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

Woj: Lance Is A Clown

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

  • #61
    Re: Woj: Lance Is A Clown

    Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
    Selective Memory? How about the PR Stephenson caused in 2 incidents right after being drafted? Or are those to be ignored?
    Which ended up being nothing (Oh, go ahead with your "Yeah, but ....").

    Substance. Something with substance. Anyone ?? Anyone ?? Bueller ??

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Woj: Lance Is A Clown

      I don't see Lance becoming a PR nightmare. He's a little egregious at times now, but nothing bad. He's still growing up, and he has made great strides. He's learning and I have no doubt that his behavior will not go beyond silly antics in the spot light. I believe even those will decrease over time.
      Stephenson with the .1 second tap in.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Woj: Lance Is A Clown

        I don't care if this takes place in NY or Indy but personally I think we need to get JR Smith and Lance Stephenson on the same team. The only problem is, between Lance blowing kisses and JR undressing people there will be noone under 17 admitted without parents.
        Last edited by DisplacedKnick; 05-30-2014, 02:51 PM.
        The poster formerly known as Rimfire

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Woj: Lance Is A Clown

          Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
          You address everything except Stephenson is an immature walking time bomb ready to drop a PR nightmare on the Pacers. All you can see is his potential, and have fallen in love with it. Where were you when Artest destroyed a successful and proud franchise? Many of us PD posters who don't want Stephenson back suffered but remained loyal during those bleak dark years. The Pacers after all these years since the Place brawl have now come back and so have the causual fans. Why take a chance? You aren't the owner who lost millions b/c of the brawl, so why do you expect him to hope Stephenson won't do the same b/c you want to keep Stephenson? HE DOESN'T DESERVE ANOTHER PR NIGHTMARE!!! And neither do the Pacer fans nor the city of Indianapolis.
          You could keep this entire post and replace everything on here with Paul George. This year alone he has
          1.) got a girl pregnant
          2.) tried to pay her a boat-load of cash to have an abortion
          3.) (allegedly) destroyed team chemistry with Hibbert with some lady stuff over all star weekend
          4.) send pics of his Johnson
          5.) Got nationally ridiculed for saying "home cooking"
          6.) got hit with a paternity suit

          All this in four months. I understand what you're saying about lance, but let's not be hypocritical about it.
          Danger Zone

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Woj: Lance Is A Clown

            Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
            You address everything except Stephenson is an immature walking time bomb ready to drop a PR nightmare on the Pacers. All you can see is his potential, and have fallen in love with it. Where were you when Artest destroyed a successful and proud franchise? Many of us PD posters who don't want Stephenson back suffered but remained loyal during those bleak dark years. The Pacers after all these years since the Place brawl have now come back and so have the causual fans. Why take a chance? You aren't the owner who lost millions b/c of the brawl, so why do you expect him to hope Stephenson won't do the same b/c you want to keep Stephenson? HE DOESN'T DESERVE ANOTHER PR NIGHTMARE!!! And neither do the Pacer fans nor the city of Indianapolis.

            What has he done that suggests he would attack fans? You're being overly dramatic, and that's a gigantic understatement. He blows in Lebron's ear and flops, so he's mentally unstable and violent? I could've sworn Artest had a history of breaking stuff, getting into opponents' faces and altercations before even becoming a Pacer.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Woj: Lance Is A Clown

              Originally posted by Rogco View Post
              You could keep this entire post and replace everything on here with Paul George. This year alone he has
              1.) got a girl pregnant
              2.) tried to pay her a boat-load of cash to have an abortion
              3.) (allegedly) destroyed team chemistry with Hibbert with some lady stuff over all star weekend
              4.) send pics of his Johnson
              5.) Got nationally ridiculed for saying "home cooking"
              6.) got hit with a paternity suit

              All this in four months. I understand what you're saying about lance, but let's not be hypocritical about it.
              Don't know about some of these, but 2.) should have (allegedly) as well.
              Stephenson with the .1 second tap in.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Woj: Lance Is A Clown

