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:
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

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 Raptors - the Raptors angle

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Post Game Raptors - the Raptors angle

    I've been following the Raptors all season long cause they
    1. Have Anthony Parker
    2. Publish torrents of all their games, so I can follow easily

    And since I've been following the Pacers for the past year and a half or so, and I got to watch the game live on the internet - I'd like to share my perspective:

    To me it's pretty amazing how these 2 players are similar. They play the role of the bigman star of the team who need to have good games for their teams to succeed. Last night Bosh had a below average game. He was forcing too much, settling for jumpers, and being his usual non-aggressive self on defence. O'neal was playing better. Probably the best style I've seen from him. Posting up and passing out. Barely forcing fadeaways, and always keeping the Raps interior defense on its heels. JO is the one who dished out to Granger's 3rd quarter 3's, and JO was the one playing great defense on Bosh. He seems more mature, and more understanding of his new role. Really surprised me.

    Granger, Quis
    These guys obviously profitted from the trade in playing time, but more importantly in playing style, and in definitive roles. Quis penetrates and dishes. Danny shoots 3's. They both had very good games (especially Danny hitting a wild %, and Quis with that prayer shot that went in). It's obvious they're confidence levels are high and they are finally playing to their potential.

    New guys - Dunleavy, Murphy
    Dunleavy was ok. Not great, but played solid. I'm not sure there's much more to his game than what he's giving right now. 15 points on so-so shooting, a few rebs, some assists in 30 minutes. Overall he shares the ball and doesnt force nearly as much as Jax or Al. Murphy was superb IMO. "Foster with a midrange jumper" is an understatement. His rebounding was excellent, his defense was great - both the man to man, but especially the help on screens, which is what the Raps really like to do. His "midrange" extends almost to the 3 point line. If he keeps this up - he's clearly going to help the Pacers A LOT. Diogu, by the way, although didnt play a lot showed what he's about - inside presence with a body not big enough IMO. Unless he develops a midrange shot and some ball handling - he'll see more bench than court. Overall - I'd say the trade is REALLY working out so far for the Pacers.

    A bit about the Raptors
    The Raps are going up. 3 straight wins before this game (without TJ Ford), and 7-3 in the last 10. Their style of play dictates the ball be in the PGs hands to initiate, which primarily means penetrate or "get the ball to Bosh". On rare occasions do they use the wings or have any other go-to plays. It's sufficient when Bosh can dominate, but it's not good enough when Bosh is struggling or facing a strong defensive opponent, like last night. Personally IMO they're usage of Anthony Parker is almost outrageous. I'm pretty sure next year when Mitchell will be out Parker's role will be a much more productive one (btw - what a DUNK on O'neal!). Bargnani is learning, Garbo is still adjusting, Ford, Calderon, Bosh, Graham - they're still kids. Toronto needs a rebounding presence - a "banger" (somewhat like Murphy or Foster), and a coach to design some plays for this group of talented players - and they can really become a threat.

    What won the game for the Pacers
    I'll give a few reasons off the top of my head:
    1. Toronto coming off a back-to-back. Not surprising the Pacers made their run late 3rd early 4th, and the Raps didnt have the gas for a run back.
    2. Excellent shooting from the Pacers side - 50% 3's (11-22). 2nd half percentages were outstanding, and not for the lack of defense.
    3. Clutch (& lucky) daggers from Armstrong (7 straight points early 4th to push lead to 10+), Marquis (THE shot) and Tinsley (2 3's to seal the deal)
    4. Defending Bosh - Chris had a rough day at the office against Murphy and Oneal
    5. JO's share-the-ball winning strategy
    6. Defensive rebounding, especially from Murphy & Foster. It was 1&Done all night for the Raps.

    It was a closer game than the final score suggests. In a 7-game series I'm not sure which team prevails, and if you take a look at the standings - it might just come to that...

