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

Post Game Thread 21: Cavs-Pacers

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

  • Post Game Thread 21: Cavs-Pacers

    First comment: If DG is to be at some point our lock-down perimeter defender, I see no indication that he has it in him. I know there's no stopping LeBron, but I just saw no attempt from DG tonight.

    I don't think the 3rd yr thing is valid. He's had enough time to at least develop a consistent mindset. And I'm not even complaining about his offense tonight.
    I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

    -Emiliano Zapata

  • #2
    Re: Post Game Thread 21: Cavs-Pacers

    hey good point danny just nothim self when oneal is in focus MHO .. rush shouldnt been playing we got no back up at point even tough owens play last 3 mins of game we need see more from him and graham
    IF YOU A PACER FAN DONT BASH TO THE PACERS..!!!!!

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Post Game Thread 21: Cavs-Pacers

      Here is what I can deduce:

      We aren't a very good rebounding team with Foster, and dare I say Hulk, out. JO needs to do way better than four rebounds if neither of those guys are playing. Yes JO played well offensively but we don't pay him franchise money to not have a strong presence in more than a couple aspects of the game.

      Kareem Rush is terrible and has no business being in the NBA. Stephen Graham should have his minutes for a short time as an experiment.

      Granger did not show up on either side of the ball.

      Dunleavy played well offensively but was especially poor defensively tonight.

      What most glaringly shows how bad our defense is is the fact that Larry Hughes, who in the last few years has been shown to be made of nothing but paper, lights us up for 30 points.

      No defense + no rebounding or control of the paint + one of your primary options not showing up= terrible loss, whether it be 8th grade basketball or the NBA.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Post Game Thread 21: Cavs-Pacers

        Same ole story... Cavs hit the 3, and we lose.

        It's amazing how open Lebron gets his teammates.

        Larry Hughes actually played how the Cavs expected him to play for the 1st time in years... of course it was against us.

        They had lost 6 in a row without Lebron and a few players, you knew they would come out strong is his return, and once again... of course it was against the Pacers. Look at what we did to the Jazz after losing 6 in a row.

        We'll be alright. Gotta bounce back at home vs. a Chicago team that's starting to play better.

        I agree Graham needs Rush's minutes for the time being.

        I don't mind Quis playing the point, I thought he and Dun Dun did pretty well together tonight.

        Our offseason acquisitions need to be benched and get some time to sit and think about how poorly they've shot!

        JO played well on the offensive and defensive side... just needs to rebound.

        Dunleavy played well, but didn't stand a chance against Lebron... but then again who does.

        Danny played well... in garbage time... blah! He has to get going early or he just seems lost out there.

        Tinsley took a couple terrible shots early, but had a decent game.

        Quis needs to be more agressive offensively.

        Murph and Shawne played alright. I watched the game, but I don't remember them too much, so i could be wrong.

        Definitely missed Foster hustle and rebounding wise.

        Missed Hulk some too. He's played pretty well this season.

        All in all, it's just a loss... just gotta rebound at home!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Post Game Thread 21: Cavs-Pacers

          Here's how stupid I am:

          I thought Kareem Rush would challenge Dun for a starting spot, and be (at the very worst) a great backup SG.
          This space for rent.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Post Game Thread 21: Cavs-Pacers

            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
            Here's how stupid I am:

            I thought Kareem Rush would challenge Dun for a starting spot, and be (at the very worst) a great backup SG.
            Yeah that was quite dumb. Rush shouldn't even be in the NBA.


            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Post Game Thread 21: Cavs-Pacers

              We had a lot go against us even before the tip off so I didn't expect to win, but we played a lot worse than I expected.

              JO was the only really impressive guy. I'm not too bothered about his lack of boards seeing he played so few minutes. Taking a few charges made up for it.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Post Game Thread 21: Cavs-Pacers

                Holy crap I didn't realize Rush played TWENTY FIVE minutes. That is obscene. He shouldn't even be playing for 25 seconds.


