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

3/22/2012 Game Thread #45: Pacers Vs. Wizards

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

REMINDER: Per PD policy, please do not share a link to, describe how to search for, request a link to, or request a PM about streaming video of a NBA game that is not coming directly through the NBA. Not even in a "wink-wink, nudge-nudge, know-what-I-mean" round-about sort of way. Thank you

Season Records: (W-L)
(Away: 12-12)
(Home: 6-16)
Upcoming Games:
Mar 23
Mar 24
Mar 26
Mar 28
Mar 29
vs at vs at vs
7:00 pm
8:30 pm
7:00 pm
7:30 pm
7:00 pm

Projected Starting Lineup:
Projected Starting Lineup:

Jeff Foster, that big ol' Ugg Boot in the sky, retired

Andray Blatche, voted off the island, out
Rashard Lewis, sore left knee/glue factory, out

Semi-Relevant Pictures:
Nene dunks on JaVale…
…and then kicks it with him.

Minimally Relevant Video:

Semi-Relevant Video:

Eight Points, Nine Seconds Preview Review:
Jared Wade: Jeff Foster, a True Indiana Pacer Great, Retires

The second-longest-tenured Indiana Pacer of all time has retired from the
only team he has ever known. Yes, in a sad development, Jeff Foster has
called it quits at the age of 35 midway through his 13th season. He has
suffered from chronic back trouble for years, and after undergoing two
different corrective procedures this year, apparently with limited success,
he has decided that his body will no longer allow him to play the
relentless style of basketball Pacers fans have had the pleasure to watch
for the past 13 seasons.

"It’s with deep regret that I have to conclude my basketball career," said
Foster. "I’ve given my all to the Pacers and the community the last 13
years. I had hoped to be able to finish the season, but unfortunately my
back problems prevented that from occurring. I want to thank the Simon
family and the Pacers' organization for 13 memorable years."

According to the Pacers, Jeff ranks in the top 10 among all players to have
ever suited up for the NBA incarnation of the blue and gold in 11 different
statistical categories. With 764 games played as a Pacer, he's third in NBA
franchise history, behind only Rik Smits (867), and some guy named
Reggie (1,389). Perhaps most special of all, these three guys combined
to play precisely 0 games for another NBA franchise. In that respect, and
many others, Jeff Foster is a true Pacers legend. (The games played figures
are regular season totals. Throw in playoffs, and it is 817 for Jeff, 971 for
Rik, and 1,533 for Reggie).

This announcement really is a shame since Jeff had the game to keep playing
for several more seasons. He just doesn’t have the body for it anymore.
Earlier this season in Boston, Foster jokingly told me that he knew he would
never pass Reggie Miller on the all-time games played list for the Pacers.
"[Tonight], I officially became the second-longest-tenured Pacer behind
Reggie," said Foster on January 6 after the first game he played this season.
"And I am not catching him. I’ve got five more years to go [to catch up]
— that’s not happening."

At the time, it was a funny comment from a guy who is one of the classiest
men, and best financial planners, in the league. Now? In hindsight? It takes
on a different meaning. He seemed very sure that he was on the road to
recovery and eager to play alongside...CONTINUE READING AT 8p9s

Truth About It:
JaVale McGee Leaves The Nest

I don’t have many McGee stories, but here’s one.

Last winter I was playing in a rec league at a high school about twenty minutes
from D.C. On Sunday nights, after participating in any number of NFL-watching
activities that would not be described as “performance enhancing,” we would
take the court in chafing mesh jerseys, our shouts and clanked jumpers echoing
all over the gym.

One evening, a few minutes before tip-off, JaVale McGee crept into the gym in
a dark grey sweatsuit, hood pulled up to shadow his face like the world’s most
conspicuous ninja. There’s just no hiding when you’re 7-feet tall and move like
a jungle cat, a lesson McGee must thoroughly understand at this point. We
immediately spotted him, but attempted not to stare as he positioned himself
on a ludicrously ill-proportioned loose chair in the corner of the gym, the seat
so low as to bring his knees and shoulders almost level.

