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 vs Celts post game thread

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

  • Pacers vs Celts post game thread

    I watched the game on TV and don't really have much to say. But I am in a cranky mood though

    Remember back in October all the "fans" (not in this forum) who said they will never go to another Pacers game again as long as Jackson is on the team. I inferred that statement to mean two things. 1) when Jackson was gone they would come back. 2) that those "fans" used to go to games but stopped going because of Jackson.

    Well it is great to see all those fans packing Conseco once again. The crowd tonight would have been a small crowd by Atlanta Hawks standards. 12,600.



    Oh well.

    I think Marshall has a great chance of being a really, really goo defender some day

  • #2
    Re: Pacers vs Celts post game thread

    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
    Well it is great to see all those fans packing Conseco once again. The crowd tonight would have been a small crowd by Atlanta Hawks standards. 12,600.
    I think that if the Pacers win in the playoffs, that would all change. Does anyone know if our attendance increased the year after we lost to Detroit in the Coference Finals? I know that was the year of the brawl so it would be hard to judge but i'm sure we had a few home games.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Pacers vs Celts post game thread

      I wouldn't read too much into the attendence. The weather is terrible (which I believe can affect attendence), the Colts are all the rage right now, and we were playing the Celtics.
      Proudly supporting the Indiana Pacers since 1992.

      Currently on the Darrell Armstrong, Mike Dunleavy, Jr., and Marquis Daniels bandwagons.

      sigpic

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Pacers vs Celts post game thread

        Tinsley played a really good game tonight, he and JO were the difference


        As far as the weather goes. It is late January in Indiana - seems like a pretty typical night. 14 degrees it is winter - unless there is a huge snow storm I don't see how a little cold weather should keep people away. (Of course I'll never forget an excuse from a playoff game a few years back. People didn't go because the weather was too nice. As I said at the time OK so people don't go when the weather is bad and they don't go when it is good. I don't understand how the fact the Colts play in 5 days should have any impact on attenance.


        Rommie: the attendance went up about 700 per game in the brawl year and some of that was the increase in pre sales due to ECF and 61 win team. But also Reggie announced his retirement in early February and attendance increased because of that.

        I don't want to focus everything on the attendance, but 12,600 shocked me

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Pacers vs Celts post game thread

          Well we beat a bad team at home like we were supposed to. I'd be feeling real good if we had sustained the 20 pt. lead and been able to emtpy the bench tonight.

          Jamaal had it going tonight and played his best game in quite some time (He was AWFUL during the late Celtic when he must have lost interest)

          There's not really a lot to breakdown from this one. Just a much needed win.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Pacers vs Celts post game thread

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            Remember back in October all the "fans" (not in this forum) who said they will never go to another Pacers game again as long as Jackson is on the team. I inferred that statement to mean two things. 1) when Jackson was gone they would come back. 2) that those "fans" used to go to games but stopped going because of Jackson.
            Regardless of who made that statement, it has nothing to do with the drop in attendance. It's just highly unlikely many of these "fans" who have vacated Conseco post on the internet very much.

            The "fans" that have left are not coming back soon. People attend games for different reasons...often not because they are hard core Pacer fans. They have tickets to take their clients out, for example. Many of those people are long gone because the team became an embarrassment to the general public (i.e. bad business) Other people attend games because of status. Now, some of them don't want to be associated with the club. Three years is a long time for a fair weather fan. Some of them have simply got fed up with the team and have changed the channel.

            Fortunately, things will get better from here on out.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Pacers vs Celts post game thread

              From the TV it looked terrible. The first thought I had was we were playing in Atlanta. I dont understand the fans staying away right now. We are winning more games than we are losing and Jack is gone.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Pacers vs Celts post game thread

                Originally posted by Ragnar View Post
                From the TV it looked terrible. The first thought I had was we were playing in Atlanta. I dont understand the fans staying away right now. We are winning more games than we are losing and Jack is gone.
                You don't lose fans overnight...and they don't return the next day. This should not be a shock to anyone. I think we all should be thankful it's not worse.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Pacers vs Celts post game thread

                  two things...

                  wow dunleavy sucks.

                  and wow, troy murphy sucks pretty bad too.

                  lol~

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Pacers vs Celts post game thread

                    Tinsley had a really good game tonight and if he played like this every night I could live with him. And I dont mean just his shots hitting. He wasnt forcing bad shots as much. He started out with some forced shots, and ended in the 4th with some bad shots. But during the rest of the game he was sharing the ball real well, with everyone, not just JO. He still gave away a lot of dribble penetration but made up for it with some good steals. He attacked the rim a lot instead of just settling for the running jumper like usual. He also did a good job of pushing the tempo and the team actually looked really good running the break at points in the game, of course some of this could be attributed to Boston's terrible D.

