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

Excellent preview of the NBA Finals by JVG

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Excellent preview of the NBA Finals by JVG

    I agree with every word of this


    Van Gundy: Celtics defense will give Lakers a Finals test

    By Jeff Van Gundy, as told to USA TODAY

    I know a lot of people are happy that the NBA Finals are the Boston Celtics and Los Angeles Lakers, but I don't really get into that as much. Instead, I see it like these are the two best teams. That's good for the NBA, proving the regular season is worth something. I also like the fact that it's a contrast between what I think is by far the best offensive team, the Lakers, against by far the best defensive team, the Celtics.

    Los Angeles has the most talented roster in the NBA, even without, arguably, their third-best player in center Andrew Bynum (out with a left knee injury). L.A. is on the verge of being a championship-caliber team for the foreseeable future.

    I think the Lakers will win the series. Their offense has a lot of flexibility in taking advantage of their own players' strengths and mismatches that occur, and they have the ultimate closer in Kobe Bryant.

    But to make the case for the Celtics, the biggest thing they have going for them is their defense. When you have a great defense, solid rebounding and you keep your turnovers low, you won't beat yourself and you have a chance to win.

    Very few coaches would give an assistant total autonomy over an entire offense or defense. But Boston's Doc Rivers felt comfortable enough in himself to give first-year assistant coach Tom Thibodeau the responsibility of running the Celtics defense. Between Thibodeau's attention to detail and Kevin Garnett's passion and intensity, they have a defensive scheme that fits their personnel.

    They've played, without question, with the most urgency and the most tenacity of any team in the NBA from the preseason until now.

    Garnett sets that tone with his competitiveness and unselfishness. He's one of the great big-man jump-shooters to play the game. From 18 feet in, he has tremendous efficiency. He has good enough lateral quickness and length to give Lamar Odom trouble. His lateral quickness gives Boston the ability to play different schemes against the pick-and-roll.

    Pierce has improved dramatically from his rookie year. He came in as a great scorer; now he's a great all-around player. He rebounds, he's a much better ballhandler and passer, his defense is very good and he has a tremendous competitive spirit. He's their best offensive option when the play breaks down.

    Ray Allen has a difficult matchup if he's the one assigned to Bryant. He got things going offensively in Games 5 and 6 of the Detroit series, which was a good sign for them. In Game 5, up one, six seconds on the shot clock, his jump shot off the baseline out-of-bounds play was the defining moment of that series.

    When Allen is shooting well, it makes Bryant have to play at both ends. Now, I wouldn't be surprised to see Bryant play Rajon Rondo and Derek Fisher guard Ray Allen to conserve Bryant's energy.

    Boston must limit Bryant's layups and free throws, but play him straight-up until late in the game. The best thing you can do when you're playing a great player is limit everybody else for 3 quarters, then hit him with double-teams late.

    Bryant wants to do it just the opposite; he wants to be a playmaker early, get everyone involved so that if he's double-teamed late, they're ready to shoot-and-make. And then he wants to be the closer.

    The best way to play Pau Gasol is with size. Make him face up to the basket. I'd give him an extra cushion and encourage him to shoot the jumper. Celtics center Kendrick Perkins' length could bother him, but he's a tough cover.

    As far as the 2-3-2 Finals schedule format, I still think the best team wins. But without question, that format benefits the home team. If you split the first two games and win one of three on the road, you come home down 3-2 but with two home games to close it out. That's a great advantage to the Celtics.

    What is the key to the series for Boston? To win a championship, you have to do a lot of things right. To narrow it down to one or two things doesn't make sense to me as a coach. I wish it were that simple. If it were, you could focus all your energy on that.

    The keys to winning basketball games are always the same: Shoot a better true shooting percentage than your opponent (incorporating three-point shooting into the equation), make more free throws, have fewer turnovers and outrebound your opponent on a percentage basis.


    As told to USA TODAY's Chris Colston

  • #2
    Re: Excellent preview of the NBA Finals by JVG

    I just don't see Perkins playing the Kobe/Gasol pick'n'roll better than Duncan. Which Duncan was too slow to sink after the hedge.

    Odom is the X factor. Eventually Gasol will go up against Garnett. After that I really see Odom taking advantage of whoever plays him. Is this the series that PJ Brown gets more minutes?

    I think that Rajon and Ray Allen are vital on both ends. Rajon plays well one on one when his player has the ball. But he can't lose Fisher or Farmar. Allen needs to play hands on with whomever he is guarding. I just think that he is a defensive liability more so this series than against the Pistons, because of the strength of the Laker guards.


    • #3
      Re: Excellent preview of the NBA Finals by JVG

      Boston is the more veteran team, the better defensive team, and has just enough scoring options.

      I predict the Celts in 6


      • #4
        Re: Excellent preview of the NBA Finals by JVG

        I've become a big JVG fan in the last several years. If he goes back to coaching, fine... but I like having him on the press side of things.


        • #5
          Re: Excellent preview of the NBA Finals by JVG

          It seems to me that when Rondo plays well the Celtics win and when he doesn't the Celts lose. I'm sure you can say the same thing with some of their other players, but he seems to be the key and most unpredictable.

          Does anyone else think that this series is getting more pre-series hype/buzz of any Finals series in a long, long time. Usually right around now everyone's either complaning about the long layoff or asking the question why are they playing basketball when it is 90 degrees out. Should be interesting to see the ratings of this series. It is always really imnportant that game 1 is a close and exciting game because a lot of people will tune in tonight
          Last edited by Unclebuck; 06-05-2008, 01:49 PM.


          • #6
            Re: Excellent preview of the NBA Finals by JVG

            Originally posted by intridcold View Post
            I just don't see Perkins playing the Kobe/Gasol pick'n'roll better than Duncan. Which Duncan was too slow to sink after the hedge.

            Odom is the X factor. Eventually Gasol will go up against Garnett. After that I really see Odom taking advantage of whoever plays him. Is this the series that PJ Brown gets more minutes?

            I think that Rajon and Ray Allen are vital on both ends. Rajon plays well one on one when his player has the ball. But he can't lose Fisher or Farmar. Allen needs to play hands on with whomever he is guarding. I just think that he is a defensive liability more so this series than against the Pistons, because of the strength of the Laker guards.
            I think I did a decent pre-series assesment by the game one results.


            • #7
              Re: Excellent preview of the NBA Finals by JVG

              Buck, I've felt all along that it was Rondo's key presence that created the wacky home-road issues Boston was having. Young players tend to react more to the home/road status, and if everything you do hinges on that player you're going to feel it.

              Obviously he's not their star, but even a minor bolt can hold your whole system together.