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

ESPN - Weekend Dime with interesting Pacers info

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

  • ESPN - Weekend Dime with interesting Pacers info

    Found in Mark Stein's weekend dime located here.

    Indiana, meanwhile, is closer to sleeper territory than anyone else in the vicinity, inconsistent as the Pacers remain. Their 17-16 record as of Friday morning doesn't look bad at all when you consider that they've played 19 road games and 10 back-to-backs already, but Jermaine O'Neal sounded less than optimistic when he shared this pearl Thursday night:
    "We've had a lot of games this year where we've controlled the game all the way up until the fourth and then lose our damn mind. Why? ... We get up 10 points and we just go ballistic. Sit down and get some tape. Every time we hit a 10-point margin, we go ballistic. I can't understand it for the life of me."
    Jamaal Tinsley's decision-making, I'd say, has something to do with it, but I'd still put the O'Neal-Al Harrington-Danny Granger Pacers, with Rick Carlisle at the controls, ahead of the field.

    ...(snip)...

    "That's what's pissing me off," Jermaine O'Neal steamed. "We just need to play consistent basketball and we got the East."

    Also from the same article:




    "If I can't take this team to another level, then I truthfully believe that we should go our separate ways at the end of the season."
    Indiana's Jermaine O'Neal, clearly frustrated by the Pacers' up-and-down play in a 17-16 start, went on to reveal that he badly wants to stay a Pacer, telling Reggie Miller recently that he doesn't want to leave until he wins the championship that eluded Miller's Pacers, but O'Neal also disclosed that he has an agreement with management to "talk at the end of the season" and determine if a change is best for both parties.
    O'Neal, on this scorecard, looks like the least of Indiana's problems, playing the best defense of his life. Inconsistent play at the point, as referenced in Box 1, remains the Pacers' foremost trouble spot. Yet O'Neal acknowledges that he's "going to take the blame" for any struggles and "rightfully so."

  • #2
    Re: ESPN - Weekend Dime with interesting Pacers info

    Yeah, this is what Stein just repeated on NBA Kia Shootaround

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: ESPN - Weekend Dime with interesting Pacers info

      Get ready for it...










      We shoulda traded for Iverson.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: ESPN - Weekend Dime with interesting Pacers info

        Originally posted by Shade View Post
        We shoulda traded for Iverson.
        Not sure we had the draft picks/ expiring contracts to get it done. (assuming that's what they were after, not to mention being in the same conference)

        Besides that old issue (), this was an interesting view into JO's viewpoint. I'm fascinated with the possibilities for the Pacers down the stretch, whether it be trades, players setting into roles, or a shift in game philosophy. I'm especially watching to see if our guard play improves as trade talks heat up.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: ESPN - Weekend Dime with interesting Pacers info

          JO is losing it and I can't blame him. He is trying to light a fire under his team. I can see the writing on the wall right now IMO JO is a Pacer for life unless TPTB decide to do a full on rebuild which I think they don't think the franchise can withstand. JO wants to win so damn bad too, its crazy. Its beyond me how people could ever question his committment to winning.


          Comment


          • #6
            Re: ESPN - Weekend Dime with interesting Pacers info

            Originally posted by maragin View Post
            Not sure we had the draft picks/ expiring contracts to get it done. (assuming that's what they were after, not to mention being in the same conference)

            Besides that old issue (), this was an interesting view into JO's viewpoint. I'm fascinated with the possibilities for the Pacers down the stretch, whether it be trades, players setting into roles, or a shift in game philosophy. I'm especially watching to see if our guard play improves as trade talks heat up.

            We did before all the offseason moves! Croshere was expiring, and our pick went to Atl for Harrington. Only reason Den threw in the 2nd pick was b/c they needed to stay afloat during the suspensions! but yeah that's all old news!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: ESPN - Weekend Dime with interesting Pacers info

              Yep, we should have gotten JO some legit help here.
              Super Bowl XLI Champions
              2000 Eastern Conference Champions




              Comment


              • #8
                Re: ESPN - Weekend Dime with interesting Pacers info

                You can tell Jermaine doesnt want to play here anymore, but he doesnt want to come out and say it because he is classy like that.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: ESPN - Weekend Dime with interesting Pacers info

                  Originally posted by Dat Dude View Post
                  You can tell Jermaine doesnt want to play here anymore, but he doesnt want to come out and say it because he is classy like that.
                  Jerm, I think you are wrong here.

