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

Anybody See This

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

  • Anybody See This

    I hope it hasn't been posted, if it has I'll gladly delete it.

    I agree with what A.D. had to say, but that's about it.


    http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playof...tch&id=1794376




    Let's hear it for the underdogs.


    Let's hear it for the team that has won 14 straight playoff games in the East, sweeping out its last three opponents. Let's hear it for the team that has won seven straight road playoff games against the East. Let's hear it for the two-time defending Eastern conference champion New Jersey Nets.


    They're not the favorite against Detroit in the conference semifinals?


    Yes, and it's perfectly fine with them.


    "We'll probably be underdogs from here on out," Jason Kidd said. "We don't have a Shaq, a big dominant guy. We play as a team."


    They've been on an absolute rampage through the East in the postseason since Kidd's arrival, but now they're playing the best team they've ever faced in the postseason -- this side of the Mississippi. Although the Pacers were the cream of the East, it's the Pistons -- and not the Pacers -- who are the best-equipped team in the conference to dethrone the Nets. It comes down to a few factors:



    1. Big guys
    Why not Indiana? They've got only one big guy, and Jermaine O'Neal still has to prove to more than a few folks that he can be an elite playoff performer. That includes the Nets, who have always had the upper hand in the matchup because of Kenyon Martin.


    "What Jermaine needs to do is show people," said Antonio Davis, the ex-Pacer and current Bull, on the eve of the postseason. "I think he needs to step up and show people that when the game is on the line, he's going to take control of the game and get it done. Whether it's getting a rebound or block or bucket or whatever. Because that's the difference between guys who get there and have all the tools and experience and use it, and the guys who don't. Some guys run off and kind of hide in the mix. There've been a few games in the playoffs where Jermaine has run off and hid. But there were games where he stepped up. He needs to show the consistency of doing that in each and every game in the playoffs. But that's tough to do. When you're playing a team and they know what you do, inside and out, and you're playing them for five or seven straight games, and no matter what they did, they couldn't stop you -- then you've shown me something. That's special. Shaq or Duncan or Magic Johnson or Isiah Thomas or Larry Bird or Michael Jordan, they could all do that."



    Big Ben isn't the only Wallace who'll give the Nets problems.
    Why Detroit? The Pistons have two big, long athletic guys who could make life a living hell for Martin, starting Monday night in the Palace of Auburn Hills.


    The two Wallaces -- Ben and Rasheed -- are the perfect antidote to Martin, who has always had the clear-cut advantage in the East during the playoffs. It was clear that Martin had too much size and athleticism for the Knicks' undersized and less-athletic frontcourt players. He went for 23 points a game on 64-percent shooting against New York, including a career playoff high of 36 when the Nets applied the broom to Stephon Marbury in Game 4.


    "This won't be like the New York series, where he could do whatever he wanted around the basket," one Eastern Conference scout said. "Wallace is as strong as Martin, but he's also taller and just as quick."


    You'd never know from his stats against the Bucks -- 14.8 points, 10.6 rebounds, 2.2 blocks -- but Rasheed was hampered in the first round by a sore left arch. If it affects his ability to stay on Martin, the other Wallace should be able to challenge his shots, too. Ben Wallace will be matched up against two non-scoring centers, Jason Collins and Aaron Williams. Their inability to be offensive threats should allow Ben freedom to roam the middle, looking to give Rasheed help. That's the perfect role for Ben Wallace, who is one of the top help defenders in the game.


    "The thing that makes Detroit so tough is that they have two big guys who really protect the goal," the scout added. "Indiana really only has one."



    2. Point guard
    Why not Indiana? Do you really think that Jamaal Tinsley and Anthony Johnson or any other Pacer is capable of slowing down Kidd in a potential conference finals?


    Right. We didn't think so, either.


    The Nets are 27-7 against the East in two-plus playoff runs with Kidd, and reason No.1 is that he normally wins his matchup -- in a landslide. Just ask Marbury, the latest victim of Kidd's superb playoff efforts.


    "He just knows the game so well," said Marbury after his first season in New York came to a crashing halt. "He knows when to break the defense down. He knows when to pass the ball. When to take shots. He's not a guy who will dominate the game by scoring a lot of points, but he knows how to make the game easy for their other guys."


    Why Detroit? Chauncey Billups will be getting his second shot at Kidd in the playoffs and figures to be a difficult matchup. Billups was victimized by Kidd when Kidd hit the game-winner at the end of Game 1 of the conference finals last spring. But he was also playing that series on a badly sprained ankle. This time, Billups is healthy and should be able to present problems for Kidd at both ends.


    "Chauncey's ability to drive is going to make it tough on Jason, especially if his knee starts acting up," the scout said. "Chauncey's got great explosion and he's a tough cover."


