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

11AM today Bird speaks live (watch online)

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

  • Re: 11AM today Bird speaks live (watch online)

    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
    From what I saw of him when he played in the month of March, I agree with Bird. Lance has the potential to be one of the better players in the NBA.
    Thanks Buck

    I am not on some high moral ground, I think the kid can play and play extreemly well

    he needs to mature but he is still a 19 year old kid

    I mean come on, what were any of us like Freshman/Sophmore year in college

    Kinda like Animal House

    Sittin on top of the world!

    Comment


    • Re: 11AM today Bird speaks live (watch online)

      Originally posted by Merz View Post
      You realize that they have a second round pick right?

      Howard isn't going in the first round.
      of course but the guy i was quoting said he would be ok with Howard at 15 which to be would be a terrible mistake Honestly i dont think he gets drafted

      Comment


      • Re: 11AM today Bird speaks live (watch online)

        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
        If Lance Stephenson is starting at any position for us in the fall and we don't have copious amounts of injuries to blame, I'll buy his jersey and take a picture of myself wearing it and holding up a sign saying "Lance is #1"

        Here are the two options with Lance as I've spelled out countless times.

        1.) He's the best player on the team, but he's so ****ing crazy we still couldn't play him (terrifying)
        2.) He's not that good, and he's still crazy (My bet)

        Either way...count me out.
        Why is it so balck and white to ya bro?
        Sittin on top of the world!

        Comment


        • Re: 11AM today Bird speaks live (watch online)

          Originally posted by Hicks View Post
          Things he talked to Frank about that needed to be cleaned up, but overall did excellent job.
          Brought this back to the top as this thought popped up. With Bird having the end of season talks with the players, and then Vogel, that very well could have been Frank's first interview. Vogel is probably getting his ducks in a row and enquiring who would be willing to sit on his bench. The guy is smart and knows when he goes in for the last talk he better have the answers to the questions.
          You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

          Comment


          • Re: 11AM today Bird speaks live (watch online)

            Originally posted by Sookie View Post
            He refused to blame Jim O'brien for any issues with the team, too. In fact, he used a lot of excuses to support his point too.

            "I'm bullish about Lance" -Larry Bird.
            right sook, but my point was it was not one person off in a corner by himself causing 14 other players to stop giving 110% DURING PRACTICE

            He said players so that means more than one. While the great Mike Wells took pleasure in slamming Lance at every opportunity ( my opinion and I dont give a fk who agrees or disagrees with me, its MY opinion)

            Its OBVIOUS there were a few players that were taking practice lightly, goofing around etc

            yet all we heard was how ONE teamate is creating all this strife

            I dont buy it, Bird doesnt buy it and it takes two to tango

            We dont have strong leadership and thats a poor reflection on Granger as the best player and most expereinced starter

            Thats why Vogel gets a one year contract and why Bird called out the team saying lack of leadership hurt and that if Bird was in the locker room Lance wouldnt be a problem

            I perswonally think Lance had the "audacity" to call a vet or two out for not playing hard or passing the ball or whatever. If that was the case, good for him

            I dont think you can deny Lance's talent. He has obvious room to grow but two things

            MJ or Garnett, or people like that I can bet would have brought the best out in Lance, and wouldnt have allowed the drama to continue

            Lance probably feels like the whole team is against him and he is being singled out becuase he wanted his voice heard as well

            If we havee basketball next year, all this will straighten itself out
            Sittin on top of the world!

            Comment


            • Re: 11AM today Bird speaks live (watch online)

              Originally posted by Tom White View Post
              But you can say he caved in to prima donnas? Larry Bird caved in to prima donnas?

              Sorry, I don't buy the prima donna theory at all.
              I hear ya.

              My guess is that Bird was pushing hard to keep playing Lance (probably the reason he got playing time in the first place) and Vogel was pushing to postpone Lance until next year in lieu of the prima donnas.

              I agree with you. If Bird was coach, the prima donnas would not have won the day.
              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

              Comment


              • Re: 11AM today Bird speaks live (watch online)

                Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                Our most talented player couldn't even get off the bench on a 37 win team Larry? Just cut it out. This is getting ridiculous.

                Part of me thinks he makes these comments about Lance just so he can come on here and watch everyone get all excited about him.
                Experience often trumps talent, not only in basketball but in all walks of life. Surely you've experienced that. You may have talent and a bright future but you have to earn your place in the rotation. You don't just get it handed to you.

                I do think that Bird feels pressure to hype Lance, for many reasons. There's a local sports writer than has been crucifying Lance since before the season even began. And have you read the things people say about Lance on this forum? It's outrageous. I think Bird feels he has to keep reiterating that the team believes in Lance to counteract the negative noise. He's reacting to the negative perceptions that others are trying to create.

                Comment


                • Re: 11AM today Bird speaks live (watch online)

                  Originally posted by Strummer View Post
                  Experience often trumps talent, not only in basketball but in all walks of life. Surely you've experienced that. You may have talent and a bright future but you have to earn your place in the rotation. You don't just get it handed to you.

                  I do think that Bird feels pressure to hype Lance, for many reasons. There's a local sports writer than has been crucifying Lance since before the season even began. And have you read the things people say about Lance on this forum? It's outrageous. I think Bird feels he has to keep reiterating that the team believes in Lance to counteract the negative noise. He's reacting to the negative perceptions that others are trying to create.
                  Or...

                  he truly believes in Lance and its not hype, and he just doesnt give a fat rats azz what some mid market "journalist" or fans think

                  really I could see it either way
                  Sittin on top of the world!