He was there to watch a friend, and a guy that might have been his trainer —
both on our opposing team that night. His friend ostentatiously wore a Team
USA practice jersey with McGee’s number. During the game, McGee mostly
heckled his pals when they returned to the bench, and gave a brief shout when
I caught the trainer with a crossover.

If you wondered what JaVale McGee was getting into on school nights during
the season, there’s your answer.

Any time McGee is on the court, it doesn’t take long for your eye to begin
tracking the simultaneously spastic and graceful movement of the tallest
guy in the gym. His legend as a master of .GIF-worthy blooper is deserved,
but he’s hardly a larger than life center on the lines of Dwight Howard. In the
locker room it was Nick Young or Andre Blatche who held court. I always
found McGee surly and distrustful — he knew we were laughing.

And he didn’t like it, because McGee — and I genuinely believe this — wants
to be good. In Washington, and given the deal they made to move him, I
suspect that the Wizards feel the same way, I began to wonder whether
McGee was fatally flawed — somehow as stunted mentally (in a basketball
sense) as he was gifted physically.

It’s hard to believe that as McGee goes to Denver, a 24-year old with his
size and coordination who ranks thirteenth in rebound rate and fourth in
block percentage, could be considered something of a rescue project.

Yet a rescue project he is...CONTINUE READING TRUTH ABOUT IT
This is the darkest timeline.

  • #2
    Re: 3/22/2012 Game Thread #45: Pacers Vs. Wizards

    Is anyone else sad that we will not get to play against McGee this season?

    That said, I'm also anxious about today's game. The Wizards are stronger after the trade deadline. However, I hope that they'll tank and that we'll get another W. Preferably, an easy one in order to rest our starters since this is the beggining of a back-to-back-to-back.
    Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
    Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.


    Originally posted by IrishPacer
    Empty vessels make the most noise.


    • #3
      Re: 3/22/2012 Game Thread #45: Pacers Vs. Wizards

      The injuries, the Nene pic, the Jeff pic: pure awesomeness


      • #4
        Re: 3/22/2012 Game Thread #45: Pacers Vs. Wizards

        go pacers....miaa jeff already


        • #5
          Re: 3/22/2012 Game Thread #45: Pacers Vs. Wizards

          I'm suddenly a bit scared of this game. Haven't seen much Wizards but interested in seeing Booker and Singleton, two guys I liked in the draft.


          • #6
            Re: 3/22/2012 Game Thread #45: Pacers Vs. Wizards

            Yeah, I'd feel more comfortable facing Nick Young and the Wizards.

            Which Brazilian plays better tonight? Nene in his home debut for Washington, or Leandro in his road debut?
            Last edited by LG33; 03-22-2012, 07:12 PM.


            • #7
              Re: 3/22/2012 Game Thread #45: Pacers Vs. Wizards

              DC has tied his shoes twice now. George Hill doesn't do that.


              • #8
                Re: 3/22/2012 Game Thread #45: Pacers Vs. Wizards

                this how Denver felt last year?


                • #9
                  Re: 3/22/2012 Game Thread #45: Pacers Vs. Wizards

                  6-6 from the field....


                  • #10
                    Re: 3/22/2012 Game Thread #45: Pacers Vs. Wizards

                    Darren is just bad...


                    • #11
                      Re: 3/22/2012 Game Thread #45: Pacers Vs. Wizards

                      Look at all those empty seats. I should've gone to the game.


                      • #12
                        Re: 3/22/2012 Game Thread #45: Pacers Vs. Wizards

                        defense is horrible
                        Counting down the days untill DJ Augustin's contract expires.


                        • #13
                          Re: 3/22/2012 Game Thread #45: Pacers Vs. Wizards

                          wat am i watching right now
                          Counting down the days untill DJ Augustin's contract expires.


                          • #14
                            Re: 3/22/2012 Game Thread #45: Pacers Vs. Wizards

                            WHO is playing defense what the hell...

                            Really nice play from DC on that West assist


                            • #15
                              Re: 3/22/2012 Game Thread #45: Pacers Vs. Wizards

                              this is sad


                              • Working...