enjoying this product, but claiming it to be something it isn't is not going to fly.

      Comment


      • Re: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

        Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
        But you say that like most teams don't try to improve... there's only so much talent to go around in the league to get even ONE superstar talent let alone 2-3. The Raptors are this year's version of attempting to get better within their budget, and they still got spanked.
        Of course teams try and improve. Raptors are a great example.

        But the onus is still on opposing franchises to compete at the highest level. The league shouldn't limit players on where they want to play it n an effort to make things "fair". That's just ridiculous if you ask me

        Comment


        • Re: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

          Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
          Of course teams try and improve. Raptors are a great example.

          But the onus is still on opposing franchises to compete at the highest level. The league shouldn't limit players on where they want to play it n an effort to make things "fair". That's just ridiculous if you ask me
          The Raptors show how hard it is. You basically have to be a perfect GM to build a team to beat Lebron. Kind of hard to blame GMs for not being flawless.

          Comment


          • Re: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

            Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
            Of course teams try and improve. Raptors are a great example.

            But the onus is still on opposing franchises to compete at the highest level. The league shouldn't limit players on where they want to play it n an effort to make things "fair". That's just ridiculous if you ask me
            Why should opposing franchises attempt to compete with all the stars centralizing talent? The fact is, they really cannot compete. The Spurs are viewed as a star franchise so they are a special exception. But the rest of the league are trash teams that stars try to leave because they cannot compete. Paul George the latest example. Even when teams are good, guys like Durant just join the better team to make them that much better. OKC simply cannot compete with that.

            Comment


            • Re: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

              Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
              Of course teams try and improve. Raptors are a great example.

              But the onus is still on opposing franchises to compete at the highest level. The league shouldn't limit players on where they want to play it n an effort to make things "fair". That's just ridiculous if you ask me
              Gotcha. For some reason, I thought you was still beating the drum that teams did a "terrible" job of putting together a team to beat LeBron.

              I agree...rules should never be implemented to limit FA choice. Teams just have to build their roster accordinglyband hope for the best.


              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: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

                Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                The Raptors show how hard it is. You basically have to be a perfect GM to build a team to beat Lebron. Kind of hard to blame GMs for not being flawless.
                This. The Pacers have tried doing it the right way several times. They always fall short and will always fall short as long as guys like LeBron recruit stars and guys like Durant join a team that is already about the best team in the world.

                Comment


                • Re: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

                  Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                  The Raptors show how hard it is. You basically have to be a perfect GM to build a team to beat Lebron. Kind of hard to blame GMs for not being flawless.
                  If the Cavs beat the Warriors, it's going to show that even being perfect is not good enough, lol. How do you top adding a MVP player to a record breaking roster?


                  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: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

                    Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                    If the Cavs beat the Warriors, it's going to show that even being perfect is not good enough, lol. How do you top adding a MVP player to a record breaking roster?
                    By allowing one of the GOAT to ditch his declining team and join a team in a perfect situation for a quick rebuild. Kyrie and Love were acquired directly or indirectly due to very high picks (both #1's? With Wiggins being the other) in large part because LeBron left Cleveland in the first place. When he returned it was ready made for a quick rebuild. LeBron would never have gone to another team like that in a fair trade. That team would've had to sacrifice it's number one pick. So yes he cheated by going to Cleveland.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

                      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                      By allowing one of the GOAT to ditch his declining team and join a team in a perfect situation for a quick rebuild. Kyrie and Love were acquired directly or indirectly due to very high picks (both #1's? With Wiggins being the other) in large part because LeBron left Cleveland in the first place. When he returned it was ready made for a quick rebuild. LeBron would never have gone to another team like that in a fair trade. That team would've had to sacrifice it's number one pick. So yes he cheated by going to Cleveland.
                      Maybe, but on paper...should the Cavs be able to beat Golden State? If LeBron beats GS with Durant on the team, I think that solidifies his place in NBA. Personally, I don't think Love is THAT great of a player, but he fits their needs.