                  Comment


                  • Re: 11AM today Bird speaks live (watch online)

                    Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                    right sook, but my point was it was not one person off in a corner by himself causing 14 other players to stop giving 110% DURING PRACTICE

                    He said players so that means more than one. While the great Mike Wells took pleasure in slamming Lance at every opportunity ( my opinion and I dont give a fk who agrees or disagrees with me, its MY opinion)

                    Its OBVIOUS there were a few players that were taking practice lightly, goofing around etc

                    yet all we heard was how ONE teamate is creating all this strife

                    I dont buy it, Bird doesnt buy it and it takes two to tango

                    We dont have strong leadership and thats a poor reflection on Granger as the best player and most expereinced starter

                    Thats why Vogel gets a one year contract and why Bird called out the team saying lack of leadership hurt and that if Bird was in the locker room Lance wouldnt be a problem

                    I perswonally think Lance had the "audacity" to call a vet or two out for not playing hard or passing the ball or whatever. If that was the case, good for him

                    I dont think you can deny Lance's talent. He has obvious room to grow but two things

                    MJ or Garnett, or people like that I can bet would have brought the best out in Lance, and wouldnt have allowed the drama to continue

                    Lance probably feels like the whole team is against him and he is being singled out becuase he wanted his voice heard as well

                    If we havee basketball next year, all this will straighten itself out
                    Okay, Lance has been a problem everywhere he's been.
                    His former high school coach, refused to talk about him. He has a reputation as a team cancer.

                    The fact that Mike Wells went around the locker room and asked the guys about Lance after moving to the fourth string..and only Roy Hibbert was able to give a quote other than "I don't know what the heck to say to the kid" or "no comment" and even in his quote, he said "I've tried to help him.." That says, that even if there were locker room problems besides Lance, he's certainly a big part of it. (And Personally, I think Posey is actually probably a problem. I've heard grumblings of it before..that he tends to cause problems when things aren't going well. And I also think Dahntay can rub people the wrong way. But I'm sorry, I'm not going to blame Dahntay for trying to be intense and trying to be a leader. As a vet, I'm sure he felt that was part of his responsibility. And no player, besides Tyler, is more intense than he is. And no player cheers as hard for his teammates as he does. )

                    It's been mentioned that TJ tried to help him out. We've all seen Dahntay try and take care of the kid. On the court, someone (I think it was Peck) saw Tyler try and help keep his confidence up. I personally saw AJ try and help him out (New Jersey game, although to be fair to Lance, it looked like he was listening..but the fact that Wells specifically mentioned AJ as saying "don't know wtf to say.." means that isn't going well either.) So sorry, I don't buy this "Lance took it to Danny" theory. If that's the case, why would (at least) five different guys have tried (and failed) with helping him out.

                    I know people like to say Wells "hates Lance" and is biased. But he has no reason to be. Larry has a reason to be. Remember that.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 11AM today Bird speaks live (watch online)

                      Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                      I know people like to say Wells "hates Lance" and is biased. But he has no reason to be. Larry has a reason to be. Remember that.
                      All good points except I dont think Wells "hates" Lance , strong dislike? Sure

                      But Wells doesnt need a reason to dislike Lance. As I said before it could be Wells see's a kid with enormous God given talent acting like he is "entitled" and that is a thorn in Wells side

                      I guess only Wells knows exactly why

                      Perhaps someone like Gnome, Hicks or Peck could tweet that exact question.

                      Not sure he would answer, but worth a try
                      Sittin on top of the world!

                      Comment


                      • Re: 11AM today Bird speaks live (watch online)

                        Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post

                        We dont have strong leadership and thats a poor reflection on Granger as the best player and most expereinced starter
                        You know who else the "lack of leadership" issue reflects on? Jeff Foster.

                        Yes I know, he doesn't get the playing time he used to, he's coming back from injury, blah, blah, blah...........but, who on this team has been around longer, has more experience or can speak from a "been there, seen and done that" perspective? However, it would appear that perhaps he doesn't take on the role of a veteran presence that he should or could.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 11AM today Bird speaks live (watch online)

                          Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                          I hear ya.

                          My guess is that Bird was pushing hard to keep playing Lance (probably the reason he got playing time in the first place) and Vogel was pushing to postpone Lance until next year in lieu of the prima donnas.

                          I agree with you. If Bird was coach, the prima donnas would not have won the day.
                          Who the prima donnas are you talking about?
                          DC or Danny?

                          Comment


                          • Re: 11AM today Bird speaks live (watch online)

                            Originally posted by Tom White View Post
                            You know who else the "lack of leadership" issue reflects on? Jeff Foster.

                            Yes I know, he doesn't get the playing time he used to, he's coming back from injury, blah, blah, blah...........but, who on this team has been around longer, has more experience or can speak from a "been there, seen and done that" perspective? However, it would appear that perhaps he doesn't take on the role of a veteran presence that he should or could.
                            Or that he lacks the gravitas because he isn't considered a major player by the youngest guys?

                            I think Jeff is there to teach the guys who want to be taught, I don't think he has the wherewithal to be the locker room hall monitor.
                            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


                            • Re: 11AM today Bird speaks live (watch online)

                              Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                              I hear ya.

                              My guess is that Bird was pushing hard to keep playing Lance (probably the reason he got playing time in the first place) and Vogel was pushing to postpone Lance until next year in lieu of the prima donnas.

                              I agree with you. If Bird was coach, the prima donnas would not have won the day.
                              So you would have benched Danny?

                              Let's not forget that Danny was at the center of the confrontation between Lance and Dahnaty.
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 11AM today Bird speaks live (watch online)

                                Originally posted by Sherlock View Post
                                Who the prima donnas are you talking about?
                                DC or Danny?
                                From what we've heard, the blowup was between Lance and Dahntay/Danny/possibly Foster

                                I don't think DC was involved at all.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X