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

Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

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

  • #16
    Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

    We interrupt this thread to ask Anthem a very important question.

    Which annoys you more: Posts Where Every Word Is Capitalized Or posts were nothing is capitalized?

    We now take you back to the original discussion whatever it was.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

      Originally posted by Peck View Post
      Guys I have become one of the biggest JOB bashers on here and believe me the sooner we can get rid of him the better.

      However to be honest with you Stpehenson may have every reason in the world to be thrilled with JOB. If he can drive the lane and get his shot, as long as he can control the ball while he dribbles without excessive turnovers, then this may be a marriage made in heaven between the two.

      Yes, we all know Jim likes to shoot the three. But he really wants to open up the driving lanes and if Lance can even do 1/3 of what he did in the summer league this may be the first high impact rookie we have had since way back when Chuck Person played.
      (paul george)
      I'm saying it now.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

        Originally posted by Peck View Post
        Guys I have become one of the biggest JOB bashers on here and believe me the sooner we can get rid of him the better.

        However to be honest with you Stpehenson may have every reason in the world to be thrilled with JOB. If he can drive the lane and get his shot, as long as he can control the ball while he dribbles without excessive turnovers, then this may be a marriage made in heaven between the two.

        Yes, we all know Jim likes to shoot the three. But he really wants to open up the driving lanes and if Lance can even do 1/3 of what he did in the summer league this may be the first high impact rookie we have had since way back when Chuck Person played.
        3rd post of Peck trying to explain the JOB system what is going on? is UB highjacking your computer?
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

          Originally posted by MLB007 View Post
          (paul george)
          I'm saying it now.
          I'm high on what I think Paul can become, but I'm expecting him to suck more often than he shines this year. He's still raw.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

            Because it's the truth.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

              He is great, a great person from what I understand. He's an average NBA coach, coaching a below average NBA team. That translates to lottery land.

              BTW, average is not the worst thing in the world particularly if you've progressed in your career like he has. Average will keep him in the NBA most of the time. If he were truly great, it would be a given that he'd have an NBA coaching job..usually with teams better than the Pacers. I don't think he has that type of guarantee.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

                JOB is not a horrible coach. He is upper middle management. He is not a prince. He does not have the grace and savvy that comes with the best of the best. Rather, at certain points he becomes stubborn and willful, even when he is wrong.

                He deserved to be coach his first two years. He deserved to be fired last year. He does not deserve to be around currently.

                So, he's not horrible. But why does he get better treatment than Carlisle, Byron Scott, and Avery Johnson?
                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

                  But why does he get better treatment than Carlisle, Byron Scott, and Avery Johnson?

                  because "he is great"
                  @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

                    Because those team had different expectations.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

                      What all of us are not realizing, if Lance comes in and excels and the team makes playoffs......JOB gets another contract. just saying what could happen, lol. I actually think he is done and will still be employed by the Pacers in some capacity.
                      Bambam

                      Follow me on Twitter @http://twitter.com/brockhubble

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

                        I'm one of the few who places blame where it belongs where JOB is concerned. Simply put, I don't blame JOB for everything that's gone wrong with this team during his tenure. Alot of his problems have stemmed from injuries to so many players at the most inopportune times. However, he isn't without his flaws; some of his rotations and/or decisions at key moments in some games have proved to baffle me more than they've instilled confidence. Overall, I don't think JOB is that bad of a coach. I just think he hasn't had alot of what some of the more successful coachs have had:

                        - an injury-free starting five for an entire season.

                        - A 3-pronged offense.

                        - a consistent leadership philosophy.

                        We all know about this team's injury history that span atleast the last 6-years; no need to rehash this issue. However, it does need repeating that the Pacers have had a revolving door of players since the year following the Brawl. I think that revolving door stops beginning next year, but this year should mark the beginning of the franchise acquiring the type of players they want to keep and build upon for the long-term. Hopefully what we start seeing is fewer and fewer short-term (1-year) contracts and a few more moderate (3-4 year) contracts to establish so form of a core group of players and a more consistent group of players.

                        Not since the days of Reggie Miler, Rik Smits and Mark Jackson have the Pacers been built around a real 3-pronged offense. If you look back over the last 6 years, what you'll notice was a team that relied heavily on one interior player (JO) and one perimeter player (Reggie). They've struggled with finding a playmaker and penetrator from either Guard position. Moreover, since JO was traded the Pacers have searched for an interior replacement. I believe they've found one or two players who are very capable of filling that role now, Hibbert and Hansborough, specifically (if Hansborough can get his verdigo problem resolved). As far as their perimeter game goes, they've been alittle more success in filling the void left by Reggie's retirement than they've been at finding JO's successor, but it's still a patch-work fix. Put simply, I think we have too many Wing players, but that fits quite well with coach O'Brien's coaching style towhich I'd like to speak briefly about.