                Originally posted by Woj View Post
                now they find out whether Lance Stephenson is capable of playing the part of a real point guard in pursuit of the NBA Finals – or just some clown trying to inspire the greatest player in the world to a meltdown
                Well, at least he knows what position Lance ought to play.
                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Woj: Lance Is A Clown

                  Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                  You address everything except Stephenson is an immature walking time bomb ready to drop a PR nightmare on the Pacers. All you can see is his potential, and have fallen in love with it. Where were you when Artest destroyed a successful and proud franchise? Many of us PD posters who don't want Stephenson back suffered but remained loyal during those bleak dark years. The Pacers after all these years since the Place brawl have now come back and so have the causual fans. Why take a chance? You aren't the owner who lost millions b/c of the brawl, so why do you expect him to hope Stephenson won't do the same b/c you want to keep Stephenson? HE DOESN'T DESERVE ANOTHER PR NIGHTMARE!!! And neither do the Pacer fans nor the city of Indianapolis.
                  For one, I'm thinking we would've seen something that points to him going down that route after, say, getting elbowed in the throat on two different occasions....
                  So why, exactly, do you feel that he could potentially go down that path? And where do you get the correlation between Artest and Lance? Has Lance demanded a trade? Has he ever ran into the stands and started a riot? Has he ever threw a flagrant-type foul and act as if it was inadvertent? The things he does like the blowing in Lebron's ear and talking smack through the media are petty things. I don't condone it, and wished he wouldn't do it, but that stuff isn't enough to make me feel like he's a detriment. Stuff like Hibbert only showing up 3 months a season and publicly calling out teammates are more a detriment to me.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Woj: Lance Is A Clown

                    Larry Bird has gone soft....telling Lance to cut it out. Just soft. He needs to go back and look at the tapes on the type of crap he pulled in this days. Dude was raring for a fight, talk trash to everybody.

                    If anything he should told Lance "we'll you got your licks in and everyone will be watching for it this time, so instead starting taking strong to the rim, play the most focused game of your life"
                    You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Woj: Lance Is A Clown

                      Originally posted by pogi View Post
                      For one, I'm thinking we would've seen something that points to him going down that route after, say, getting elbowed in the throat on two different occasions....
                      So why, exactly, do you feel that he could potentially go down that path? And where do you get the correlation between Artest and Lance? Has Lance demanded a trade? Has he ever ran into the stands and started a riot? Has he ever threw a flagrant-type foul and act as if it was inadvertent? The things he does like the blowing in Lebron's ear and talking smack through the media are petty things. I don't condone it, and wished he wouldn't do it, but that stuff isn't enough to make me feel like he's a detriment. Stuff like Hibbert only showing up 3 months a season and publicly calling out teammates are more a detriment to me.
                      Agreed. Just the stuff he pulls makes me think the mean streak isn't in him. The best way to describe what I think is by using an analogy. We used to categorize people who boozed as being in one of two categories - a mean or a happy drunk. Lance is a happy drunk. Now you'd like to see more focus out of him but his antics are silly, not mean or contentious.
                      The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Woj: Lance Is A Clown

                        I won't touch the "PR NIGHTMARE" stuff... cause I ain't saying that about Lance in the first place.

                        However, there is too much evidence that points to Lance needing "special attention" and metaphorical kid-proofing in order to not become the next in a long line of "unrealized potential" NBA players. His instability might not be "actual crazy" but the idea that Bird developed a rather large and carefully planned out support system seems like a waste of serious resources. People talk about how soft mentally Roy is because it's fairly easy to see that he is mentally vulnerable, and lots of people want to dump him because of it. A lot of those same people think it's ok to coddle the other volatile personality in the locker room because he "tries" when he's struggling, when it's perceived that Roy just "quits". Lance is mentally soft too, he needs to be in an incredibly controlled enviroment in order to maximize his ability without the whole thing becoming a god-awful shitshow. He has almost 0 focus if he's not the focus, how is that not a glaring mental weakness to those who praise his toughness? That toughness really shines through when he just rolls around on the ground like a soccer player everytime he falls down. Get up stop acting, be "real" tough.