                  Originally posted by Jermaine O'Neal
                  Indiana's Jermaine O'Neal, clearly frustrated by the Pacers' up-and-down play in a 17-16 start, went on to reveal that he badly wants to stay a Pacer, telling Reggie Miller recently that he doesn't want to leave until he wins the championship that eluded Miller's Pacers
                  I think JO loves this city and this franchise, so much so, that hes willing to go somewhere else if that means a better future for us.


                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: ESPN - Weekend Dime with interesting Pacers info

                    Originally posted by indy0731 View Post
                    Jerm, I think you are wrong here.



                    I think JO loves this city and this franchise, so much so, that hes willing to go somewhere else if that means a better future for us.

                    I concur. If Donnie & Larry can find a decent deal for Tinsley and Jax, you best believe they're half way out the door! Sadly no one wants either of them!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: ESPN - Weekend Dime with interesting Pacers info

                      Originally posted by Shade View Post
                      Get ready for it...










                      We shoulda traded for Andre Miller.
                      Fixed.

                      I'll take less FGAs, more assists, and a better A/TO ratio, thank you.



                      You can tell Jermaine doesnt want to play here anymore
                      I got just the opposite impression. Confiding to Reggie about the issue tells me that he views himself as the next step of the Pacers legacy. Maybe he's had it with Bird leaning on him to prove something, or he's had it with the roster they've put around him recently.

                      But JO is playing as well as Reggie ever did right now. He has become a one-man force out there, his on-court attitude is better than ever, and his words sound more like a leader than ever as well. As much as he's talked the role before, it still sounds more in touch with the level of superstar responsibility he's taken on.

                      Honestly I think JO took a big step forward as a player in getting through the last 2 years. He's better than he was even before the injuries.

                      TPTB would be outright idiots not to try to keep him and get the rest of the situation in order.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: ESPN - Weekend Dime with interesting Pacers info

                        I've been all over the place in my feelings about Jermaine O'Neal, but lately they've been positive about him, and I feel for him when I read these things after seeing him play the way he has been playing. I think while there definitely was, and maybe partially still is, a part of O'Neal that looks out for him above everyone else, that it's either taken a back-seat or gone completely in the wake of wanting to do what's best for this team.

                        I know when he complained early in the year that many (including myself) took it to be a selfish act, but the more I've watched this season, and the more I've thought about it, my mind has changed. I think he said it because he honestly felt it would make the team better, not just him. I can't point specifically to several reasons why I feel the way I do, it's largely what my gut/heart tell me based upon everything I have seen. However, one specific thing I can point to is O'Neal's defensive play.

                        He's never been this good before on that end of the floor, and when I think back to past moments combined with how he's acted during important moments in games this year, I now believe that he was clutch all along, just not where you'd expect. He makes big defensive plays in the clutch. Sure, I'd want him to be as clutch offensively, but that's extremely difficult to do when you play as a big man (I firmly believe clutch offense is the domain of the little man).

                        Anyway, when I think about the effort (sorry, Jay) he's displayed in this area all season, it tells me he truly, honestly gives a **** about winning, and is trying his damnedest to make it happen. Hell, even on the other side of the ball he shows flashes of becoming a better passer (thought still not consistently enough for me to praise it).

                        At this point, I think if he becomes consistently the better passer he sometimes is, and brings a versatile, non-stagnant offensive repertoire to each game, he will be at Tim Duncan/Kevin Garnett level, and I've never placed him there before in my mind.

                        With all of that said, I hope we can get some true quality in at the 1 and 2 before we lose him before his time is up in this league; I think it will be seen as a mistake within 5 years of it happening if what he's showing me lately is truly a sign of what he will bring until he declines. We need to do something soon.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: ESPN - Weekend Dime with interesting Pacers info

                          All those good young PGs in the draft! Williams, Rondo, Farmar.. glad we didn't need a PG

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: ESPN - Weekend Dime with interesting Pacers info

                            Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
                            All those good young PGs in the draft! Williams, Rondo, Farmar.. glad we didn't need a PG
                            .....
                            Lance is finally home. Whether he becomes our starting PG or he's 6th man, he's getting big minutes and he's here to stay. #llortontnia

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: ESPN - Weekend Dime with interesting Pacers info

                              We get it Seth, you dont like Iverson.

                              I personally dont like the guy (I have met him, he is a good guy but not someone who I would look at as a "role model") but I happen to think he would have been a great fit.

                              Guess what. He has already been traded, and short of me becoming GM for the Nuggets and trade Melo and Iverson for Sarunas we can stop talking about Iverson.

                              I realize it is a message board, and trust me Shade I am as sick as anyone of being stuck in mediocracy, but we are not going to get Iverson.

                              ______________________

                              As for the initial post JO has said the same thing the last couple of years. He has really stepped his game up, now it is up to managment to do the same.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X