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

Pacers vs Knicks hype is starting.

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Pacers vs Knicks hype is starting.



    February 2, 2004 -- Isiah Thomas won't discuss rival Larry Bird and the looming Pacers' showdown until today.
    But Knicks developmental coach George Glymph, Jermaine O'Neal's high school coach who spent three seasons in Indiana before following Isiah here, knows emotions will bubble at the Garden tomorrow.

    Bird runs the Eastern Conference's dominant team that Isiah built for him. Tomorrow, the Pacers (35-13) face Isiah's upstart Knicks, who are tied for the seventh seed with Boston, in a preview of a potential first-round matchup.

    "You know [Isiah] is looking forward to it," Glymph told The Post. "Just like those Pacers are going to look forward to seeing Isiah and saying, 'This is what you built, and this is what we're going to do to you.'

    The Isiah/Bird rivalry is well-documented, dating to their '80s playing days when Thomas made the infamous remark that Larry Legend would be just another player if he were black. When Bird took over the Pacers in mid-July, he and the Pacers coach shook hands at the podium, but neither could manage even a forced smile.

    Bird fired Thomas on Aug. 27, citing Isiah's failing to communicate with him. Glymph, O'Neal's high school coach, was soon on his way out too, along with Knicks assistant Mark Aguirre. Bird declined comment yesterday through a spokesman, who said the Pacers executive "doesn't want to get caught up in it."

    "Larry had his game plan," Glymph said. "It's not about a person's feelings. It will be emotional. They are a great team. It's gratifying to feel part of building that and there's gratification if you could beat them."

    During his introductory press conference as Knicks president, Isiah said of Bird, "I wanted to beat him as a player and I want to beat him now."

    O'Neal believes Bird kept Isiah around just long enough for the Pacers' All-Star big man to re-sign as a free agent. In this month's "Slam" magazine, O'Neal said, "If I would've known that Isiah wasn't going to be back, I would have signed with San Antonio. That's a fact. I was pretty upset. But time heals everything."

    Said Glymph, "Jermaine looks at Isiah as a father figure. He was buried on the bench in Portland and Isiah traded for him. He'll never forget how he believed in him."

    Glymph, a high-school coaching legend in South Carolina, has never been on the opposite side of O'Neal — from Eau Claire High School, where he coached 27 years, to the Blazers, where he worked one season working with O'Neal, to the Pacers. "I've never been in this situation before, I don't know how I'll feel," he said.

    When Isiah got canned, Pacers prez Donnie Walsh kept Glymph on, re-assigning him to the scouting department. "I never got an assignment, then I got the call from Isiah," Glymph said. "He said to me the day he got fired, 'If I go someplace, I want you to join me.' "

    Isiah has certainly ruffled feathers here.

    "Whenever you come into a situation and make changes, there's going to be bruised feelings," Glymph said. "He's done what he thinks he had to do. People second-guess whatever you do, but it's working."

  • #2
    Re: Pacers vs Knicks hype is starting.

    Pacers to Provide Test Of Knicks' New Offense

    By Greg Logan

    February 2, 2004

    Since Isiah Thomas took over as president of the Knicks, traded for Stephon Marbury and hired Lenny Wilkens as the replacement for coach Don Chaney, the trend has been steadily upward in the weak Atlantic Division.

    But for all the progress made by the Knicks during the easiest portion of their schedule, they are only 3-6 against winning teams since Thomas took charge.

    As important as it was for the Knicks (22-27) to win their back-to-back weekend set with Boston and Phoenix, their biggest test yet comes against Indiana tomorrow night at Madison Square Garden. The Pacers (35-13) have the best record in the Eastern Conference, including a 2-0 mark against the Knicks.

    Now that the Knicks have Marbury, there's new life for a rivalry that was as heated as any during the '90s. "It's a huge game," said Penny Hardaway, who accompanied Marbury in the trade with Phoenix. "It's going to be a war. It's going to be like a playoff game because those guys are the best team in the Eastern Conference and they're going to be ready to come in here and win."

    Although the Knicks beat two other losing teams in the Celtics and Suns, they played so well offensively that it indicated they are beginning to come together now that they've had some practice time with Wilkens and are learning Marbury's playing style. The way Marbury ignited the offense in the second quarter of both weekend wins shows he is developing a feel for when to assert himself.

