Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

The window has closed

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

  • #76
    Re: The window has closed

    I mean, I guess the window on a starting lineup with Hill-Stephenson-George-West-Hibbert with Vogel as coach. The window for the Pacers with Paul George as the #1 option won't close for at least another 5 years.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: The window has closed

      Roy takes a lot of crap for what has been going on, but nobody talks about the fact that it's not exactly like West is Mr. Speeddemon who can help with the rotations. We are fine if we have one of the slower guys on the court (pick one of HIbbert, Scola, West), but where we sink like a ****ing rock is when we have two. The West-Scola front court hasn't been any better than the West-Hibbert front court in terms of rotations. In fact Roy wasn't even on the court when Mike Scott turned himself into Robert Horry for 5 minutes. Roy's been total ****, but our power forwards have gotten let way off the hook by his play. They have both been awful on defense all series and have gotten lit up plenty of times.

      A certain fellow has really escaped a lot of criticism and IMO it's Bird. I think he's done an amazing job, but I do wonder if maybe he over thought it with the Scola trade. He did all that work to get Cope here and then he immediately goes out and gets another guy that you know is clearly going to play ahead of Cope in the rotation? That was a blatant mistake looking back on it. Why did he double down on backup power forwards? Just seems silly honestly looking at it now. And it's not like we saw a ton of the West-Scola frontcourt which would at least explain the motivation a little bit. It just hasn't made sense. Which is why I have a tough time blaming Frank and I think Larry may kind of feel like he **** the bed with that move too. I bet you if he could have a do over he would use the asset buffet of Green, Plumlee, first round pick, Granger to get a dead eye shooter from the 2 or the 3 position. I love Cope, but let's just be honest he can't guard the wing position in this league. He is perfect at the 4 though. So yeah I do think Bird has to take some blame for both trades he made this year, the turner one is a minor boo boo, but the Scola trade was a pretty gigantic **** up all things considered. Even if Plumlee and Green hadn't blossomed in Phoenix it's a pretty huge screw up because you basically doubled down on a backup spot which is pretty stupid if we're being honest. And plus we didn't even give Plumlee much of a chance here to work. I don't think Green ever would have, but man having nice mobile Plumlee might be a good thing right now, no?


      Larry built us to beat Miami, but it's like he totally spaced the possibility that we could end up playing a team like Atlanta. I don't know that having a do over for some of these things would totally change our fate, but I do think it would change this series. Cope alone isn't enough either, if we end up winning this series it will still be because of PG, Lance, etc. Cope shuffles the deck a bit, but you could have really changed our bench identity with a good shooter at the 2/3 spot and another athletic big.
      Last edited by Trader Joe; 04-30-2014, 04:24 PM.


      Comment


      • #78
        Re: The window has closed

        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
        Roy takes a lot of crap for what has been going on, but nobody talks about the fact that it's not exactly like West is Mr. Speeddemon who can help with the rotations. We are fine if we have one of the slower guys on the court (pick one of HIbbert, Scola, West), but where we sink like a ****ing rock is when we have two. The West-Scola front court hasn't been any better than the West-Hibbert front court in terms of rotations. In fact Roy wasn't even on the court when Mike Scott turned himself into Robert Horry for 5 minutes. Roy's been total ****, but our power forwards have gotten let way off the hook by his play. They have both been awful on defense all series and have gotten lit up plenty of times.
        Unfortunately Danny Granger would be perfect against the Hawks.
        PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: The window has closed

          Originally posted by MagicRat View Post
          Unfortunately Danny Granger would be perfect against the Hawks.
          Eh, to me that's a minor issue, but if I could turn Green, Plumlee, and a first round pick into our bench 2/3 and then use Cope as backup 4, I'd like that a lot more over what our bench is. It would have given us flexibility. Our lack of shooting at the 2/3 spot after PG really kills us. Danny wasn't solving that. Turner actually hasn't shot poorly from 3, but I don't think anyone in the NBA is going to fear him getting loose for 4 or 5 threes in a game.


