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

A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

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

  • #16
    Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

    Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
    Yes, Dunleavy doesn't suck, he blows.

    At least, that's what Btown says.
    And Btown is living somewhere where he knows the true meaning.
    The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

      Sometimes I truly have to wonder if some people have ever watched a basketball game other than And1.
      The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

        Originally posted by Jermaniac View Post
        He is light-years away from being a good player also. Nothing about him says he is a good player, other then his IQ. WOOT for IQ. So many championships won with his IQ.

        I also for the first time in my life seen a fan of a player use "he passes the ball into the post well" attribute when defending a player. WTF is that? He passes the ball into the post well, now thats absurd.
        I think you and others are probably being a bit too hasty in trying to gauge just how Dun Jr, or even Murphy for that matter, might perform for the Pacers.

        Let's face it, neither has had much of an opportunity to show what he is capable of contributing.

        Training camp is extremely important for new players to a team. And with a new coach, a training camp and preseason games will go a long way toward shaping and determining what we have.

        Going into next season, I would hope that both players are healthier, better conditioned, stronger and more consistent with their mid-range and perimeter shots. Each will get to know his teammates better in an extended practice environment, rather than trying to pick this information up on the fly during games.

        What I would expect from Murphy is an ability to use his shooting range to extend the oppositions interior defense, just as Sam Perkins and Rik Smits used to do. We all complained that we've missed that since losing Brad Miller... well here's our opportunity to see if Murphy can supply what we need.

        Once Dunleavy has an opportunity to immerse himself within the offense during training camp, we will get an opportunity for him to demonstrate the smarts that we have all read about.

        I find it strange that so many of you on the forum stayed on the Bender bandwagon for so long because of his athletic abilities, despite the fact that he had very little court knowledge and productivity. Yet we acquire a player with a lot of court smarts and fundamental skills like Dunleavy, and you are ready to throw him under the bus based on two months of play with very little practice time.

        Assuming they stay healthy throughout training camp and the preseason, give them 25 to 30 games into next season, and I think we will all be able to speak knowledgeably regarding what they can or cannot do for us.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

          Dunleavy gets a bad rap, IMO.

          In his 43 games with the Pacers his averages improved in ppg, rebounding, and overall FG percentage. His numbers in the 43 games with the Pacers were: 14 ppg, 5.7 rebs, 2.6 assists, 1.1 stls and 79% FT, 45% FG. Those aren't the numbers of someone who "sucks" as people keep saying. Those numbers are better than Stephen Jackson's numbers with the Pacers this past season.

          His threepoint percentage was terrible after the trade but late in the season he shot less threes and began attacking the basket and using the mid-range jumper more. He played really well during the last 10 games of the season and averaged 16 points and 7.4 rebounds.

          I also think people keep forgetting that MDunJr has only played 4 seasons. Sure he's making a lot of money but it's not like he's hit the prime years of his career but people are writing him off. I think he deserves more credit than what he's been getting.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

            i totally agree on the dunleavy assessment he definitely gets a bad rap. obviously overpaid but it doesn't bother me as much as murphy.

            and truth be told were it not for the terrible position his contract puts us in financially, i'd be willing to see what happens with a new coach (and probably will have to). but i'm more anxious to trade him because of the financial implications.
            This is the darkest timeline.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

              Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
              In his 43 games with the Pacers his averages improved in ppg, rebounding, and overall FG percentage. His numbers in the 43 games with the Pacers were: 14 ppg, 5.7 rebs, 2.6 assists, 1.1 stls and 79% FT, 45% FG. Those aren't the numbers of someone who "sucks" as people keep saying. Those numbers are better than Stephen Jackson's numbers with the Pacers this past season.
              That's an awfully misleading comparison. Jack's 2006-07 stretch with the Pacers was riddled with injury (wrist in November) and by far was his least productive stretch in about 4 years.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

                Dunleavy is an average defender, a decent shooter (from inside 3), a good passer, a very good rebounder (for a wing), and yes a smart player (typically knows where to be / what to look for) and he's even got a little bit of atheleticism. That's a good player.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

                  Originally posted by beast23 View Post
                  I think you and others are probably being a bit too hasty in trying to gauge just how Dun Jr, or even Murphy for that matter, might perform for the Pacers.

                  Let's face it, neither has had much of an opportunity to show what he is capable of contributing.

                  Training camp is extremely important for new players to a team. And with a new coach, a training camp and preseason games will go a long way toward shaping and determining what we have.

                  Going into next season, I would hope that both players are healthier, better conditioned, stronger and more consistent with their mid-range and perimeter shots. Each will get to know his teammates better in an extended practice environment, rather than trying to pick this information up on the fly during games.

                  What I would expect from Murphy is an ability to use his shooting range to extend the oppositions interior defense, just as Sam Perkins and Rik Smits used to do. We all complained that we've missed that since losing Brad Miller... well here's our opportunity to see if Murphy can supply what we need.

                  Once Dunleavy has an opportunity to immerse himself within the offense during training camp, we will get an opportunity for him to demonstrate the smarts that we have all read about.

                  I find it strange that so many of you on the forum stayed on the Bender bandwagon for so long because of his athletic abilities, despite the fact that he had very little court knowledge and productivity. Yet we acquire a player with a lot of court smarts and fundamental skills like Dunleavy, and you are ready to throw him under the bus based on two months of play with very little practice time.