                    Speaking of Boston, I dont watch them that much but I was thoroughly unimpressed with Delonte West. Anyone who wants to replace Tinsley with this guy is crazy. Was he sick or something? I think I heard the commentators say that. Is he usually better than this? Even so, I dont think he would be much of an improvement over Tinsley.

                    Rawle looked a little bit more comfortable but I still cant wait for Marquis to get back.

                    How about Fosters jumper from the top of the key, did anyone else catch this? He didnt hesitate to shoot it and as a result he didnt look as clumsy as usual and his shooting form looked real good. He shot another one towards the end of the game that he missed, but I didnt cringe when he shot it and I could of swore it was going in.

                    Finally, I wished we could have seen more of Ike. He should have played in the 4th, but unfortunately we had that embarassing collaspse.

                    Oh well a wins a win.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Pacers vs Celts post game thread

                      Delonte West had the flu and was clearly struggling just running down the court once or twice.

                      Edit: where is everyone tonight. The game thread was very quiet - this post game thread is dead. Surely the weather kept everyone inside watching TV. Maybe everyone was watching "American Idol"

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Pacers vs Celts post game thread

                        Attendance: 12,641

                        i understand its cold and all but come on now... *shakes head*
                        If you havin' depth problems, I feel bad for you son; I got 99 problems but a bench ain't one! - Hicks
                        [/center]
                        @thatguyjoe84

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Pacers vs Celts post game thread

                          I'd post something about the game, but I'm too sad about the apparent break-up of the Gentlemen Jugglers. Sure the guy hit the 3 pointer while on the giant unicyle, but it's just not the same as a solo act.......
                          PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Pacers vs Celts post game thread

                            3 cheers for Tinsley tonight.

                            Having Troy Murphy has made my respect for Jeff Foster go up so much. I knew Jeff was a great defender, but I didn't really realize how good he was. I know Al Jefferson's stats were great tonight, and he was great, but Jeff really neutralized him. Jeff kept him from really going off on us tonight. He really defends all kinds of big men well.

                            I think we should go back to starting Jeff and bring Murph off the bench for a little bit of a scoring punch. I don't like Murph/Dun both in the starting lineup. I think Murphy would do better in the second unit with Quis on the floor at the same time. At the same time I do think Murphy and Tinsley are starting to develop something together. The high pick and roll they run is pretty effective, and Jamaal has been making the correct decision consistently in that play.

                            We need to throw out that play that JO used to run with Jack where he gets the ball in the low post and then Jack runs by him using him as a screener then JO sometimes dumps him the ball and sometimes faces up and goes one on one. We've tried to run it with him and Dunleavy at least twice a game, and it just doesn't work. We need to just run plays that spread the floor. That 2 man game doesn't work with Dunleavy.

                            Danny is getting more and more comfortable every game. I know he got in to foul trouble tonight and was frustrated, but he really was called for some terrible fouls, I thought he played pretty well. Just wait untill playoff time when he's really used to his role as the number 2 scorer. I truly believe he can be a legit 20 ppg scorer.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Pacers vs Celts post game thread

                              Originally posted by Isaac View Post
                              3 cheers for Tinsley tonight.

                              Having Troy Murphy has made my respect for Jeff Foster go up so much. I knew Jeff was a great defender, but I didn't really realize how good he was. I know Al Jefferson's stats were great tonight, and he was great, but Jeff really neutralized him. Jeff kept him from really going off on us tonight. He really defends all kinds of big men well.

                              I think we should go back to starting Jeff and bring Murph off the bench for a little bit of a scoring punch. I don't like Murph/Dun both in the starting lineup. I think Murphy would do better in the second unit with Quis on the floor at the same time. At the same time I do think Murphy and Tinsley are starting to develop something together. The high pick and roll they run is pretty effective, and Jamaal has been making the correct decision consistently in that play.

                              We need to throw out that play that JO used to run with Jack where he gets the ball in the low post and then Jack runs by him using him as a screener then JO sometimes dumps him the ball and sometimes faces up and goes one on one. We've tried to run it with him and Dunleavy at least twice a game, and it just doesn't work. We need to just run plays that spread the floor. That 2 man game doesn't work with Dunleavy.

                              Danny is getting more and more comfortable every game. I know he got in to foul trouble tonight and was frustrated, but he really was called for some terrible fouls, I thought he played pretty well. Just wait untill playoff time when he's really used to his role as the number 2 scorer. I truly believe he can be a legit 20 ppg scorer.
                              One thing I like about Carlisle is that he's flexible in terms of the offensive sets that the team runs. He has said in the past that the players and himself determine what plays are working and what isn't, and often change/discard the plays that aren't working.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X