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 cut DID matter

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

  • #16
    Re: The cut DID matter

    So far it would seem that the presence of these players affect the team's
    overall dynamics much more positively than not, and they are contributing
    to winning efforts by doing exactly what they are supposed to do - trying
    to plug holes when guys ahead of them go down.

    This is hardly worthy of dismissing as "meh", and there is a bigger picture to
    be looked at than the +/- stats from a couple games.

    So far Graham and McRoberts are doing great in my opinion, and are likely
    to keep getting better if they continue to get playing time.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: The cut DID matter

      Mckey fan you are absolutely correct.

      If this were all about winning a title then maybe we could just blow it off. But we are not there yet and to get there we are going to have to do it with a very harmonious team effort. The 10th, 11th & 12th man (not to mention the two others that will be on the inactive list) have to not only be able to compete when called upon, but they are also going to have to be team players who don't cause trouble due to lack of min. or games.

      The fact that all three seem willing to accept thier roles right now is very important to our team dynamics.


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

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: The cut DID matter

        Originally posted by Peck View Post
        Mckey fan you are absolutely correct.

        If this were all about winning a title then maybe we could just blow it off. But we are not there yet and to get there we are going to have to do it with a very harmonious team effort. The 10th, 11th & 12th man (not to mention the two others that will be on the inactive list) have to not only be able to compete when called upon, but they are also going to have to be team players who don't cause trouble due to lack of min. or games.

        The fact that all three seem willing to accept thier roles right now is very important to our team dynamics.
        No odd thoughts?

        Also, Hicks, too bad your "What I liked tonight" didn't return yet. I really enjoyed the pilot.
        Word on the street is he doesn't want your money, he only wants to please your ears...
        Bum in Berlin on Myspace

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: The cut DID matter

          Originally posted by Suaveness View Post
          Anymore brilliant insight there?


          Who we cut is really relevant. When a team is troubled with injuries, as we were last game with 3 out of our 5 staters injured, who we have on the bench matters. The whole bench matters
          "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


          Comment


          • #20
            Re: The cut DID matter

            Bottom line, who knows what happens if Graham dosent hit those threes.
            The eyes of the Granger are upon you.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: The cut DID matter

              I was happy with our decision to keep the guys we did. If we had been able to move Tinsley, sure I would have liked to have kept Croshere. But it worked out for everyone as our bench guys are playing well and Croshere got picked up by Milwaukee and is still in the NBA.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: The cut DID matter

                Originally posted by Pacersfan46 View Post
                I say 'meh' at the most usless stat on planet Earth. The '+/-' stat.

                Useless.

                Look. If you're out prowling the bars some night, and you meet a lady with real potential -- the right shape, the right personality, the whole package -- and you get to talking to her and finding out more about her and you are forming a really good impression, and then she says, "I have two children by different men. One of them is in prison and the other is in remission," you don't say, "No, you don't!" You just have to think, "Well, that's interesting." You might still like the lady and you might still want to spend some time with her. But you realize that you might not take her home to meet you mother just yet.

                The +/- statistic is like that.

                Stephen Graham came in and the first shot he took this season was a swish from 3. Yay! He finished the game with 12 points. Yay! But then you see the fact that the Nets outscored the Pacers while Graham was on the floor. Woof! It doesn't take away what he did, but it does deflate the balloon and bring you back to Earth.

                Graham . . . made a couple of turnovers, some dumb fouls, and at least twice . . . (got) pinned on picks way too easy with his guy getting free for an open lay up.

                The +/- statistic is true, and it exactly and accurately meaasures what it claims to measure. It shows the scoring differential between the two teams while each particular player was on the floor. Does the performance of the other 4 guys affect each players +/- score? Yes, it does, but the definition of the stat informs us that it will. Do variations in game situation create the possibility that a player could have a +/- score that misrepresents the game outcome? Sure. Sometime this season, the Pacers are going to get blown out by 26 points, but one of our subs will have a +10 with points scored in garbage time.

                The +/- cannot be the only thing you look at. Viewed in the prism of a complete comprehension of the game, the +/- can be very illustrative. Plenty of people talk about players who "do the little things that help you win that don't show up in the stats." That sort of thing DOES shown up in the +/-.




                Anyway, the most useless stat on the planet Earth is probably average annual temperature.


                EDIT: Several folks, begining with Los Angeles argue the case well before I got to it.



                .
                Last edited by Putnam; 11-13-2008, 08:58 AM.
                And I won't be here to see the day
                It all dries up and blows away
                I'd hang around just to see
                But they never had much use for me
                In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: The cut DID matter

                  Unlike some, it does make a difference in this case! Graham in particular. The kid when given minutes produced last season only to get no minutes. After 6 games this season, he "finally" gets the opportunity to play and produces again. I said this b4 the season the best thing for Graham if JO'B wasn't going to be a man of his word after Graham was re-signed/picked back up was to cut him to allow him to be picked up by a team that would give him minutes to develop his game. Give him the opportunity as a Pacer or a player on another team to make a contribution besides sitting on the bench being a Eddie Gill cheerleader.

                  To me if you want to play at an up tempo pace you need a bench, and that means playing 10-12 players. If not, you are going to have a tired team come the end of the season and going into the playoffs. Don't wait until the last 20 games to start trying to rest your 8-9 main players by that time it's too late.

