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/Sixers postgame thread

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

  • Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

    Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
    I don't understand what you could have possibly seen to suggest he's anything more.

    Drink'n Bird's Koolaid about Stephenson. You know that drink that Bird put out for one the best 3 pt shooters he was bringing in a few years ago. How did that work out?

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

      Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
      Drink'n Bird's Koolaid about Stephenson. You know that drink that Bird put out for one the best 3 pt shooters he was bringing in a few years ago. How did that work out?
      Bird isn't the only one who's talked Lance up though. Mark Boyle, one of the more honest analysts out there, has also said positive things about him.

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

        Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
        Well then we just have a different opinion. I think Lance has a tremendous basketball resume for a 21 year old. Believe it or not. People call him a street baller but he's in reality the most successful HS basketball player ever to come out of NY. He hasn't gotten much of a chance here being shuffled between positions and coaches and having a lockout between years one and two, IMO. But he will show his talent in time. He played much better last year.

        He can be impossible to guard one on one when he gets it going offensively. And he is the only player on the Pacers who has ever shown that kind of offensive ability, IMO.

        My purpose isn't to be antagonistic, but rookie 1 year college players like Brandon Knight, Irving, etc are younger and went thru a lockout as well, so why is Born Ready not playing as well? He's already been practicing for a year against NBA talent. He needs to get it together or Bird needs to swallow is pride and use as trade fodder.

        I'm really trying to give the kid some slack, but he isn't showing me anything to make me think he's got all this wonderful talent Bird keeps blubbering about. If he was showing anything like Bird spews, Vogel would be playing him. He's not and Vogel isn't playing him.

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

          Originally posted by Thingfish View Post


          See, this show does real harm to our youth!
          Yeah, my problem with that show is they don't show you the other side. Did ancient aliens come down, or maybe is it just because these people did that kind of work all of the time and when your king tells you to do something you do it. One thing you never want to do is underestimate humans, if there is a will, especially when it comes from your king who you and they believe is divine, there is a way. We always find a way, it might not be obvious at first, but don't underestimate human ingenuity.

          Given enough time, skilled people, and a few lies it is not that extreme of a thought that those people were able to put two stones together and sand them down until they fit perfectly, or build those pyramids and maybe didn't tell the whole truth in how long it took. If there is one fact that everyone should know about ancient people, and people of today, they will tell every lie in the book to make themselves look more impressive than they really are.

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

            Originally posted by Thingfish View Post
            The History channel stopped being about History long ago. Ancient Aliens is not history. We call that woo woo. They also had this awful show called the Universe, where they intentionally put forth theories that have been disproved just to sensationalize the show.

            They do have a couple good shows about WW2 now and then, but it used to be much better about 10 years ago.
            Exactly. My degree is in History and I still maintain a steady diet of historical books. I teach history at the high school level. I enjoyed the History Channel in its early days when it was mostly comprised of solidly researched scholarship. These days it is full of "Ancient Aliens," "Ax Men," "Swamp People," "Cajun Pawn Stars," "Extreme Marksmen" and other sensationalistic pap like "Comets: Prophet of Doom," or "The Bible Code: Predicting Armageddon." Sometimes there is content in these shows that is solidly historical (in the academic sense), but that's about as far as it goes. It's history-ish. I'm sure it can be fun to watch, but primarily about respectable history, it is not. I stopped watching it regularly about 5 years ago after some of the shows began not only conveying "alternative" history that is mostly speculation - they also began flat-out getting things about which there is consensus WRONG. I am not going to be "open minded" about shoddy scholarship and flimsy inferences passing themselves off as serious theories. There are much better ways to gain access to knowledge about various cultures that are not also shot full of erroneous, sensationalistic, or misleading information.

            So. How about those Pacers? I only caught about a quarter of the game (this is the first game I didn't watch in its entirety) and it doesn't seem like it's a good one to go back and watch. The good thing about the lockout schedule for the fan is that I don't have to wait very long before the next game. I hope Danny and George are ready to go.

            I don't get the Lance thing either. I see that he has some court vision and can make some nice passes. I am sure he can be better than he is now in time. But the most talented player on the team? Or the most potential? I haven't ever seen anything that would make me entertain such a notion. I see a guy who is often lost and slow on defense while running entirely too fast on offense. I see a guy who makes a lot of boneheaded moves in a short period of time, even for a young guy. If Bird really thinks that this guy is the most talented player on our roster, that concerns me because it speaks to his judgment. But mostly I wish he would have kept it to himself.
            Last edited by gummy; 01-10-2012, 05:11 PM.
            "Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better." - Albert Camus

            "Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well." - Voltaire

            "Everyone's values are defined by what they will tolerate when it is done to others." - William Greider

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

              Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
              What are you talking about? The team might of had an issue with Lance's attitude last year. But they all know how talented he is. Two different issues. The kid has boat loads of talent.

