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

The Official Golden State/Stephen Jackson Thread

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

  • Re: We should trade for this guy

    Originally posted by Jermaniac View Post
    I APPLAUD THAT MAN. Wow what an amazing analysis of Dunleavy. I'm going to get a tattoo of that blog on my chest, so it stays with me till the day I die.
    The only bad thing about Dunleavy is his contract. Something that isn't his fault. Other than that I would much rather have a low key player who has a basketball IQ over an overrated chucker who could possibly end up in prison for violating his parole. the truth is people were saying the exact same thing about Ron Artest in last years playoffs. One year later and Sacramento is even growing tired of him. The same will happen with Jax. I highly doubt he will be able to survive in Oakland without having something similar occur to the bar fight in Indy occur at some point in the future.
    PACER FAN ON STRIKE!!!-The moment the Pacers fire Larry Bird I will cheer for them again.

    Comment


    • Re: We should trade for this guy

      Reading many of these comments you would think the Pacers traded away superstar players who were going to lead us to the NBA Finals. We didn't trade Nash, we didn't trade Kidd, we didn't trade Baron Davis (many other franchises did though) - we traded away 4 players - 3 of which weren't working out at all and a 4th who wasn't going to play at all.

      Comment


      • Re: We should trade for this guy

        Originally posted by DrBadd01 View Post
        The only bad thing about Dunleavy is his contract. Something that isn't his fault. Other than that I would much rather have a low key player who has a basketball IQ over an overrated chucker who could possibly end up in prison for violating his parole. the truth is people were saying the exact same thing about Ron Artest in last years playoffs. One year later and Sacramento is even growing tired of him. The same will happen with Jax. I highly doubt he will be able to survive in Oakland without having something similar occur to the bar fight in Indy occur at some point in the future.
        Except, he's not Artest and nowhere near the level of craziness that is Artest....I agree with this thread and everything Naptown is saying.....Lol@?Dunleavy getting better.........The guy will NEVER get any better.......He's as good as he's going to get and he's a bench player at best......Jackson is a lot better than him, not just a tad better.....The fact that the guy plays with heart makes him better already.....

        Comment


        • Re: We should trade for this guy

          Originally posted by timid View Post
          Except, he's not Artest and nowhere near the level of craziness that is Artest....I agree with this thread and everything Naptown is saying.....Lol@?Dunleavy getting better.........The guy will NEVER get any better.......He's as good as he's going to get and he's a bench player at best......Jackson is a lot better than him, not just a tad better.....The fact that the guy plays with heart makes him better already.....
          Dunleavy has been in Indy for less than a season. He had to pick up an entirely different system of play from the one he was in with Golden State and he had to pick up at an accelerated rate. I plan on at least giving him a full season before I condemn him, just like I plan on giving Jax a full season to show his true colors and do something stupid.
          PACER FAN ON STRIKE!!!-The moment the Pacers fire Larry Bird I will cheer for them again.

          Comment


          • Re: We should trade for this guy

            Originally posted by DrBadd01 View Post
            Dunleavy has been in Indy for less than a season. He had to pick up an entirely different system of play from the one he was in with Golden State and he had to pick up at an accelerated rate. I plan on at least giving him a full season before I condemn him, just like I plan on giving Jax a full season to show his true colors and do something stupid.
            Basketball is basketball......A good player can go anywhere and play....His IQ is supposed to be his main positive, correct? I'm not saying he sucks, but he's just not that good. He's average.....I haven't seen him improve on any aspect of his game since he's been in the league and actually his shot has gotten worse.....He's the type of player that if you stuck a defender on him, who was to say, talk a lot of trash, he would fold like a tent.......It doesn't matter if the defender sucks or not....The dude shows no mental toughness or heart and just looks like he's going through the motions all the time....

            Comment


            • Re: I don't want to start a big ugly thing, but...

              Originally posted by Roferr View Post
              Like we were really going places before the trade.
              Didn't you get the memo, or see all those banners, for first round playoff exits?

              Making the playoffs with no shot of actually winning a series is a BIG deal.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • Re: We should trade for this guy

                Despite how we all feel about the Trade I think everyone would probably admit that Jack's defense was more critical to the Pacers success than we realized at the time.

                Before the trade Danny looked like a good defender and the team's defense was still pretty solid. After the trade... Danny and the rest of the team fell off the cliff. I knew they were gonna take a hit defensively but it got downright pitiful at times. Jack is a really good defender and he actually improved GS's overall team defense.