  • #2
    Re: Post Game Raptors - the Raptors angle

    Well with all due respect to Toronto, I actually like what they are trying to do and are building up there, I think we normally should win a 7-game series against them.

    Why? Because, I think, our rebounding, team defence and experience are superior to what Toronto can put against that. I am also VERY pleasantly surprised by the improvement on our ballhandling and game smarts. Also the team post-trade is still gelling and we haven't even seen Keith yet who might give us an extra defensive chip in the backcourt.

    I realize Ford wasn't in the game which also was major for us. The second night of a back-to-back and an away game for Toronto, offcourse, also played roles here. I still think we would win a playoff-series against the Raptors 4-2 or if pressed maybe 4-3.

    It doesn't matter though, because it's all pure speculation.

    I must say that I am surprised that on some Toronto boards Joey Graham is getting so much flak from the fans. A lot of them continously curse Babcock for not taking Danny with two picks ahead of us at 16.


    2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion,

    2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion,

    2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up,


    • #3
      Re: Post Game Raptors - the Raptors angle

      NPF, I gotta say, Anthony Parker is a better player than I remembered. He's really improved over the years. I'd be interested to see what he'd do defensively against a real 2-guard (he had to guard Dunleavy, which isn't very hard), but his offense is right there.

      A good pickup for the Raptors. I wish we'd signed him instead of Sarunas.
      This space for rent.


      • #4
        Re: Post Game Raptors - the Raptors angle

        I don't know why you say Diogu needs to develop a midrange jumper, that's one of the strongest aspects of his game. He has great ability to hit out to 18 feet.


        • #5
          Re: Post Game Raptors - the Raptors angle

          Originally posted by Anthem View Post
          NPF, I gotta say, Anthony Parker is a better player than I remembered. He's really improved over the years. I'd be interested to see what he'd do defensively against a real 2-guard (he had to guard Dunleavy, which isn't very hard), but his offense is right there.

          A good pickup for the Raptors. I wish we'd signed him instead of Sarunas.
          I wished we signed both Sarunas and Parker to reunite the Maccabi trio!

          Further on I wish you stop now with your pure hatred on Sarunas, the guy is gone but you still can't stop saying negative things about him. Grow up Anthem (which by the way was a good Japanese metal band in the eighties)!
          Maceo Baston's #1 fan on Pacers Digest!


          • #6
            Re: Post Game Raptors - the Raptors angle

            Parker's got the 'dunk of the night'.



            • #7
              Re: Post Game Raptors - the Raptors angle

              how do you get ahold of the torrents? would love to download a few pacer games, even if it is only when the play the raptors....???


              • #8
                Re: Post Game Raptors - the Raptors angle

                Parker was 2-time Euroleague MVP. Only a blind scout could miss him ("hmmm who's that "Nash" character - he seems pretty good")...
                My guess is more contract-money oriented issues were involved.

                If you'd like to re-unite, you should've gotten Sarunas, Baston, Parker and ... Vujcic. Once again - only blind scouts wouldn't acknowledge Nikola Vujcic as the current best Center in the Euroleague. Still quite young, and playing his best ball ever. He's the last remainder of the best Maccabi team ever.

                Anyway, you can get the torrents at , and there's a link there to another torrent site called that also has some.


                • #9
                  Re: Post Game Raptors - the Raptors angle

                  Originally posted by Alpolloloco View Post
                  Further on I wish you stop now with your pure hatred on Sarunas, the guy is gone but you still can't stop saying negative things about him. Grow up Anthem (which by the way was a good Japanese metal band in the eighties)!
                  What the heck? I went out of my way to say I was wrong about Parker, and the only thing you read was that I hate Sarunas?

                  We could have had Saras or Parker, but not both. It really is an either-or proposition. You can't sign bunches of guys during the same season... the salary cap just doesn't work that way. It was public knowledge that Bird was talking both to Sarunas and to Parker... I was just saying that I wish we'd used our exception on Parker instead of Sarunas. That doesn't mean I hate him.
                  This space for rent.