                  I stated just recently that McBob and Graham needed to get playing time in order to help the Pacers in just this exact circumstances of last nights game. I stand by my belief.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: The cut DID matter

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    I honestly forgot Cro was in tranining camp
                    I forget he signed with the Bucks because he is yet to suit up for a game.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: The cut DID matter

                      Too bad the Count gave up. I think he's right. It's doesn't matter. Graham, Mcroberts & Baston have done exactly what was expected of them......don't screw up. They've come out with lots of energy knowing their time will be limited. It's great that all three have had positive minutes but lets not overstate what they've done.

                      All three of them will be back to the end of the bench (and rightly so) when the hobbled Pacers return.
                      I'm in these bands
                      The Humans
                      Dr. Goldfoot
                      The Bar Brawlers
                      ME

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: The cut DID matter

                        Originally posted by Dr. Goldfoot View Post
                        Too bad the Count gave up. I think he's right. It's doesn't matter. Graham, Mcroberts & Baston have done exactly what was expected of them......don't screw up. They've come out with lots of energy knowing their time will be limited. It's great that all three have had positive minutes but lets not overstate what they've done.

                        All three of them will be back to the end of the bench (and rightly so) when the hobbled Pacers return.
                        I don't think anyone is disagreeing with that. I think what is trying to be said here is that the overall team dynamic is very important to what we are trying to do this season.

                        We do NOT have a superstar. Danny is a great player and if he continues at the level he is at all season long he certainly will be a star, our star if nothing else, be we don't have a LeBron, Dwane or Dwight on our team.

                        So for us to have any success, we have to function as a team. Look I liked Croshere when he was here, but I think it would be wrong to say that he would be fine in the role that McRoberts has been given. In the past that hasn't proven to be so. I don't think Austin would be a whiner about it, but I also think due to experiance and other factors there may be more pressure to play him.

                        Right now we seem to have 14 guys who all accept thier role and are trying to play for the greater good. Of course I say "seem" because we really don't know. For all we know Baston is throwing a fit about time and McBob may have a swollen head, we just don't know.

                        But on the surface, it appears, that everybody is getting along and there is no individual agenda. You really could not have said that over any time over the past seven years.


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

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: The cut DID matter

                          I like Josh's game and realize it is more suited for the NBA than College. The kid rebounds the ball and looks for a quick outlet pass. I hope we can extend his contract in the off season. He is a good teammate and the Carmelite's might buy more tickets with him here.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: The cut DID matter

                            I was addressing the underlying sentiment that these guys have now earned the right to more minutes. While I look at it more like they've somewhat proven they at least belong in the league.

                            Seldom do the three least talented players on a roster cause much trouble. They know they're lucky to even be a part of the team. All three of them could easily be replaced with any of the thousands of players with college basketball experience.
                            I'm in these bands
                            The Humans
                            Dr. Goldfoot
                            The Bar Brawlers
                            ME

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: The cut DID matter

                              Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                              Some folks on here said the chatter about who would or would not get cut was pretty much irrelevant.

                              I beg to differ. Tonight, it made a difference that we had Stephen Graham and McRoberts.

                              Good showing by the "scrubbs." Maybe Cro would have given us something similar but I feel really good about the end of our bench this year.
                              While I liked Davis and my heart felt for Croshere as a Pacer of old, I was more up on Josh McRoberts than most fans here and I liked what I saw out of Graham from last year. So, I'm thrilled that both players remained.

                              I didn't see much reason to retain Croshere. He just didn't bring anything to the floor defensively, and if his 3-pt shot isn't falling he's a liability. We saw it all the while he was here. There's no reason anything about his game would have changed (at least nothing that I saw of the two pre-season games there were broadcasts). So from a basketball standpoint as far as trying to move this team forward and get the right mix of players in here who fit JOB's system, I was fine with letting Croshere walk. Davis was a bit of a different story.

                              He was another BIG who at the time I felt the team needed to retain because we hadn't really seen what Rasha nor Hibbert could do, not to mention we all agree that Baston probably won't become a double-double man - not for this ball club. (And that's a shame because I think he could surprise some folks if given the chance.) But now that I've watched this team in every game thus far in this young season, I'm convinced the Pacers won't allow not having a dominate big man be an excuse. They'll work their bigs by committee if they have to. As long as Murphy, Foster, Hibbert and Rasho are all able to provide 5-12 ppg, I think JOB will be pleaseD with their output, and so far all four of them - especially Foster and Murphy - have proven themselves worthy of a roster spot.

                              I'd like to see more of McRoberts and Graham, but I know that it's unlikely unless someone ahead of them gets injured (again), such as is the case currently w/Granger, Dunleavy and Murphy all being out. Hopefully, they'll continue to be ready and are able to produce when called upon in the not too distant future.

                              Good Call, Bird/Murray/JOB!
                              Last edited by NuffSaid; 11-13-2008, 01:56 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: The cut DID matter

                                Originally posted by Dr. Goldfoot View Post
                                I was addressing the underlying sentiment that these guys have now earned the right to more minutes. While I look at it more like they've somewhat proven they at least belong in the league.

                                Seldom do the three least talented players on a roster cause much trouble. They know they're lucky to even be a part of the team. All three of them could easily be replaced with any of the thousands of players with college basketball experience.
                                No disagreement from me.

                                However I do believe that the style of play our coach wants to run, a 9 man rotation will not work. Fatigue and injury will start to take it's toll on any team over a coarse of 82 games, however even more so for a team that prefers to run. In particular our bigs, I just think that you will see more of Baston and McRoberts this season than that of toke victory cigar or white flag players.


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

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X