          Comment


          • #80
            Re: The window has closed

            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post

            Larry built us to beat Miami, but it's like he totally spaced the possibility that we could end up playing a team like Atlanta. I don't know that having a do over for some of these things would totally change our fate, but I do think it would change this series. Cope alone isn't enough either, if we end up winning this series it will still be because of PG, Lance, etc. Cope shuffles the deck a bit, but you could have really changed our bench identity with a good shooter at the 2/3 spot and another athletic big.
            Well we did beat Atlanta last year. Going into the season, there was no reason to think that they could do anything more than win a couple of games off of us. Also, weren't the 2013 Knicks just a glorified version of Atlanta? They won 54 games by shooting lights out. But we destroyed them come playoff time.

            Bird got Cope and I'm sure that Cope was the initial plan, but then he had the opportunity for Scola, who was considered a superior player at the time. There is a reason that this forum was 100% glee when we got Scola. At the time, the price didn't seem that steep at all. Green was crap last year, Plumlee was a bench warmer, and the first round pick would be at the end of the round. It seemed like a fair price for a commodity we desperately needed - bench scoring. When Scola was playing so well at the beginning of the year, he looked like just what we needed. Sure in hindsight it doesn't look like a very good deal, but at the time it seemed like what we needed.

            Also, I don't think that Bird was ever going to dangle Granger before the season started. I think he felt that he at least owed Granger a chance to audition for what he could do.

            Last year's Pacers wouldn't have gone down 30 because of Mike Scott. 15 points maybe, but not 30. We lost the other night because we completely crapped the bed once he started going off.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: The window has closed

              I keep seeing people compare ATL to NYK and I have to disagree. ATL's 3s are all about ball movement and spacing in this series. Knicks were all about 1v1 and hope. The Knicks play last year directly correlated to being hot or not. IMO ATL is much more sustainable. Plus key stat, Hawks were 1-10 this year without Korver. That is crazy. Totally different team with him in the lineup. The whole reason the Hawks are the 8 right now and not a few seeds higher is because of injuries in February basically. Now they are healthy and they are pretty scary. Should we beat them? Hell yes, absolutely, but they are a terrible matchup for us.

              Teague also has been a boon of quickness this year and Milsap is a better fit than Josh Smith. You add in a bit of luck (Demarre Carroll games 1 and 3, Mike Scott game 5) and you've got the recipe for a serious headache. One that IMO the Knicks didn't relaly threaten us with. The Knicks play right into our hands. Iso ball and slow pace. Hawks go the other way, really good spacing and quick pace.


              My point about Scola was simple, you went and got Cope, a guy who actgually put up similar numbers to Scola that year on a per minute basis, you spent a chunk of change and time to get him. Then you go and spend MORE assets on a guy who fills the exact same role? I agree from a talent standpoint no brainer, but when you step back and look at it from an asset perspective you do have to kind of scratch your head. Cap space, a draft pick and a young player on two backup power forwards....why?
              Last edited by Trader Joe; 04-30-2014, 04:36 PM.


              Comment


              • #82
                Re: The window has closed

                Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                I have a tough time saying that a team that has two 23 year old wings who put up

                21, 6, and 3 & 14, 7 and 4 has already had its window close. Only if you let it maybe.
                Not exactly KD and Westbrook numbers. Hell it's not even Westbrook and Harden numbers lol. But I certainly get your point.