                Three added points not to be overlooked GS's rebirth are:

                1. A healthy Baron Davis
                2. The coaching of Don Nelson
                3. The improvement and emergence of Monte Ellis (who kept them competitive while B-Ditty was on the IL)

                Comment


                • Re: We should trade for this guy

                  Originally posted by DrBadd01 View Post
                  The only bad thing about Dunleavy is his contract. Something that isn't his fault. Other than that I would much rather have a low key player who has a basketball IQ over an overrated chucker who could possibly end up in prison for violating his parole. the truth is people were saying the exact same thing about Ron Artest in last years playoffs. One year later and Sacramento is even growing tired of him. The same will happen with Jax. I highly doubt he will be able to survive in Oakland without having something similar occur to the bar fight in Indy occur at some point in the future.
                  lmao At basketball IQ. Thats the nice way to say you suck at basketball.

                  So Mike Dunleavy imagines the right play in his mind but he cant execute it because he sucks. But as long as he imagines it in his head its all good, thats basketball IQ Mike Dunleavy style.

                  Troy Murphys and Mike Dunleavy's IQ got us out of the playoffs for the first time in 9 years.

                  Comment


                  • Re: We should trade for this guy

                    Id rather have an idiot who can score 50 on any given night,and take over games,and win games than a "smart basketball player" who scores 12ppg.
                    LoneGranger33 said
                    Agreed. As the members of Guns and Roses once said, "every rose has its thorn".

                    Comment


                    • Re: We should trade for this guy

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      Reading many of these comments you would think the Pacers traded away superstar players who were going to lead us to the NBA Finals. We didn't trade Nash, we didn't trade Kidd, we didn't trade Baron Davis (many other franchises did though) - we traded away 4 players - 3 of which weren't working out at all and a 4th who wasn't going to play at all.
                      I'm going to have to root for GS to pull off a miracle NBA championship this season. Heck, even a miracle deep playoff run would be something. The entertainment value to this forum would cause Hicks and Able to charge admission because it would be so popular.

                      Let the polarization begin!

                      -Bball
                      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


                      • Re: We should trade for this guy

                        Originally posted by Evan_The_Dude View Post
                        Doesn't matter. He's kicking *** in Golden State now. Also, I don't see anything wrong with calling out a rookie in a playoff series. If Jeff Foster had called him out, or even Jermaine had done it, it would be considered a part of leadership. Since it was Jackson, it's something else. Jackson isn't one of my favorite players, but I'm not blinded by what he is. He's a winner. He's a competitor that plays very hard. He doesn't believe in missing games. He's mentally tough. He's a good teammate. He also has the experience of an NBA Championship under his belt. That's a guy I want on my team. He hasn't been proven guilty for a damn thing, so I'm not looking at him like a criminal.
                        Thats damn sure.

                        If Austin Croshere called out Danny during the playoffs. LORDY LORD. "Omg Amazing leadership by Cro once again, Austin Croshere is the leader of this team, lets give Cro an extension." Because Austin Croshere was a spy in the locker room and then snitched to the media about stuff that should stay in house he was a leader, but when Stephen Jackson calls out a rookie during the playoffs he is dirt.

                        Comment


                        • Re: I don't want to start a big ugly thing, but...

                          Originally posted by Shade
                          I don't understand how any Pacers fan can support Ron Artest or Stephen Jackson after what they put this franchise through.
                          Granted, I will probably never support Ron Artest in any endevor, but I personally dont feel that Jackson is responsible for all the ills of the franchise that you are laying on him. Look, in the past I was just as much of a Jackson critic as a lot of you. Heck, I even boo'd him viciously at many games before this season. I see and understand why a lot of you feel that he had to be dealt at any cost because of PR reasons, but I thought he was making an effort to be a better player and teammate this season.

                          I have a hard time just hating him because of his MINOR (IMHO) "off the court" issues. As for the on the court issues that some had with Jack...some of these seemed a little overstated, but I do reallize that TPTB made a wise decision to deal Jackson because he would never get a fair shake no matter what he did to clean himself up to be a better representative of the franchise. The fan base would just be looking and waiting for anything he did left of center to hang him on.