                        Every coach has his own coaching philosophy. While I don't think JOB's is one of "read & react" from the offensive end, I do think he wants his players to make quick decisions w/the basketball on offense and force the defense to react to them. On the defensive end, it's clear his defensive philosophy doesn't rely on any one player but rather requires all 5 players working together using their quickness to react to what the offense is doing. Still, in order for any coach to be successful he (or she) needs to have the right mix of players on the roster who fit the coaching philosophy he's trying to implement. For coach O'Brien, that means having players who can create shots for themselves, who can move without the basketball, who can finish at the rim, and most of all players who can shot the 3-ball w/accuracy. It's still early yet, but I think for perhaps the first time since JOB has been here he's about to have most of the elements he needs to have a successful basketball team that matches his coaching philosophy. But it all depends on if the Pacers can finally keep their five core players healthy and on the court throughout the year.

                        One last thing I'd like to address is coach O'Brien's leadership philosophy. I really don't think his message to his players has been consistent. We've heard him send mixed signals almost from day-1, the biggest of them being "players will earn playing time". If true, perhaps Stephen Graham should have received alot more playing time than Brandon Rush when he was here. If I had to point to any one thing I believed would help set the tone for this team from a leadership perspective more than anything else, it would be for JOB to set a heiarchy at every position and stick with it, i.e., if his starting Center goes down, his backup moves up in his place. Instead, what we've seen has been this "plug-N-play" aspect of basketball where when one player goes down, another player who doesn't necessarily specialize at that position is "plugged" into it (i.e., when Foster and Hansborough went down, Granger was moved over to PF instead of going with Murphy, McRoberts or Solo all of whom are natural PFs). Granted, I'm sure JOB felt he had to do this out of necessity due to injuries, but I'm a firm believer that if you acquire a player to play at a certain position, you'd better develop that player to play that position based on your coaching philosophy and use him in that position for which you acquired him. It's fine to have versatile players, but too much versatility hurts you because you lack "specialist" at each position. Even now, the Pacers still have a very versital roster, but povided certain players can come back healthy, I think the Pacers will have the skill and depth at every position to be more competitive this year.

                        C - Hibbert/Foster
                        PF - Murphy/Hansborogh
                        SF - Granger/D. Jones
                        SG - BRush/Dunleavy
                        PG - TJ Ford/AJ Price

                        If you add the 3 newbies and McRoberts to the mix you have the buidling blocks in place to pickup where guys like Murphy, Foster, Dunleavy an Ford leave off assuming none of their contracts are picked up after the 2010/11 season ends. Still, health is the key factor here.

                        I do see positive signs for the immediate future, but it really depends on the attitudes of the players and the coach imposing fair standards.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

                          Originally posted by grace View Post
                          We interrupt this thread to ask Anthem a very important question.

                          Which annoys you more: Posts Where Every Word Is Capitalized Or posts were nothing is capitalized?


                          ====

                          Every word. No question.

                          if you don't use any capital letters, it makes you look like a 12-year old who learned to write from texting. it makes me think you're too lazy to use that nasty shift key, which means you're likely to be lazy as you think and write your opinions. which means your opinions probably aren't worth much. your writing can still be relatively easy to read, though, since the eye flows easily over lower case letters. take this paragraph, for example. sure, it would have been better if i'd used the shift key 7 times, but it's not hard to quickly read it and pick up all of the salient points.

                          But When You Capitalize Every Letter, You're Not Just Too Lazy To Do Things Properly. You're Actively Doing It Wrong Just For The Sake Of Doing It Wrong. That's Some Trippy Stuff Right There. Plus, You're Actively Writing In A Way That Makes It Harder For Your Readers To Understand What You're Saying. Try To Read This Paragraph Quickly. Is It Easier Or Harder To Read Than The Previous Paragraph? No Question, It's Harder. Your Eyes Keep Stopping And Looking To See If A Given Word Is The Beginning Of A New Thought. It's More Work For You And More Work For The Reader, Just For The Sake Of Doing Things Wrong.

                          I might not have tons of respect for people who write like the first example, but the second example is ignore-worthy.

                          And I don't ignore nearly as many people as you do.
                          This space for rent.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

                            Originally posted by LA_Confidential View Post
                            Fixed.

                            But To Answer Your Question, No Not Really. I Guess Ive Never Thought About It.

                            Is It Harder To Read?
                            It's much harder to read, please post in normal English. Like Anthem said, it really annoys me when people won't take the time to use correct grammar out of pure laziness, but to put so much effort into making your grammar wrong is beyond annoying. You don't need a special style of grammar to stand out and be noticed. At least in a good way. Let your content do that.

                            Thanks for your consideration.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

                              The fact that someone writing style (no matter if it is right or wrong) is being discussed proves that it is a problem. if people are commenting on style instead of content, then you need to change the style

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

                                Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post
                                One last thing I'd like to address is coach O'Brien's leadership philosophy. I really don't think his message to his players has been consistent. We've heard him send mixed signals almost from day-1, the biggest of them being "players will earn playing time".
                                To be fair, for all that people here THINK they know exactly what earns playing time, we don't REALLY know. What we see in a game may really have little to do with the rest of the preparation and philosophy that goes into it.

                                I don't agree with everything JOB does, nor do I think he gives enough weight to what goes on in games - in my opinion, he outthinks himself way too much - but I don't go so far as to say he is arbitrary.
                                BillS

                                A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                                Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X