                        I also don't think Hill and Lance dislike each other exactly, they are just very opposite in terms of personality. Lance is large and boisterous, Hill is calm and guarded. Lance wants to be the center, and Hill is a good little soldier. There are strengths and there are weaknesses to both types of personalities. One is infinitely coachable, the other can explode into a leader himself. George always talks about how they need Lance to be the best he can be to have success, that they need Lance to be "Lance". Some might see them as a clash, but to me I see them as complements.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Woj: Lance Is A Clown

                          Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
                          Which ended up being nothing (Oh, go ahead with your "Yeah, but ....").

                          Substance. Something with substance. Anyone ?? Anyone ?? Bueller ??

                          You can chose to believe as you like, I chose to err on the side of caution.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Woj: Lance Is A Clown

                            Originally posted by shadowjfaith View Post
                            I don't see Lance becoming a PR nightmare. He's a little egregious at times now, but nothing bad. He's still growing up, and he has made great strides. He's learning and I have no doubt that his behavior will not go beyond silly antics in the spot light. I believe even those will decrease over time.

                            The real issue isn't what we believe but, what TPTB and ownership believes. It will be interesting to see how it plays out this off season.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Woj: Lance Is A Clown

                              Originally posted by pogi View Post
                              For one, I'm thinking we would've seen something that points to him going down that route after, say, getting elbowed in the throat on two different occasions....
                              So why, exactly, do you feel that he could potentially go down that path? And where do you get the correlation between Artest and Lance? Has Lance demanded a trade? Has he ever ran into the stands and started a riot? Has he ever threw a flagrant-type foul and act as if it was inadvertent? The things he does like the blowing in Lebron's ear and talking smack through the media are petty things. I don't condone it, and wished he wouldn't do it, but that stuff isn't enough to make me feel like he's a detriment. Stuff like Hibbert only showing up 3 months a season and publicly calling out teammates are more a detriment to me.

                              Oh I agree he isn't Artest, but only that Artest caused a PR nightmare for the franchise. I just have never trusted Stephenson. I don't deny is ability, just his foolishness or whatever you want to call it.

                              Ages ago, I had the most wonderful well trained dog who I trusted to the utmost and busted the buttons on my shirt sticking out my chest over it, but unfortunately someone put it in a position where it bit them. I never fully trusted that dog again. A great case could be made that it was the person who it bit was at fault, but the bottom line was it bit someone. Bottom line was my lack of trust caused me to find it a new home. It lived out it's life as the LOVE of it's new owners w/o another incident. It was a once in a life time dog, no dog that I have had since nor in the future will ever be like it. Just couldn't ever trust it again, and I had to be able to trust it in order to live with it.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Woj: Lance Is A Clown

                                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                                Oh I agree he isn't Artest, but only that Artest caused a PR nightmare for the franchise. I just have never trusted Stephenson. I don't deny is ability, just his foolishness or whatever you want to call it.

                                Ages ago, I had the most wonderful well trained dog who I trusted to the utmost and busted the buttons on my shirt sticking out my chest over it, but unfortunately someone put it in a position where it bit them. I never fully trusted that dog again. A great case could be made that it was the person who it bit was at fault, but the bottom line was it bit someone. Bottom line was my lack of trust caused me to find it a new home. It lived out it's life as the LOVE of it's new owners w/o another incident. It was a once in a life time dog, no dog that I have had since nor in the future will ever be like it. Just couldn't ever trust it again, and I had to be able to trust it in order to live with it.
                                All I got out of this is that you're an unforgiving person who punishs the end result with no consideration to what circumstances led up to the result...

                                Your dog was put in a situation to bite by someone else, and you punish the dog for an expected reaction? Personally and without knowing the details, it seems like an example of a "I bet he/she doesn't mess with my dog again." conclusion.

                                Now, if your dog was suddenly attacking random people with bad intentions...okay he gotta go.

                                Lance hasn't shown me anything that leads me to believe that he'll be a threat to society.
                                Last edited by ksuttonjr76; 05-30-2014, 06:55 PM.


                                Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X