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

Game #18 Pacers vs Hornets

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

  • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

    Not sure if this is sarcasm or not. If they only played a couple minutes, the stat means nothing. Going big against a small team that is shooting lights out from 3 is just stupid. Domas got in foul trouble in part because their players were all very mobile and caused problems for us. The last thing we needed was more size in that game.
    The ratings are based on 100 possessions, so if they only played 10 possessions, and they outscore their opponents by one point in those possessions, then that is a plus 10. Pretty basic math, but it isnít points and rebounds, so some might struggle with it.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

      Not sure if this is sarcasm or not. If they only played a couple minutes, the stat means nothing. Going big against a small team that is shooting lights out from 3 is just stupid.
      No. It's only stupid if the guy you're gonna have guard their PFs cannot defend 3-point shooters.That's not an issue for Domas. He is better at guarding 3-point shooters than Thad because Domas won't gamble and get so out of position that will force the whole team to rotate like Thad does.
      People who try to win arguments are the worst. The point of an argument isn't to find a winner, it is to find the truth.

      Originally posted by IrishPacer
      Empty vessels make the most noise.

      Comment


      • By the way, the Pacers are blowing you all smoke with this twin tower thing. It's just not the plan. It's not Nate's plan obviously and KP's plan is to keep Nate. I would say...just forget about it. It's not even a good plan. How about we find a better, mobile PF that can protect the rim? We certainly don't want Myles on offense.
        Vnzla81: Yep pretty much, they cut him because they were going to get "their guy" they couldn't get option 1,2,3,4,5 then they went to Lance he said "no thanks" and they had no other choice but to get Lance 2.0 for three times the cost.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

          So, you're trying to shut down the discussion because you were wrong?
          Looks like it is over, till next time

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

            No. It's only stupid if the guy you're gonna have guard their PFs cannot defend 3-point shooters.That's not an issue for Domas. He is better at guarding 3-point shooters than Thad because Domas won't gamble and get so out of position that will force the whole team to rotate like Thad does.
            Given how foul prone Domas seems to be, the last thing I want him doing is guarding quicker players on the perimeter. They will drive by him or he will try to block their shot and he doesn't have the length.

            The reality is, I wouldn't mind seeing twin towers because I think it's better than the status quo. But it's never going to be the answer. That's why the Pacers haven't already done it.
            Vnzla81: Yep pretty much, they cut him because they were going to get "their guy" they couldn't get option 1,2,3,4,5 then they went to Lance he said "no thanks" and they had no other choice but to get Lance 2.0 for three times the cost.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

              Given how foul prone Domas seems to be, the last thing I want him doing is guarding quicker players on the perimeter. They will drive by him or he will try to block their shot and he doesn't have the length.

              The reality is, I wouldn't mind seeing twin towers because I think it's better than the status quo. But it's never going to be the answer. That's why the Pacers haven't already done it.
              The Pacers haven't done it because the coach doesn't want to do it. But KP wants to do it. The coach won't be here forever. I'm willing to bet that KP will fire Nate before he has to trade Domas because Nate won't play him alongside Myles.
              People who try to win arguments are the worst. The point of an argument isn't to find a winner, it is to find the truth.

              Originally posted by IrishPacer
              Empty vessels make the most noise.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by kent beckley View Post

                The ratings are based on 100 possessions, so if they only played 10 possessions, and they outscore their opponents by one point in those possessions, then that is a plus 10. Pretty basic math, but it isnít points and rebounds, so some might struggle with it.
                Another reason why you shouldn't give any weight to 6 or 7 minutes a game. That's a handful of possessions and essentially means nothing because it's such a small sample. The MUCH larger sample...4 or 5 times larger that had them negative 4 over the course of a mix of wins and losses is probably far more accurate. The Pacers are advertising twin towers not because it's going to happen but because both players are pretty good and they need to keep the casual fans happy. Most here should know it's not happening.
                Vnzla81: Yep pretty much, they cut him because they were going to get "their guy" they couldn't get option 1,2,3,4,5 then they went to Lance he said "no thanks" and they had no other choice but to get Lance 2.0 for three times the cost.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

                  The Pacers haven't done it because the coach doesn't want to do it. But KP wants to do it. The coach won't be here forever. I'm willing to bet that KP will fire Nate before he has to trade Domas because Nate won't play him alongside Myles.
                  KP is part salesman. I think you guys need to pick up on what's really happening. IF KP wanted them to be played together it would be happening. KP knows it's not the answer too. We all should know it. Both of them are C's and neither are perfect. In yesterday's NBA, yes it would work. In today's NBA, it works against some teams. It will never ever be good enough to really contend though. There are far too many teams that can expose that especially as foul prone as Domas has been.

