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

Pacers vs. Hornets

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

  • Re: Pacers vs. Hornets

    Originally posted by Hicks View Post
    Because we wouldn't know about him yet, but we do know about him because we get to see every single game he plays.

    Your view that he's "clearly" this or that doesn't hold water considering the vast majority disagree with you, and despite your claims to the contrary, that has little or nothing to do with him being a Carmel kid.
    People inside the game see him more than any of us and they don't seem to think he has any value. If he did he would have played more PT or someone would have wanted him. After he gets exposed in his default starting role he will be one step closer to heading overseas to try and salvage his career.

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers vs. Hornets

      Originally posted by AlexAustin View Post
      People inside the game see him more than any of us and they don't seem to think he has any value.
      Except, apparently, according to you, the Pacers, who Morway has praised Josh's potential since we acquired him, and now Indiana not only starts him, but wants him to play over 30mpg this year, ahead of a healthy Tyler Hansbrough no less (who they also are high on).

      If you're next move is to say no one is trying to trade for him, why would they until he proves it in the regular season?

      I don't think anyone here is trying to argue it's 100% he's going to be what we think he's going to be, but we're mostly pretty damn sure he's gonna be decent/good this year, and it won't be long before he proves it.

      I don't know what mystical thing is supposed to happen to the other 29 teams starting on October 27th to where Josh's abilities suddenly won't look as good as they have up until last night, but obviously you feel something significant is going to happen causing him to fail.

      So my final question to you is: How many games of decent/good play in the regular season until you admit he belongs in the starting lineup, and not just by default? 5? 10? 20? More?

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers vs. Hornets

        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
        Except, apparently, according to you, the Pacers, who Morway has praised Josh's potential since we acquired him, and now Indiana not only starts him, but wants him to play over 30mpg this year, ahead of a healthy Tyler Hansbrough no less (who they also are high on).

        If you're next move is to say no one is trying to trade for him, why would they until he proves it in the regular season?

        I don't think anyone here is trying to argue it's 100% he's going to be what we think he's going to be, but we're mostly pretty damn sure he's gonna be decent/good this year, and it won't be long before he proves it.

        I don't know what mystical thing is supposed to happen to the other 29 teams starting on October 27th to where Josh's abilities suddenly won't look as good as they have up until last night, but obviously you feel something significant is going to happen causing him to fail.

        So my final question to you is: How many games of decent/good play in the regular season until you admit he belongs in the starting lineup, and not just by default? 5? 10? 20? More?
        What is he going to day we got this guy because he sucks? They are starting him right now by default because he's the only 100% option and everyone here already knows that. He isn't going to finish as the starter and once Tyler shows he's fully healthy and gets his feet back under him its his job like has been the plan the whole time.

        If Josh is still the starter at the halfway mark and we are healthy I will say he is the legit starter, if he has good numbers after 28 games I will be ready to start buying in after 56 games I will say he has real some talent after 82 games I will say I was totally wrong. But if Josh sucks and can't hold the starting job will you say Alex you were right the whole time and Josh is overrated by the fans and not rated at all by the experts?

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers vs. Hornets

          You cannot reason with the unreasonable. I think Josh is unproven but he has never had a shortage of potential. I also so think Tyler is very effective, but always fails the eyeball test. He looks ugly, but gets it done. We will see how it plays out. That is why the play the ****ing games.

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers vs. Hornets

            This thread is incredibly annoying to read. They are both average to below average power forwards that offer different things the Pacers can use at the moment. Why does one have to be specifically better than the other?

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers vs. Hornets

              Originally posted by righteouscool View Post
              This thread is incredibly annoying to read. They are both average to below average power forwards that offer different things the Pacers can use at the moment. Why does one have to be specifically better than the other?
              Yeah that was my basic pont about 5 pages back when I feared this would turn into a Josh vs Tyler discussion

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers vs. Hornets

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                Yeah that was my basic pont about 5 pages back when I feared this would turn into a Josh vs Tyler discussion
                I don't agree. McRoberts is an above average complement to the starting group. Hansbrough could be an above average scoring punch off the bench.

                This thread had not turned into a Josh vs. Tyler thread so much as it has an AlexAustin making ridiculous claims versus the world thread.

                I would still like to hear your opinion in the matter from a few pages back however. Just because the thread has devolved from where you had hoped, that is no reason to discount all discussion as non-worthwhile. Seems like it would be in the best interest of the board to continue the discussion more reasonably with people who don't have the extreme biases that AlexAustin is so blinded by.
                Last edited by Mackey_Rose; 10-17-2010, 11:11 AM.

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers vs. Hornets

                  Hard to say who's better JM or TH right now. Hard to say if either could eventually develop into a serviceable, long-term, starting option for us at the 4. Personally, without having significant material for observation in authentic, big-minute roles, I wouldn't anoint either one the starting 4 of the future. Honestly, think, currently, both strike me more as a good off-the-bench option.

                  Based on what we have to go on currently, I think JM gets the initial nod at starting PF, Tyler the backup. Then let their performances dictate any adjustment to that and, in the longer-term discussion, inform us how seriously we need to be pursuing external PF acquisitions.

