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

How would you rate these EC post players?

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

  • #16
    Re: How would you rate these EC post players?

    Originally posted by Peck View Post
    1. Howard
    2. Bosh
    3. Okafur

    I'm not sure Drew Gooden shouldn't be on par with J.O. but I know people would have a hissy over that so I'll list J.O. at 4. But I think Drew is a close 5th.
    C'mon, Peck. You might not like JO, but you don't have to be silly about it.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: How would you rate these EC post players?

      Jermaine O'Neal..................Dwight Howard.................
      Indiana Pacers...................Orlando Magic..................
      Position: F-C....................Position: C-F...................
      Height: 6-11 Weight: 260..Height: 6-11 Weight: 265..
      Age: 28, Oct 13, 1978.........Age: 20, Dec 8,1985..........

      2006-07 Statistics..............2006-07 Statistics
      PPG...18.5.........................PPG 17.1
      RPG...9.3..........................RPG 13.6
      APG...3.0..........................APG 1.7
      SPG...80...........................SPG .56
      BPG...3.33.........................BPG 1.94
      FG%..463..........................FG% .576
      FT%..759..........................FT% .667
      3P%...000.........................3P% .000
      MPG...35.9........................MPG 35.5
      Eff....22.60........................24.25




      Chris Bosh
      Toronto Raptors
      Position: F
      Height: 6-10 Weight: 230
      Age:22, Mar 24, 1984

      Player file | Team stats
      2006-07 Statistics
      PPG 20.5
      RPG 12.3
      APG 2.0
      SPG .53
      BPG .93
      FG% .466
      FT% .725
      3P% .364
      MPG 36.5
      Eff 23.07

      You guys/gals going on potential . . . remember Bender? Not only did he not reach it, he's not playing anymore. You have to rate guys today, because they might not be playing tomorrow.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: How would you rate these EC post players?

        Originally posted by Just View Post
        C'mon, Peck. You might not like JO, but you don't have to be silly about it.
        He isnt being silly... that is his honest opinion.
        This space for rent.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: How would you rate these EC post players?

          Hmmm I don't know the main problem I have in this poll is I really haven't had a chance to watch either Bosh or Howard play much. I've seen JO play a lot and frankly bassed upon the recent game between Bosh and JO.. JO clearly outplayed Bosh, I know Bosh got a lot of stats but JO clearly outplayed him and was much more dominate on both the offensive and defensive side of the ball... our run back into the game basically ended when JO left the game and was obviously hurting when he came back into the game. I watched and he had trouble moving... I frankly was upset that Rick didn't take him out with five minutes...

          Going into this season I really didn't have Howard over JO yet either but I think from what I am hearing from others Howard has stepped up the physical nature of his game being more aggresive, still have not seen him play defense like JO does nigth in night out... still I have no real argument for those picking him over JO... but Bosh over JO.. from what I have seen no way....
          You didn't think it was gonna be that easy, did you? ..... You know, for a second there, yeah, I kinda did.....
          Silly rabbit..... Trix are for kids.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: How would you rate these EC post players?

            Offense
            O'Neal: 8/10
            Bosh: 8/10
            Howard: 7/10

            Defense
            O'Neal: 10/10
            Bosh: 5/10
            Howard: 7/10

            Rebounding
            O'Neal: 7/10
            Bosh: 9/10
            Howard: 10/10

            Average
            O'Neal: 8.3
            Bosh: 7.3
            Howard: 8

            Right now I've got JO slightly ahead of Howard due to his superior all-around game, and Bosh a fairly distant third due to the fact that he's a very poor defender. Howard will almost certainly surpass JO within the next season or two, but until Bosh can defend his shadow he'll remain third on my list.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: How would you rate these EC post players?

              Originally posted by Anthem View Post
              He isnt being silly... that is his honest opinion.

              The correct answer is that he is being silly AND that is his honest opinion.
              The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
              http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
              RSS Feed
              Subscribe via iTunes

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: How would you rate these EC post players?

                Originally posted by FlavaDave View Post
                The correct answer is that he is being silly AND that is his honest opinion.
                That's my honest opinion too, and I'm not being silly, and I said it before Peck.

                Okafor is improving rapidly and has almost caught up with Jermaine and is about to pass him by.

                He is already a better rebounder, way higher percentage shooter, blocks about the same, has a more athletic build so that he isn't pushed off the blocks, and he is several years younger. The only knock is his TERRIBLE free throw shooting and limited range. Funny me, I don't mind it if my best inside player can't jack up 18-footers all day long.

                Now JO might have a slight edge, but the rate of improvement for Okafor puts him way above Jermaine in value.


                Emeka Okafor
                Charlotte Bobcats
                Position: C-F
                Height: 6-10 Weight: 252

                2006-07 Statistics
                PPG 16.9
                RPG 10.9
                APG 1.4
                SPG .93
                BPG 3.20
                FG% .543
                FT% .488
                3P% .000
                MPG 35.9

                Jermaine O'Neal
                Indiana Pacers
                Position: F-C
                Height: 6-11 Weight: 260

                2006-07 Statistics
                PPG 18.5
                RPG 9.3
                APG 3.0
                SPG .80
                BPG 3.33
                FG% .463
                FT% .759
                3P% .000
                MPG 35.9
                The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: How would you rate these EC post players?