                  Bottom line is, the Pacers have some talent but they probably need to make some trades before this iteration of the team contends. It will not contend as presently constructed.
                  Vnzla81: Yep pretty much, they cut him because they were going to get "their guy" they couldn't get option 1,2,3,4,5 then they went to Lance he said "no thanks" and they had no other choice but to get Lance 2.0 for three times the cost.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

                    This is why stats lie so bad. That was only 20 minutes over the course of 3 wins. Not only is that a small sample of 6-7 minutes, it was over games we were winning including a big time blow-out. I think the negative 4 rating over 14 games prior (in the fine print if you can read that) means A LOT more.
                    I agree that it might be a little deceptive if you put too much value in the 3 game sample. It's probably less deceptive to say that the last 3 games have moved the numbers from -4 on the season to +2, which still illustrates the positive momentum of that lineup without putting out an eyepopping +18 number that is going to regress. It's nice to have it up in a range where it's not hurting the Pacers, but time will tell if it's a valuable lineup to be actually excited when it's in.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

                      Not sure if this is sarcasm or not. If they only played a couple minutes, the stat means nothing. Going big against a small team that is shooting lights out from 3 is just stupid. Domas got in foul trouble in part because their players were all very mobile and caused problems for us. The last thing we needed was more size in that game.
                      Omg yes to this 100%, pretty much what Iím trying to say thank you.
                      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post

                        I agree that it might be a little deceptive if you put too much value in the 3 game sample. It's probably less deceptive to say that the last 3 games have moved the numbers from -4 on the season to +2, which still illustrates the positive momentum of that lineup without putting out an eyepopping +18 number that is going to regress. It's nice to have it up in a range where it's not hurting the Pacers, but time will tell if it's a valuable lineup to be actually excited when it's in.
                        Somewhat agree, but we won those three games. I would expect the numbers to rise dramatically after a 27 point victory over Utah. That's really all I'm saying. I don't think it's a bad lineup against some teams. but I don't think it's a viable long term direction for the lineup. Not if we want to contend at least. The team will be a playoff team regardless.
                        Vnzla81: Yep pretty much, they cut him because they were going to get "their guy" they couldn't get option 1,2,3,4,5 then they went to Lance he said "no thanks" and they had no other choice but to get Lance 2.0 for three times the cost.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

                          The Pacers haven't done it because the coach doesn't want to do it. But KP wants to do it. The coach won't be here forever. I'm willing to bet that KP will fire Nate before he has to trade Domas because Nate won't play him alongside Myles.
                          So letís fire the coach because he is not pulling a Vogel

                          Yeah that worked out so well for him in Orlando lol
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

                            KP is part salesman. I think you guys need to pick up on what's really happening. IF KP wanted them to be played together it would be happening. KP knows it's not the answer too. We all should know it. Both of them are C's and neither are perfect. In yesterday's NBA, yes it would work. In today's NBA, it works against some teams. It will never ever be good enough to really contend though. There are far too many teams that can expose that especially as foul prone as Domas has been.

                            Bottom line is, the Pacers have some talent but they probably need to make some trades before this iteration of the team contends. It will not contend as presently constructed.
                            Have you noticed the influx of good young bigs lately? In this last draft we saw 5 bigs go in the top 10. Most great players under 23 are 6'10 and above. It's true that most of those guys can shoot the 3 but the NBA isn't really trending towards a small direction. Teams aren't going to be smaller in the next few years. They are going to be bigger as the big wings that play PF nowadays will start getting replaced by actual PF-sized players that have that skillset.

                            We have a young team. We should be looking towards the future. The last thing we want to do is try to follow today's trend while the rest of the league is already pivoting into another tomorrow. That's how you end up being obsolete in the NBA game.By picking the wrong time to follow the trend.
                            People who try to win arguments are the worst. The point of an argument isn't to find a winner, it is to find the truth.

                            Originally posted by IrishPacer
                            Empty vessels make the most noise.

                            Comment


                            • Agree to disagree. I am fine with twin tower for awhile esp. against some teams but I donít think that should or will be the long term plan whether or not Nate is the coach. I think it breaks down in the playoffs...at least that particular combo.
                              Vnzla81: Yep pretty much, they cut him because they were going to get "their guy" they couldn't get option 1,2,3,4,5 then they went to Lance he said "no thanks" and they had no other choice but to get Lance 2.0 for three times the cost.

                              Comment


                              • We got smeared by three point shooters and poor close outs. We have at least two poor perimeter defenders on the court at all times. It just isn't hard to get a good look against us. shuffling the bigs will not help. We need a personnel change. A new starting guard, and or forward.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X