    The longer the series goes, the more Kidd's knee injury will likely be a factor. He started to slow down in Game 4 against the Knicks, when he had problems against a slower Frank Williams. With Kidd already suffering a knee cartilage injury, it's the kind of situation that will worsen over time and with extended play.



    3. Defense
    Why not Indiana? Don't get us wrong. The Pacers are an excellent defensive team and boast Ron Artest, the Defensive Player of the Year.


    Why Detroit? They're even better than the Pacers at playing defense. With their acquisition of Rasheed Wallace, the Pistons finished the season tied for first in defense, allowing only 84.3 points a game. They also finished third in field-goal percentage defense (.413).


    In the first round, the Pistons shut down the Bucks, who averaged 85.6 points a game on just 41.6-percent shooting. They could turn the Nets into a half-court team reliant on a jump shot, which has always been Jersey's downfall.


    "They have a luxury," Milwaukee coach Terry Porter said of the Pistons. "They have two shot blockers (the Wallaces) that can block shots and cover a lot of ground."


    It's not just the Wallaces. Tayshaun Prince gives them a third shot-blocker. His 7-foot wingspan is going to be a factor against Richard Jefferson. The Pistons were a great defensive team under Rick Carlisle last year, but Larry Brown has added some wrinkles that makes them even better.


    "Last year, they basically played you 22 feet and in," Nets coach Lawrence Frank said. "This year, they'll pick you up full court. They'll be more disruptive. They'll force more turnovers."



    4. Scoring options
    Why not Indiana? The Pacers have two scoring options, O'Neal and Artest. (We're not counting Al Harrington or Jonathan Bender, until they show they can do it against someone other than those pitiful Celtics). But of their big two, Martin has always given O'Neal fits as a defender, a point that the Pacers forward has conceded.


    Why Detroit? Although the Nets privately don't think the Pistons have the one player who can deliver against them in crunch time, Detroit will enter the series with more scoring weapons than the Pacers and most other teams.


    "This is definitely a different team," said Ben Wallace, thinking about last year's team that never reached 90 points in any of its four playoff losses to Jersey. "Right now, given the chance we can run with them, we can slow it down and play in the half court."


    Besides Billups and Rasheed Wallace, the Pistons can go to a more consistent Richard Hamilton (20.2 points a game and 48-percent shooting vs. Milwaukee) and Prince, who Larry Brown called the MVP of the Bucks series. The Nets' defense basically had the last series off, facing a one-man Knicks team reduced to Marbury. Now, their usually-stingy defense will be tested against a team with the homecourt advantge looking for some revenge.


    "It sometimes go unnoticed, but since the trade for Rasheed, they're averaging more points," Frank said. "They averaged over 100 points a game during their series against the Bucks. So they're not a hold-the-ball, stall, deliberate team by any means. There are going to be a lot of up-tempo moments."


    Probably enough for Detroit to win this series.

    Mitch Lawrence, who covers the NBA for the New York Daily News, is a regular contributor to ESPN.com.

  • #2
    Re: Anybody See This

    Again, who cares what Mitch Lawrence "thinks."

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Anybody See This

      I don't agree with Mitch Lawrence but there are plenty of good points in there...

      A series against NJ or Detroit is going to be difficult for the Pacers to win. A series against Indiana will be difficult for NJ or Detroit to win.

      That's why they play the games. On paper, you can support just about any opinion you want to support.

      Now I've got to get back to proving that my client isn't really a crook (on paper).
      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
      And life itself, rushing over me
      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Anybody See This

        So, we only have JO and Ron as scoring options






















        Damn! This guy hasn't got a clue. I'm sure Martin choking all the time in SEVERAL play-off contests in the past is taken into account mg: Further, I still think Reggie is going to explode for atleast one or two games. And what's up??? Didn't JO have like 15 rebs last year in the 1st round aswell as 20+ pts. And why not count Al's points and performance from the previous round, while including Tayshaun's

        Where I come from that is called "selectief winkelen" aka "selective shopping", picking only the stuff that you want and ignoring or downplaying counterarguments for the sake of "proving" your opinion.
        I hope we sweep the 2nd round too, I doubt it, but the more rest we get for the Conference Finals the better it is ... provided we advance to that stage, offcourse .

        Anyway, I don't mind looking critical at the Pacers, and the whoever we will face will give us problems, thats why they advanced that far themselves too, because they are good too, but this is just pre-configured rubbish, nothing more ... nothing less.

        Regards,

        Mourning
        2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

        2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

        2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Anybody See This

          Best record in the NBA...

          3-1 against Pistons...

          3-1 against Nets...

          Comment

          Working...
          X