                          Originally posted by Sh4d3 View Post
                          This is part of what I'm getting at. Not only was Jack a problem off the court, but on the court, he:

                          - screamed at and undermined the coach, repeatedly.
                          Well, why didn't the coach or managment put a stop to this earlier? You know that the coach has the ultimate hammer, better known as "the bench". This is more of an indictment on the coach's lack of discipline being instilled into his players. It is bad that it happens in the first place, but to let it go unchecked as it did is reason enough that blame for this didn't just stop at Jackson!

                          - screamed at referees time and again while his man ran down the floor and scored, repeatedly
                          Not so much, if any this year. I could tell that he made a concious effort to leave the officials be this season here. ie: somebody got thru to him...Why didn't this happen earlier?

                          - played defense selectively, at one point getting torched by Adam freakin' Morrison
                          Him playing defense selectivly is a hell of a lot more then we are getting out of Murphleavy full time. Anywho, I always heard this, but honestly, I didn't see this enough to make it a point of emphisis.

                          - took ill-advised shots early in the shot clock, or with other players open, repeatedly
                          Yeah, you are right on this one, but when your only choices are back down to O'neal, to our non-shot making pg, or our non-offensive skilled center...it does cut down on your choices. But, for the most part...he did take ill advised shots for the low percentage that he shot.

                          - couldn't hit the side of a barn far too often for a SG of his supposed caliber
                          Neither can ___insert Pacer player here ___.

                          Plus, he was apparently a problem in the locker room as well.
                          I guess he was such a problem in the locker room and with his former teammates that D. Armstrong openly criticized mngt for letting him/them go.
                          ...Still "flying casual"
                          @roaminggnome74

                          Comment


                          • Re: I don't want to start a big ugly thing, but...

                            Originally posted by Burtrem Redneck View Post
                            Ron Artests actions and Stephen Jacksons are so different. Ron was the opposite of what Jack did here. Stephen came to play every night, even injured. Stephen never asked for time off or for a trade.

                            He got a bum rap for off the court issues, but its painfully obvious to me how important he was to this team. His attitude, drive to win and skill. As a Pacer fan I am really mad at the front office, and some of the fans who seemed to have pressured our front office into making horrible basketball personel decisions. Watching the Warriors smoke Dallas was hard to watch knowing that could have been my Pacers in the playoffs.

                            So I think you are off base with your assumptions Shade. We all don't agree that SJax was bad for this team. And I am not happy with our crappy team and wish we could have our warriors back and undo that trade.

                            And it's not like SJax is all of a sudden turning his career around playing better basketball. He was playing the best ball of his life here in Indy but some of you just had so much hate you couldnt/refused to appreciate what he brought to the team. And that is OK. Just don't expect everyone to see things as you do.
                            Well said, especially the last paragraph. I love reading the delusional statements that go something like this: "Jack is just in the honeymoon period, he'll begin to become the 4-for-17 player we're used to seeing."

                            Jack is playing at the same exact level he has for the last 4 years. I'm sick of hearing that Golden State puts him in some amazing situation where he can actually play well. You don't hear anyone mentioning the post All-Star stretch with the Hawks in 03-04 where he put up numbers that Joe Johnson is putting up now. You don't hear anyone mentioning he carried this team to the playoffs (after partly derailing the whole season though) in 04-05 after JO was hurt and he put up 22 PPG for practically 2 months.

                            I could go on, but it will fall on deaf ears anyway, it always has and always will around here.

                            Comment


                            • Re: I don't want to start a big ugly thing, but...

                              For me, and I think for some others, You want to see Ron Artest do well. I Personally root for him because I know deep down inside him, he's a good person. I don't mean to sound like I know more than I do or sound like a pretentious wannabe psycologist, but there is something inside Ron Artest where there are situations in his life that has made him who he is today. Ron is just a scared crazy little kid who never grew up, who never learned the fundamentals of being an adult. I think those of us who have a soft spot for him hope that one day he will grow up making himself happy.
                              Life without water is tough, life without air is hard,life with one leg only is wobbly, Life without Reggie Miller, is impossible.

                              Do Not Trade Austin

                              Originally posted by Conrad Brunner
                              Veteran Austin Croshere, the longest-tenured Pacers player on the roster, has proven reliable when called upon, invariably ready to step in regardless of the circumstance.

                              Comment


                              • Re: We should trade for this guy

                                Originally posted by indy0731 View Post
                                I would rather have a two guard that has won a ring.
                                Someone give Anthony Goldwire a call, that ring makes him instant Pacers starting SG. He's a super hooper!!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X