                I just don't think we will be at the level we want to be with Paul and Lance as our two best players with such a fall off in talent after that. This team desperately needs to maintain a healthy balance in talent to combat the top heavy talent of other teams. The issue with the core we have right now, West is declining, Hill is a solid vet, and Roy is an enigma.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: The window has closed

                  Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                  Eh, to me that's a minor issue, but if I could turn Green, Plumlee, and a first round pick into our bench 2/3 and then use Cope as backup 4, I'd like that a lot more over what our bench is. It would have given us flexibility. Our lack of shooting at the 2/3 spot after PG really kills us. Danny wasn't solving that. Turner actually hasn't shot poorly from 3, but I don't think anyone in the NBA is going to fear him getting loose for 4 or 5 threes in a game.
                  I say that thinking that Frank would've been much quicker to play Danny at the 4 spot than he has with Cope. Danny isn't letting Mike Scott hit 5 threes in a quarter.
                  PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: The window has closed

                    Originally posted by MagicRat View Post
                    I say that thinking that Frank would've been much quicker to play Danny at the 4 spot than he has with Cope. Danny isn't letting Mike Scott hit 5 threes in a quarter.
                    Yeah true and we saw him do that against the Clippers and Danny did work on Blake Griffin. Just who knows if Danny would even be healthy.


                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: The window has closed

                      Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                      Last year's Pacers wouldn't have gone down 30 because of Mike Scott. 15 points maybe, but not 30. We lost the other night because we completely crapped the bed once he started going off.
                      Because the Pacers would have put him down the block and phsyically beat the crap out of him. But right now, the Pacers are determined to win a jump shooting contest against the Hawks.


                      The Pacers started sucking when they lost their smashmouth identity, and the proposed solution is to run away from it like the plague.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: The window has closed

                        I think by the time we got to the playoffs last year, our starters knew they had to play/execute the game plan to near perfection if we were going to win. Our bench last year was a terrible mess. And though Hans brought energy, and DJ could hit open 3s every few games - it was ultimately up to our starters to execute to near perfection. This is why we often saw a crazy sense of urgency. That same sense is missing this year.

                        West was our quasi number 1A option, with PG being 1B. Roy hit the offensive boards hard and got enough points off of putbacks. Lance got a lot of his buckets off the ball (back screens, cuts, fast breaks) while providing the occasional dribble drive, and Hill was consistently more aggressive.

                        Now PG and Lance try to be KD and Westbrook way too often, West and Hill are too often regulated to spot up opportunities, and Roy is....
                        Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 04-30-2014, 04:51 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: The window has closed

                          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                          Because the Pacers would have put him down the block and phsyically beat the crap out of him. But right now, the Pacers are determined to win a jump shooting contest against the Hawks.


                          The Pacers started sucking when they lost their smashmouth identity, and the proposed solution is to run away from it like the plague.
                          I agree.

                          West's role really changed this year. Last year when Scott came in we would have put West in and had him just score 2 or 3 times and force a guy like that out. Now we don't do that, and on top of that when we do force feed it inside Roy is the guy getting the ball (early in game 3 for example). West is relegated a lot now to mop up duty. I'm not necessarily saying make him a corner stone every trip down, but I do think we have gone away from using him as a safety valve.

                          Foul trouble hasn't helped either though and neither is the way Scola is playing.


                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: The window has closed

                            Sigh, this is taxing. I'd hate to be Vogel. I feel like he will end up taking the fall for this and I just feel like that is a horrible mistake to give up on a coach that age.

                            I wish I felt more confident about the game tomorrow, but at this point a loss really does seem inevitable.


                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: The window has closed

                              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                              Because the Pacers would have put him down the block and phsyically beat the crap out of him. But right now, the Pacers are determined to win a jump shooting contest against the Hawks.


                              The Pacers started sucking when they lost their smashmouth identity, and the proposed solution is to run away from it like the plague.
                              Hansbrough's game was at times analyzed more than any player we had, but I really do think that we miss some of the stuff he brought. He was a flawed player, but I liked how he would get physical and lay hard fouls. Guys don't like playing against him.

                              For as great as a defensive team as we were this year, the amount of hard fouls we dished out were few and far between.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: The window has closed

                                Screw Tyler. I wish we had McRoberts. Could play the 4/5, shoot, handle the ball and he's a total douche. Scola is a nice guy. Period. He might yap some but no one in the NBA would ever think he's going to foul them hard.


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X