    Marbury scored 33 of his 35 points against Phoenix in the first three quarters. "I think Stephon had a nice rhythm to his game and did a good job of understanding when we needed to score and when to step up and hit shots," said Keith Van Horn, who had 30 points, 12 rebounds and 7 assists. "He's really done a good job of utilizing what this team needs at a particular moment in the game. He's shown it in a lot of games this year."

    The Knicks will be without Allan Houston (right knee), but he struggled in both losses to Indiana while being guarded by stopper Ron Artest. Now Van Horn is likely to be the object of Artest's attention, but the forward has broken out of a five-game slump with two strong outings.

    If there were questions about how well Marbury and Van Horn would work together, their 65-point explosion against the Suns should put that to rest.

    What's With Williams? There isn't much playing time behind Stephon Marbury at point guard, but second-year backup Frank Williams is wondering why his time has all but vanished under Lenny Wilkens, who has been going with veteran Moochie Norris. The Suns game marked the third time Williams did not play in nine games under Wilkens, who has given him no explanation.

    "You always want to know what's going on," said Williams, who indicated he's thinking of talking to Wilkens or team president Isiah Thomas today about the situation. "If you don't talk to someone, how do they know what to do or how to change anything?"

    Asked if it seems Wilkens has more faith in established veterans, Williams said: "I don't know yet. I'm still trying to see where he's going with it. It's early to try to judge. At the same time, I would like to be out there."


    • #3
      Re: Pacers vs Knicks hype is starting.

      Wait did Isiah trade for Jermaine or did Donnie?


      • #4
        Re: Pacers vs Knicks hype is starting.

        There are some incredible statements in the first article. About how Isiah traded for J.O and about how Isiah built the current Pacers team.

        isiah was the coach and he deserves some credit for the pacers current success, but Donnie Walsh built the current team and he made the J.O trade. Isiah had only been the pacers coach for about 5 weeks when J.O was traded for


        • #5
          Re: Pacers vs Knicks hype is starting.

          Wait did Isiah trade for Jermaine or did Donnie?
          Isiah had nothing to do with that. I bet he THINKS it was completely his doing though.
          I doubt he thinks that but I am sure he wants us to think that. Of course he is not responsible for the writers miss statements.


          • #6
            Re: Pacers vs Knicks hype is starting.

            They sure are giving Isiah a lot of credit for the job Donnie Walsh did.
            I was thinking the same thing.

            I was reading through and thinking "Isiah traded for him? Try again!"


            • #7
              Re: Pacers vs Knicks hype is starting.

              Wait did Isiah trade for Jermaine or did Donnie?

              It's a joke to think otherwise (that's not directed at you, btw)


              • #8
                Re: Pacers vs Knicks hype is starting.

                Wait did Isiah trade for Jermaine or did Donnie?

                It's a joke to think otherwise (that's not directed at you, btw)
                I know it was Donnie I was just pointing out the absurdity. I think it is more likely that Rick had something to do with it than Isiah since Rick was the one who was with him as a rookie and Rick was there right before we went and got him. But I would still give the credit to Donnie. It was a bold move for sure and I doubt that a first time first year coach would have had the pull to make it happen.


                • #9
                  Re: Pacers vs Knicks hype is starting.

                  Isiah did not even like the trade. He said all the right things at the time but kept lamenting all season long how he wished we had a Dale Davis like player on our team.

                  Even at the press conferance to announce the trade Isiah made the statement that he understood why the trade was done & looked forward to working with Jermaine. He just wished the team could have kept Dale.

                  So, no. Isiah had nothing to do with that trade other than being on the recieving end of it.

                  Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13


                  • #10
                    Re: Pacers vs Knicks hype is starting.

                    well, you know how it is with some writers. never let the facts get in the way of a good story.

                    funny, glymph is quoted as saying isiah built the team.

                    "You know [Isiah] is looking forward to it," Glymph told The Post. "Just like those Pacers are going to look forward to seeing Isiah and saying, 'This is what you built, and this is what we're going to do to you.'
                    you'd think he'd know better...


                    • #11
                      Re: Pacers vs Knicks hype is starting.

                      Goofy stuff.

                      I'm waiting for the Knicks board I'm on to get going. So far it hasn't all that much. Most of them are fairly intelligent and while it's a big game from NY's perspective I think they realize that to Indy (with the exception of Reggie) it's pretty much just another game.

                      For us it's a measuring stick. I just hope Indy plays their game so we can get some reality setting in. Even without JO, if you defend like you can we'll have a lot of trouble.
                      The poster formerly known as Rimfire