Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

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

  • #61
    Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

    Originally posted by joeyd View Post
    Can't really tell who the leaders on this team are without really being in on the locker room conversations. Could be Jeff, could be Danny. Doesn't have to be someone that is a starter or a star of the team. But either way, you hope that the important points are being made is such a way that it doesn't alienate your teammates.

    As for the other posts about starting the Goon Squad, starting them would mean more minutes for them, which may or may not be bad on an individual player basis (e.g., Jeff may not be able to take the extra pounding that 30+ minutes per game might bring). Why risk injury or prolonged debilitation?

    On the other hand, many posters have complained that the younsters should play more. Although we could have to endure tons more blowouts that way.

    Despite it being a critical point in the season, to put George in the starting line up could be great. I'm sure we would all be satisfied with an effort by Vogel to introduce a player into either line. It doesn't have to be permanent, but test it out one game.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

      Originally posted by Thingfish View Post
      I hear ya...

      Uh not sure on the PS. The question didn't come out right I think. Are you saying the Pacers all went to the night club with Brandon Rush the night before the game?

      Yes...Bingo!ha

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

        Oh irrationality, how I hate thee

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

          I don't think Jeff Foster particularly helps the defense.... and his offense is questionable at best...

          ...I'm not sure I like seeing Lance get the minutes he's getting unless we're giving up on the playoffs and building for the future. I think Lance either should've been getting minutes all along and slowly building them this season, or they needed to consider keeping him on ice the entire year... and/or just dressing him for garbage minutes this season. What I'm saying is I think he throws a monkey wrench into the works trying to suddenly carve out meaningful minutes for him.

          I think it throws a kink into the chemistry. I also think the 'not happening' trade talk leaking out hurt chemistry.

          To me, the team is actually being ran like it's a developing team and the playoffs aren't really the goal now. I'm fine with that to a point, although I think for this team the playoffs are realistically a goal without O'Brien here. So it surprises me to see the organization actually acting like the playoffs aren't really 'the' goal afterall. Where was that attitude during the 4 wasted O'Brien years? (Technically, year 1 maybe wasn't wasted... the rest IMHO were a waste of everyone's time).

          There's going to be ups and downs when you're finding developmental minutes for players and using your youth. It's hard to complain when I think that's what should've been done for some time. And with the improved coaching, and smart use of our players, the playoffs were a realistic thought for this season (once O'Brien was gone). But instead we seemed to have decided developing players is more important than the playoffs this season. Possibly, that attitude has also created a chemistry issue among the players.

          Oh well... I just want them to stick with a real plan and see it through. If it's developmental minutes and taking our lumps, so be it. But then let's not panic if the developmental minutes approach leads to some losses and the loss of the playoff goal.
          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

          ------

          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

          -John Wooden

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

            Originally posted by Bball View Post
            I don't think Jeff Foster particularly helps the defense.... and his offense is questionable at best...

            ...I'm not sure I like seeing Lance get the minutes he's getting unless we're giving up on the playoffs and building for the future. I think Lance either should've been getting minutes all along and slowly building them this season, or they needed to consider keeping him on ice the entire year... and/or just dressing him for garbage minutes this season. What I'm saying is I think he throws a monkey wrench into the works trying to suddenly carve out meaningful minutes for him.

            I think it throws a kink into the chemistry. I also think the 'not happening' trade talk leaking out hurt chemistry.

            To me, the team is actually being ran like it's a developing team and the playoffs aren't really the goal now. I'm fine with that to a point, although I think for this team the playoffs are realistically a goal without O'Brien here. So it surprises me to see the organization actually acting like the playoffs aren't really 'the' goal afterall. Where was that attitude during the 4 wasted O'Brien years? (Technically, year 1 maybe wasn't wasted... the rest IMHO were a waste of everyone's time).

            There's going to be ups and downs when you're finding developmental minutes for players and using your youth. It's hard to complain when I think that's what should've been done for some time. And with the improved coaching, and smart use of our players, the playoffs were a realistic thought for this season (once O'Brien was gone). But instead we seemed to have decided developing players is more important than the playoffs this season. Possibly, that attitude has also created a chemistry issue among the players.

            Oh well... I just want them to stick with a real plan and see it through. If it's developmental minutes and taking our lumps, so be it. But then let's not panic if the developmental minutes approach leads to some losses and the loss of the playoff goal.
            They would have been playing Lance all along but they wanted to wait for his court case.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

              Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
              The Miami heat lost by 30 last night, guess they need to change everything too.
              The Miami Heat aren't 8 games under .500 and hanging on for dear life to the last playoff spot.

              Don't think everything needs change, but a few things need looked at when you're getting embarrassed like we have, and the only player out is Dunleavy. And the 1st unit has been playing terrible.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                The glory hath departed.
                You mean that rolls have been slowed?


                I peeked into the game thread...good lord. How about we stop losing our s*** over the ups and downs of developing and evaluating the talent. JOB needed to do this 2 years ago and now we are suffering for it.

                I'm really sick of seeing UB make cracks that suggest that any of us thought that firing JOB was due to the wins and losses.

                Listen Buck, I'm talking directly to you on this one - you darn well know that I explicitly told my ticket rep that I DID NOT CARE ABOUT THE WINS AND LOSSES. Again that's DID NOT CARE.