                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Post Game Thread 21: Cavs-Pacers

                  I am not sure Larry should be in charge of finding new players. Maybe he can replace the equipment guy until his elbows mend. I am not upset with this loss, the Pacers are going to be all over the place this year, but rush, and diener are pretty bad pickups by Larry. Add Cabage and we got garbage soup.
                  No matter how much success Larry Bird attains in Indiana he'll never top that first command to fire Thomas. -Peter Vecsey. NY Post 12/4/07

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Post Game Thread 21: Cavs-Pacers

                    That was the worst I've seen the pacers play all season that including the lakers and the toronto games. After about the millionth uncontested layup by sasha pavlovic, larry hughes, and lebron james I flipped the channel a couple minutes into the 3rd. It was pretty bad we'd go on some mini-run to cut the lead to 10-12 Hughes, Varejao, and James would come back in and push the lead back up to 20 in about 2 minutes. We had so many empty posessions, no rebounding, no defense, I'll watch a full basketball game unfortunately there wasn't one on tonight.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Post Game Thread 21: Cavs-Pacers

                      we played defense so bad tonight that dunleavy looked like the best defender out there.... then he got burnt so many times by larry hughes and Bron Bron

                      Jeff Foster m.I.A.... daamn fsn ohiooo guys never mention injuries on the other team, all they cared about is their cavs and how theyre so happy to get Verajao back..

                      Obie really put a lot of pressure in Dun DUn today to stop LH and LB, he couldnt even stand to sit Dun through the rest of the 3rd quarter when Mike is already in foul trouble..

                      DG really played terrible, JT had a lot of bad decisions, but again he has been playing beast the past week or so, so i really won;t blame him.. JO i think is finally getting back to like a good 90%..

                      BUlls come to Indy tomrrow to loose?? Haha
                      sigpic

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Post Game Thread 21: Cavs-Pacers

                        I had to miss the game live, but had a DVR recording it.

                        Unfortunately, that's on Dish and the rain was enough to deny me everything beyond the first 8 minutes of the game.

                        I'm betting starting Troy Murphy instead of Jeff Foster, AND not having David/Ike had a big part to do with things regardless of how good/bad the rest were.

                        How did Tinsley do tonight?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Post Game Thread 21: Cavs-Pacers

                          Throw this one away, and gear up for Chicago.
                          The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
                          http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
                          RSS Feed
                          Subscribe via iTunes

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Post Game Thread 21: Cavs-Pacers

                            Kareem Rush is a joke.

                            I said to my mate...why put on rush now...we need defense..why not put on quis??

                            AUSTRALIA'S NO.1 PACER FAN

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Post Game Thread 21: Cavs-Pacers

                              Originally posted by Mal View Post
                              I had to miss the game live, but had a DVR recording it.

                              Unfortunately, that's on Dish and the rain was enough to deny me everything beyond the first 8 minutes of the game.

                              I'm betting starting Troy Murphy instead of Jeff Foster, AND not having David/Ike had a big part to do with things regardless of how good/bad the rest were.

                              How did Tinsley do tonight?
                              Not sure if you missed it....but Foster was out due to injury. Murphy played....like always....cuz JO'B had no choice to play him.

                              Although JONeal shot a very Un-JONeal-like 57% from the field....and ( as suggested ) took some charges....when our best rebounders are out.....he should be pulling down more then 4 rebounds. I am guessing that he is still about 80% fully recovered.....but he's pulled down 6 and 4 rebounds in the last 2 games.

                              Also....I am guessing that Marquis ( like always ) was injured in some fashion....cuz he only played 15 minutes......which should explain why Rush played for 25 minutes on an astounding 1-8 shooting.

                              BTW....all I want for Christmas is a solid perimeter defender. Granger and Marquis isn't cutting it. When the opposing team shoots 50% from the 3pt line, it just plain sucks
                              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X