                  Assuming they stay healthy throughout training camp and the preseason, give them 25 to 30 games into next season, and I think we will all be able to speak knowledgeably regarding what they can or cannot do for us.
                  Murphy and Dunleavy have both had many games and many training camps in the NBA. I have been watching both of them since they have come into the NBA. And apart from the little improvement they made their first 2 years they have been the same player. Both of them have actually gotten worse the past 2 years.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

                    Originally posted by Jermaniac View Post
                    What injury? His broken nose?
                    from rotoworld.com, December 21 2006:

                    Troy Murphy left the Warriors Wednesday night so he could fly back to California to meet with a foot specialist about his injury.

                    Murphy has sat the last six games to rest his sore Achilles' tendon, but rest has not helped the situation, so it's time to explore other options. Surgery has not been discussed as a solution, but we should know more later in the week after Murphy's meeting with the foot specialist. Matt Barnes looks like he'll retain value for some time given this news.
                    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: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

                      I will give Murphy the benefit of the doubt when it comes to this last season. I suspect that he was somehow injured....injured enough to affect his play....but not injured enough to prevent him from playing. I mentioned this before.....although its all pure speculation....when you look at his stats this last year and compare it to previous years.....the only year ( other then his rookie year ) where he averaged similiar #s....in BOTH rebounding and scoring...was the year that he got injured. I really hope that this is the case.....cuz his #s took a serious hit this last season...especially in the rebounding department.

                      About Dunleavy....I don't agree with most of the "negative" comments about him. Sure, he's overpaid ( mostly not his fault....Mullin didn't have to succomb to giving him that much )...he was drafted too high ( not his fault ) and doesn't play great defense ( he probably plays as much defense as the rest of the team...why single him out ? ). Although its very difficult to ignore all of the above...most notably his salary.....I can't ignore that he is what he is....a solid 6th man.

                      I may hate the he had to start him at the SG spot....but I won't complain about his 45% shooting from the field, his 14 ppg and his 5.7rpg as a Pacer. I would love to get a player that makes as much as he does that produces more....but we can't change that now.

                      I will give both of them the benefit of the doubt after we go through a full training camp with both of them before passing any judgement on them.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

                        Originally posted by Jermaniac View Post
                        Murphy and Dunleavy have both had many games and many training camps in the NBA. I have been watching both of them since they have come into the NBA. And apart from the little improvement they made their first 2 years they have been the same player. Both of them have actually gotten worse the past 2 years.
                        I think you totally miss the importance of a player progressing through training camp with the team he is playing for. I could care less how many prior training camps they've been through before coming here; that has nothing to do with developing chemistry with our own players.

                        I've always stated that an NBA player will show his most marked improvement in his third year in the league. So it doesn't surprise me that either player has not shown significant improvement since then.

                        Not based on visual observation, but based on statistics, I think you are incorrect regarding the seasons that each player has had over the past two years... in comparisons with prior years. Based on per minute averages, each player's stats with the Pacers was in line with or even better than the prior two years of play in many categories.

                        I can state that I'm not concerned about Dun Jr at all. I honestly think he will pan out and easily be one of our top players.

                        I do have concerns regarding Murphy and what I perceive to be a lack of quickness around the basket. However, considering that he had a foot/ankle injury, that would certainy warrant withholding judgement.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

                          I actually have nothing against Dunleavy, but I really do wish we didn't get Troy Murphy after watching that game against Detroit. He's a decent player (probably overpaid), but I'm sure he'll be fine next year.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

                            I think Dunleavy is a solid player, does a lot of things well, not great, and brings a lot of other things to the floor that doesn't show up in the stat sheet.

                            Murph.... well if you don't have something nice to say, don't say it at all. Hope he plays better

                            JO is alright. I don't mind the guy, I think he plays hard and leaves it on the court. Thing is, he's not worth his contract either. I personally wanted him traded after his MVP type season. I figured that would be his best effort and his highest value. I thought Artest would be the guy to build around (swing and a miss on that one) but who knew he would snap and turn into the nutcase that he is. I was wrong on Artest, but I believe I was right on JO. He's a good player, and plays hard. Yes he's an all-star, but he should be given that the offense is built around him. He rebuilds and blocks shots, and that's nice, but he's not a go to guy in tough situations. he settles for too many jumpshots, he's injury prone, he wants certain brought in or built around him, then he also wants guys gone if they bump heads. With Reggie and Artest gone, the team hasn't really been really good. We've had good teams and good players, but we didn't have a guy to make a clutch shot, or get a clutch stop. Even Peja seemed to be a better 1st option then JO. You look at that Nets series and the 2 games Peja played we won. Granted his back is in bad shape, he was still a better option that season.

                            As long as JO is here, I will root for and support him b/c I like the guy, I just don't think he was or ever will be a franchise player

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

                              Dunleavy's a pretty good 6th/7th man. We all know he's overpaid, but that's his fault? You'd say no to that contract offer? Really my only qualm with him is his being here's going to stunt Shawne Williams's growth. We have three prototype 3s, and one'll have to play the 2. Though I think a Daniels/Dunleavy backcourt could be interesting. I say TPTB start passing around a hat to buy out Muphy.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: A couple things I think we've forgotten (JO&Murphy)

                                Dunleavy is great at scoring in blowouts. Every time we were getting blown out Dunleavy would get scorching hot and get his stats. He's done that his whole career. He may not "suck" but he sucks at playing in any sort of pressure situation, and that's why if he's a main aspect of a team they are going to be terrible.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X