                  Originally posted by pacertom View Post
                  That's my honest opinion too, and I'm not being silly, and I said it before Peck.

                  Okafor is improving rapidly and has almost caught up with Jermaine and is about to pass him by.
                  ...

                  "I'm not sure Drew Gooden shouldn't be on par with J.O."


                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: How would you rate these EC post players?

                    Yeah, the part from Peck about Gooden was pretty goofy. Cleveland wasn't sure if they wanted him back at any cost, and he's been passed around the league so much you know there are some issues.

                    But I'm with him on the Okafor evaluation.

                    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: How would you rate these EC post players?

                      Since the "talk" (thank you Conrad)

                      "Jermaine O'Neal has five double-doubles and three 20-10 games in the last seven, averaging 21.9 points, 10.3 rebounds, 3.9 assists, 3.57 blocks and shooting .505 from the field (54-of-107)."

                      Who was ahead of him ?

                      P.S. the team is also 5-2 since that same talk.

                      coincidence ?
                      So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                      If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                      Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: How would you rate these EC post players?

                        Originally posted by able View Post
                        Since the "talk" (thank you Conrad)

                        "Jermaine O'Neal has five double-doubles and three 20-10 games in the last seven, averaging 21.9 points, 10.3 rebounds, 3.9 assists, 3.57 blocks and shooting .505 from the field (54-of-107)."

                        Who was ahead of him ?


                        Dude's an MVP candiate if he keeps that up... and I think he can...

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: How would you rate these EC post players?

                          JO's passed up Emeka Okafor for the league lead in blocks per game. I'd love to see him make a run for DPOY, but his sub-great rebounding will probably prevent ity from ever happening.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: How would you rate these EC post players?

                            Like I said, I put J.O. above Gooden because I knew you people would have a hissy fit. I put him up there & your haveing the hissy fit anyway, so for the purpose of my thought I bring you the following

                            Jermaine O'Neal

                            PPG 18.5
                            RPG 9.3
                            APG 3.0
                            SPG .80
                            BPG 3.33
                            FG% .463
                            FT% .759
                            3P% .000
                            MPG 35.9


                            Drew Gooden

                            PPG 12.4
                            RPG 9.4
                            APG .7
                            SPG .53
                            BPG .47
                            FG% .487
                            FT% .745
                            3P% .333
                            MPG 26.5


                            Furthermore, one of the two of these players is the single biggest contributer of offense to his team, meaning he touches the ball on almost every possesion while the other one has to try & find offense while not only not being the # 1 option but not even being option # 2.

                            So with that in mind is JermaInes 3 more baskets a game in ten more min. really that impressive?

                            Is he really truely that much better than Gooden? Stats don't say that, although I will agree stats don't make a player.

                            Let's talk about shot blocking for a min. then can we? Shawn Bradley was a great shot blocker, did that make him a great defender?

                            JermaIne is a wonderfull shot blocker, the best the Pacers have ever had, but IMO he is a poor low post defender. He gets moved off the block easily & frankly has never been one to really cherish physical contact anyway.

                            Now given my recent posting regarding JermaIne I can see where you all think this is just me using hyperbole.

                            But go back & re-read what I wrote. I never once said that I thought Gooden was better. I just said I wasn't sure if he wasn't on par with him & IMO based on the above I don't know how you can just easily scoff at the idea.

                            Oh, not that this should be a consideration in listing players by how good they are but...

                            JermaIne O'Neal $18,084,000.00 this season

                            Drew Gooden $6,600,000.00 this season

                            Is JermaIne really 3 times better than Gooden? Again, the stats don't show that.


                            Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: How would you rate these EC post players?

                              Originally posted by Peck View Post
                              1. Howard
                              2. Bosh
                              3. Okafur

                              I'm not sure Drew Gooden shouldn't be on par with J.O. but I know people would have a hissy over that so I'll list J.O. at 4. But I think Drew is a close 5th.
                              Drew Gooden is easily as good as Jermaine. Drew Gooden is a good player and so is Jermaine, but Bosh/Howard are out of Jermaines league.

                              Jermaines rebounding is not very good, if he had 3-4 more rebounds a game he would be considered an elite player to me. I don't care about his blocks, because even foster has been blocking this year. That is a result of the pacers defensive scheme. Also, I wish I had a dollar for everytime I saw Tinsley or one of our guards pull a rebound and JO in the area snatch it from them...only to give it RIGHT BACK just so he gets the board. His 9 rebounds a game isn't even legitimate if you ask me. I'd say he earns 6-7 rebounds a game.
                              I love you pecks.

                              And listen guys, when Jermaine goes 20-10 for 3 out of 7 games that is no reason to jump for joy. At his pay, 20-10 should be a given every single night.
                              *removed* Just keep politics and religion completely out of it, please.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: How would you rate these EC post players?

                                Disregarding everything else, two of those players have played over 70 games each of the last 2 seasons. I could switch my first 2 but the player with injury problems is a lock at third for me.
                                The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X