                      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: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

                        Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                        By allowing one of the GOAT to ditch his declining team and join a team in a perfect situation for a quick rebuild. Kyrie and Love were acquired directly or indirectly due to very high picks (both #1's? With Wiggins being the other) in large part because LeBron left Cleveland in the first place. When he returned it was ready made for a quick rebuild. LeBron would never have gone to another team like that in a fair trade. That team would've had to sacrifice it's number one pick. So yes he cheated by going to Cleveland.
                        Not exactly related to your point, but even with what seemed like total incompetence from a management standpoint, the Cavs caught some incredibly lucky breaks. Don't forget the Kyrie pick was not even their own. The Clippers gave the Cavs the #1 pick in the draft to absorb Baron Davis's contract which wasn't even all that much.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

                          Originally posted by Wage View Post
                          Not exactly related to your point, but even with what seemed like total incompetence from a management standpoint, the Cavs caught some incredibly lucky breaks. Don't forget the Kyrie pick was not even their own. The Clippers gave the Cavs the #1 pick in the draft to absorb Baron Davis's contract which wasn't even all that much.
                          They caught a lucky break three years in a row. If they didn't screw up the Bennett pick, no telling what type of team they would have now.


                          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: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

                            Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                            They caught a lucky break three years in a row. If they didn't screw up the Bennett pick, no telling what type of team they would have now.
                            The only luck involved (for the Cavs) was that LeBron decided to return. It was very predictable they would lose when he left in free agency...and therefore also nearly guaranteed they would get very high draft picks.

                            They had 66 and 61 wins the last two years he was in Cleveland. They won a total of 64 games the next 3 years.

                            So, as a direct result of LeBron leaving Cleveland via free agency joining Bosh and Wade in South Beach, they loaded up on draft picks and later were able to acquire Kevin Love, considered one of the very best players in the league at the time.

                            Combine that ready-made situation for a rebuild with LeBron's clout recruiting other players, he easily built another super team plus a bench with former all-star level players.

                            But you're right about Bennett. Had he been a beast as expected, the Cavs probably wouldn't have lost to GS the first time.

                            EDIT: BTW, LeBron is great for a lot of reasons we all know about. But he's a lot better...or his team's results are a lot better...because he is brilliant at manipulating the league. Just brilliant. I have to tip my cap to him. He plays great on the court but he plays even better off of it.
                            Last edited by BlueNGold; 05-14-2017, 04:24 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

                              Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                              The Raptors show how hard it is. You basically have to be a perfect GM to build a team to beat Lebron. Kind of hard to blame GMs for not being flawless.
                              No doubt.

                              I'm not the one who believes there is an "issue" within the league. I agree with you, its damn near impossible to build a team good enough to compete with great players.

                              Thats why Russell has 11 rings, MJ has 6, Magic, Kobe and TD have 5, and so on. Its VERY hard to beat GOATS. Thats what makes them so damn great.

                              My point is that the onus on beating Lebron in the playoffs is on the rest of the league to figure out.

                              Dont complain about the system just because most of the league is struggling to compete.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

                                Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                                No doubt.

                                I'm not the one who believes there is an "issue" within the league. I agree with you, its damn near impossible to build a team good enough to compete with great players.

                                Thats why Russell has 11 rings, MJ has 6, Magic, Kobe and TD have 5, and so on. Its VERY hard to beat GOATS. Thats what makes them so damn great.

                                My point is that the onus on beating Lebron in the playoffs is on the rest of the league to figure out.

                                Dont complain about the system just because most of the league is struggling to compete.
                                Yet Wilt Chamberlain only won after he joined the Lakers, well after his prime years.

                                The issue isn't that great players cannot be beaten. It's that when they wield their influence to build super teams with other great players in their prime, they have manipulated the league into something not resembling sport.

                                This is why I have no problem if we can all agree that the league is fake and purely entertainment. Perhaps until we see the Cavs and Golden State play...which will at least be two teams who have equally cheated.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X