                I said that I wanted to stop worrying about the W-L record and start worrying about getting the young kids on the court so they could get on with learning how to play NBA ball AND so that we could get on with evaluating their chances as NBA talent.

                How can you know what needs to be fixed if you don't find out what is broken?


                So as frustrating as some of their poor play can be, as much as it sucks seeing guys like Foster dragging due to the losses, it's also exciting and interesting to see those moments when things start to click.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                  wow

                  what happened to the team that almost beat Miami on the road?
                  Sittin on top of the world!

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                    Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                    They would have been playing Lance all along but they wanted to wait for his court case.
                    I understand that but then they either needed to come to a different decision and start using him situationally much sooner, or decide to put him on ice for the season... or at best spot minutes in blowouts and such once the court decision was handed down.

                    I don't understand putting him on ice for 2/3rds of the season because of the court case and then suddenly throwing him to the wolves in the stretch run for the playoffs. ...Unless TPTB have decided the playoffs are not really the goal they've been in the past afterall... even if the playoff chances were probably more realistic now than at any time over the past several seasons.

                    But, like I said, I'm fine with developing players and seeing what we have. I think the playoffs are fools gold for weak teams anyway. It's just this handling of Lance I find odd.
                    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                    ------

                    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

                    -John Wooden

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                      Originally posted by RM31 View Post
                      PS:
                      Somebody said last night all the team follow Rush to play in the club?
                      Is that true?
                      Who said that?

                      They flew out of Dallas just after the game. Maybe they went out here in Houston I suppose but my guess is that they just hit the hotel by that time of night.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                        Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                        wow

                        what happened to the team that almost beat Miami on the road?
                        Youth = Inconsistency

                        Typically it's little mistakes that blow up into bad plays, especially sloppy offense or poor shot selection that becomes transition offense. Like Tyler getting stuffed to the floor tonight, goes the other way and Tyler commits the foul. Or Lance throwing that horrible pass right to the Rockets.

                        And Roy could be a whole book on inconsistency himself.


                        You don't get better for free. It's a long grind.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                          You mean that rolls have been slowed?


                          I peeked into the game thread...good lord. How about we stop losing our s*** over the ups and downs of developing and evaluating the talent. JOB needed to do this 2 years ago and now we are suffering for it.
                          I'm really sick of seeing UB make cracks that suggest that any of us thought that firing JOB was due to the wins and losses.

                          Listen Buck, I'm talking directly to you on this one - you darn well know that I explicitly told my ticket rep that I DID NOT CARE ABOUT THE WINS AND LOSSES. Again that's DID NOT CARE.

                          I said that I wanted to stop worrying about the W-L record and start worrying about getting the young kids on the court so they could get on with learning how to play NBA ball AND so that we could get on with evaluating their chances as NBA talent.

                          How can you know what needs to be fixed if you don't find out what is broken?


                          So as frustrating as some of their poor play can be, as much as it sucks seeing guys like Foster dragging due to the losses, it's also exciting and interesting to see those moments when things start to click.
                          Thats why I am so frustruted this needed to be done a long time ago like 5 years ago. We didnt rebulit the right way and it is so frusting to do it so late. Danny was 25 two years ago I fell like we are wasting his career. We should have been through this phase of growing pains and devloping young talent and learning to play the right way. But no we had to trade for Murphleavy instead of rebuliding the FO for JOB and not rebuliding sooner this is so frustrating.
                          Last edited by pacer4ever; 03-06-2011, 02:20 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                            Youth = Inconsistency

                            Typically it's little mistakes that blow up into bad plays, especially sloppy offense or poor shot selection that becomes transition offense. Like Tyler getting stuffed to the floor tonight, goes the other way and Tyler commits the foul. Or Lance throwing that horrible pass right to the Rockets.

                            And Roy could be a whole book on inconsistency himself.


                            You don't get better for free. It's a long grind.
                            Thank you! Like I've been saying, what do people expect from a bunch of rookie through third year players. Let's be realistic here.

                            While I do think there are flaws in our offensive and defensive scheme (mainly they help defense), the youth on this team is going to give us games like this and games like playing against Miami.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                              Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                              Thats why I am so frustruted this needed to be done a long time ago. We didnt rebulit the ight way and it is so frusting to do it so late. Danny was 25 two years ago I fell like we are wasting his career. We should have been through this phase of growing pains and devloping young talent and learning to play the right way. But no we had to trade for Murphleavy instead of rebuliding the FO this is so frustrating.
                              We had Murphleavy before then... And Seth is saying the young guys needed to be playing more two years ago. Not that we needed to be trading people for young talent.

                              You can't just trade people like this is 2k11. Jackson and Harrington didn't exactly have the best of trade values then. **** is a lot easier said than done. Was it a great trade? Of course not, but we are turning it into DC and cap space this off season.

                              And Danny is fine. He is 27 and has plenty of years left in him.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                                Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                                We had Murphleavy before then... And Seth is saying the young guys needed to be playing more two years ago. Not that we needed to be trading people for young talent.

                                You can't just trade people like this is 2k11. Jackson and Harrington didn't exactly have the best of trade values then. **** is a lot easier said than done. Was it a great trade? Of course not, but we are turning it into DC and cap space this off season.

                                And Danny is fine. He is 27 and has plenty of years left in him.
                                look at my edit and re read it. We could have got an expiring and a pick for them. But instead we tried to put a band aid on the franchise instead of rebuliding the right way.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X