                  I think their skill sets complement one another well. Both good energy, Tyler a little thicker and perhaps more of a banger. Maybe more effective guarding traditional post-up guys in that he can try to force them off the block. Josh a little more athletic overall, perhaps more of a stretch 4 candidate who would defend well off the ball as far as shot blocking. Both seem capable of running the floor. Tyler may end up being better on the boards. I need to see more, but even so, Josh I think will be able to contribute enough rebounding not to be a liability.
                  I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                  -Emiliano Zapata

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers vs. Hornets

                    Originally posted by AlexAustin View Post
                    This year as in Preseason? Josh will not have better Per-36 during the regular season and he does do some things OK but nothing like what you are trying to make it out to be because if he did teams would see value in him.
                    Teams do see value in him. Google Josh McRoberts. Why is there an article from every major sports network about him and his progress and how the starting 4 spot is his to lose and Jim O'Brien even quoted saying he does not see him losing it this year? We have 2 very good and young PF's and we need them both to stay healthy. With Tyler coming back from missing most of last year I can easily see Josh as our starter, Tyler is rusty and he needs time to adjust. Both players will get solid minutes but Josh is the starter and he earned it. If Tyler proves this year that he should start, Im sure he will. I like both players quite a bit, but I like Josh's game better. I really like Tyler off the bench and can see him having a great season is doing so. He is very high energy and he has a lot of heart. You can say what you want to about Josh but I'm sure as the season goes along and if your a real fan he will surprise you and just maybe you can see why us fans are excited.


                    Indiana Pacers' Josh McRobert's grabs a rebound from Minnesota Timberwolves' Kevin Love. AP Photo
                    Last edited by Hibbert; 10-17-2010, 11:22 AM.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Hibbert View Post
                      Google Josh McRoberts. Why is there an article from every major sports network about him
                      Probably because his starter-by-default status has made the former #1 ranked high school player in the country semi-relevant in the world of basketball since, well, he was the #1 ranked high school player in the country. His post-H.S. career has been six -years of epic fail. Two years of massive disappointment at Duke, a year of being a sub-par NBDL player and three years of being a 12th man for lousy NBA teams. That we have people ignoring this perennial failure and declaring his greatness based on preseason averages of 7 & 7 strikes me as borderline insanity (or just irrational wishful thinking coupled with an extreme hometown bias).
                      Last edited by Lance George; 10-17-2010, 01:30 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers vs. Hornets

                        Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                        Probably because his starter-by-default status has made the former #1 ranked high school player in the country semi-relevant in the world of basketball since, well, he was the #1 ranked high school player in the country. His post-H.S. career has been six -years of epic fail.
                        So your not happy for the guy now? Tyler is considered one of the best college basketball players to ever play in NCAA and now him and Josh are on the same team. Who is starting now in 2010-11?

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers vs. Hornets

                          Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                          That we have people ignoring this perennial failure and declaring his greatness based on preseason averages of 7 & 7 strikes me as borderline insanity (or just irrational wishful thinking coupled with an extreme hometown bias).
                          We have people ignoring Tyler's .360 fg% and declaring his greatness based on COLLEGE when COLLEGE is 100% different from the PROS. His greatness is also declared by 8 points his rookie season. 8 points and four rebounds and someone being obsessed with him strikes me as borderline insanity (or just irrational wishful thinking coupled with extreme, extreme, extreme college bias).

                          Man I'm getting sick of this. I thought Tyler would be starting over Josh too but is pretty damn clear that Josh has gotten leaps and bounds better over his sophomore season. You guys are Tyler fans more than Pacers fans. Can't you guys just be happy that Tyler is on the floor playing as opposed to being injured with vertigo???

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Hibbert View Post
                            So your not happy for the guy now? Tyler is considered one of the best college basketball players to ever play in NCAA and now him and Josh are on the same team. Who is starting now in 2010-11?
                            Happy for him for doing what? Being our best completely healthy returning power forward, and thus being named the starter by default? I'll be happy for him (and the Pacers) when he shows me he's earned his starting position instead of being given it out of necessity.
                            Last edited by Lance George; 10-17-2010, 02:06 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers vs. Hornets

                              Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                              Happy for him for doing what? Being our best completely healthy returning power forward, and thus being named the starter by default? I'll be happy for him (and the Pacers) when he shows me he's earned his starting position instead of being given it out of necessity.
                              So you're saying he's better than Tyler? Because Tyler was given full clearance to play and is now fully healthy.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers vs. Hornets

                                Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                                McBob has the following attributes that are better than Tyler and many are why he is starting:

                                1) Longer and more athletic. Hibbert needs paired with an athlete. Tyler is not bad, but he does not play above the rim the way Josh does.

                                2) Better defender. His main advantage is help-side defense. McBob does that very clearly better than Tyler.

                                3) The ball does not stick to his hands. In our motion offense, you want the ball moving between your best players. You want Danny, Collison and Hibbert to be making the plays on offense. Josh is the better passer. Tyler tends to hold the ball and attempt to score one-on-one.

                                4) McBob rebounds better.




                                5) The starting unit needs a garbage guy who isn't looking to score all the time. A guy that gets in the passing lanes, follows up an errant shot, etc. This better describes McBob.


                                Edit: As Hicks implies, McBob is the more capable ball handler and passer. Another advantage is that McBob seems to be mentally quick. I don't think Tyler or Granger can make decisions with the ball that quickly.
                                really you have seen nothing to compare mental quickness, your taking your support a bit far.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X