              Show me some evidence to back up that claim anyways. I guarantee you, you can't do it.
              I hope you heard Roy on the radio just now. He pretty much outlined things in regards to Lance.

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

                Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                I hope you heard Roy on the radio just now. He pretty much outlined things in regards to Lance.
                What'd he say?

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

                  Originally posted by cdash View Post
                  What'd he say?
                  Lance is slowly but surely growing up. He's a work in progress.
                  "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                  "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

                    I'm not a Lance hater when it comes to BB.
                    I am getting impatient.
                    I am ok with him to continue growing as a Pacers.
                    He has had many opportunities with the Pacers for sure.
                    I'd like to see value before the season ends.
                    I'm not sure I will see it.
                    It is not anyone's fault but Lance's for his possible short comings with the Pacers or NBA.

                    I know NBA BB players can all have great highlights, but check this out. The ability is there, he has mad skillz. If he can just get it together in his head sooner then later.

                    http://youtu.be/PtW_Hw3bWoE
                    Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

                      Please someone explain to me how Lance has had "ample opportunity"

                      Last night he was a SG, and it was pretty obvious to me he would only be passed the ball if there were no other options, mostly he was standing around trying to get in the flow of the game

                      Yet the conseous of some is "the offense moved better with Lance out of the game"

                      So how when playing SG, was he supposed to initiate the offense? or better yet how did he disrupt the offense?
                      Sittin on top of the world!

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

                        Prior to the NBA it was basically "give Lance the ball and let him make a play"

                        Things are much different on the NBA level and he will take some time to adjust

                        Talent is there, just needs more time to grow

                        I am not ashamed to admit that at the tender age of 19/20 I still had a lot of growing up to do myself
                        Sittin on top of the world!

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

                          Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                          Prior to the NBA it was basically "give Lance the ball and let him make a play"

                          Things are much different on the NBA level and he will take some time to adjust

                          Talent is there, just needs more time to grow

                          I am not ashamed to admit that at the tender age of 19/20 I still had a lot of growing up to do myself
                          Which is why I hope he gets sent down to the D-League to get some playing time. 8 minutes a game is barely enough to break a sweat.
                          First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

                            Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                            My purpose isn't to be antagonistic, but rookie 1 year college players like Brandon Knight, Irving, etc are younger and went thru a lockout as well, so why is Born Ready not playing as well? He's already been practicing for a year against NBA talent. He needs to get it together or Bird needs to swallow is pride and use as trade fodder.

                            I'm really trying to give the kid some slack, but he isn't showing me anything to make me think he's got all this wonderful talent Bird keeps blubbering about. If he was showing anything like Bird spews, Vogel would be playing him. He's not and Vogel isn't playing him.

                            I don't understand your thinking..

                            Irving, Knight, Wall and so on and so forth were basically given a very very long leash coming in.. Hell , some immediately or instantly became STARTERS... free reign .

                            OK, if we were a crap team like the Wizards or Cavs , and we put Lance as our starting PG , giving him 32-36 minutes per game, I guarantee you he would have "found his game" and be playing as well as Irving, Knight, Wall and etc..

                            They got thrown into the fire and will come out better for it.. While Lance in comparison can barely sniff the floor.

                            Put Lance in Kyrie Irving, Brandon Knight, or John Wall's shoes , and he would be eventually be putting up just as good of stats
                            Last edited by Kemo; 01-10-2012, 11:48 PM.
                            "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

                              Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                              Y'all need to lay off Ancient Aliens and Finding Big Foot.

                              I believe the Big foot is real. Though I think the show is just entertaining, they don't provide any real evidence. They have so much equipment that if a big foot really did appear in the forest, they'd have the evidence to show it. I think its funny that every time some witness tells their story the 3 dudes are like "you definetly seen a squatch!" and the chick is just shaking her head.
                              I will not say it's totally completely impossible, but really? I'd love for Bigfoots to be true, but really? In hundreds of years not one body? Some random hunter hasn't shot one, thinking it was a bear? No really good photo or video? The things are suppose to be 7-8 ft tall and 500+ lbs and nothing? The world is getting smaller with less places to hide everday. With all the high tech equipment and thermo camera technology still nothing?

                              They have incredible footage of Snow Leopards on the Planet Earth documentary, one of the rarest mammals on year in one of the most remote places on earth.

                              If one is ever found it'll be on ever news station in the world long before a TV show is aired. I do watch the show though.
                              "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers/Sixers postgame thread

                                Originally posted by Kemo View Post
                                Put Lance in Kyrie Irving, Brandon Knight, or John Wall's shoes , and he would be eventually be putting up just as good of stats

                                If you truly believe that, I've got some ocean front property in Brown county I'd like to sell you. Mark my words, Stephenson will never be as good of a PG as any of those mentioned.

                                If Bird truly believed his own hype, Stephenson would be getting plenty of minutes of PT. Since he's not, says it all.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X