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

4/14/2012 Game Thread #60: Pacers Vs. Bucks

  • 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: 17-14)
(Home: 15-14)
Upcoming Games:
Apr 16
Apr 17
Apr 19
Apr 21
Apr 23
vs at vs vs vs
7:00 pm
7:00 pm
7:00 pm
7:00 pm
7:00 pm

Projected Starting Lineup:
Projected Starting Lineup:

Darren Collison, sore groin, day-to-day

Kwame Brown, torn talent muscle, out

Minimally Relevant Video:
Sitcom Wisconsin...

Semi-Relevant Video:

Eight Points, Nine Seconds Preview Review:
Jonathan Auping: The Pacers Are "Just Right"

Once upon a time, there was a little basketball scout named Gold E. Locks. Mr.
Locks knew basketball and he had always been able to predict which teams were
successful based on his theory that balanced basketball always gets the job done.
Well, for one weekend, Gold was assinged to scout three NBA teams: the Boston
Celtics, the Oklahoma City Thunder, and the Indiana Pacers. He decided to assess
a few areas on each team and try to figure out which team was likely to have the
most success.

Gold decided to visit each team in their home city to watch them in their
respective practice sessions. He stayed in Boston for a night and made the
personal decison that, “This city is far too busy and populated. Although the
baked beans are great, I could never live here.”

After Boston, he flew over to Oklahoma City. OKC wasn’t Mr. Locks’ cup of tea
either. “This city is far too dull. I can’t believe that when I asked the hotel
concierge for night-life ideas she simply had the horse and buggy take me to the
local IHOP. No way I could live here.”

Gold next spent a weekend in Indianapolis. He felt at home. “You know, this city
is just right. Not too crowded, not too dull. I could really see myself raising a
family here.”

I’m not quite sure how Gold’s living preferences made it into this article, but
more importantly, I was able to get a copy of the notes he took from his scouting
report. Since Mr. Locks is such a great basketball mind, I thought that I might
share a few of the points he made regarding three teams that Pacers fans have
recently become familiar with.


Celtics: “This team is far too old. A few of their players seem too elderly to even
run the fast break. This is supposed to be a basketball team, not a retirement

Thunder: “This team is far too young. Young teams can make poor decisons late
in games. That James Harden guy might fool some people with his beard, but
apparently he is only 22 years old. This is supposed to be a basketball team, not
a daycare center.”

Pacers: ”This team’s age is just right. Most of its core is pretty young, but the
roster has some great veterans like David West and Danny Granger. Age shoudn’t
be a problem for them.”...CONTINUE READING AT 8p9s

Owning pessimism – Why it doesn’t make you a bad person

As my Milwaukee Bucks world came crashing down around me earlier this week
I found myself, as I often do, looking to Twitter and Facebook for some sort of
kinship. I don’t know what I was looking for. I guess I wanted to see other people
complaining about the Bucks. I wanted to see people frustrated about what was
going on.

My search ended almost as quickly as it began.

I saw almost nothing.

I did see the occasional person compliment Milwaukee on its effort. Then I saw
someone in my Facebook timeline had a picture from the Knicks game with a
caption of something like, “Got last minute tickets to the Bucks game.” The first
comment was about no one ever actually making a plan to go to a Bucks game.
The second was something more simple, like the Bucks suck. I shook my head,
rolled my eyes and moved on to Twitter where some people were feeling the
same way I was.

All the national writers and bloggers I follow had little to nothing to say about
the ramifications of the Bucks-Knicks game though. A few comments about the
Knicks probably securing a playoff spot and about the Bucks having their work
cut out for them the rest of the way were made. Matt Moore had a bunch of
funny tweets throughout the night. But after the game was done on Wednesday,
the biggest regular season game the Bucks have had a couple years mind you,
pretty much no one was talking about the Bucks.

That’s our reality right now. I was incredibly charged and full of a variety of
thoughts from “I TOLD EVERYONE SO” to “Can it get any worse?” to “Maybe
Monta Ellis can work.” But only a few hundred people really cared.

No one ever really cares. The Bucks do not matter. And that’s why I am the
way I am. That’s why I write the way I write.

I’ve been thinking about this a lot lately. I want to be a more positive person. I
want to be an optimist. People at work have discussed starting a list of all the
things I hate. That’s probably a sign that I need to stop hating so many things
(or that I need to stop being so vocal about what I hate). The Bucks would
probably be on that list. Nothing in my life has ever been more love/hate than
my relationship with the Bucks.

But the hatred in me just feasts and gets stronger when I see things like this:
“It’s important for the players, the coaches, myself, the business
operation, and first and foremost for the fans,” Sen. Herb Kohl
said of reaching the playoffs. ”It’s a lot easier to sell your product
when you have a winning season. If we get to the playoffs, I think
we’ll all feel that we’ve had a good season. Then we’ll hope to do
well in the playoffs.

When I see that, I just throw my hands up. The playoffs are a Band-Aid on a
shotgun wound. I feel the same way when I see the “look how hard the Bucks
are trying” stories...READ MORE AT BUCKSKETBALL
Last edited by avoidingtheclowns; 04-14-2012, 03:08 PM.
This is the darkest timeline.

  • #2
    Re: 4/14/2012 Game Thread #60: Pacers Vs. Bucks

    The Pacers can't take this game lightly, b/c the Bucks have to win every game they possibly can to make 8th seed and the playoffs. The Bucks are not bottomdwellers like Toronto and Cleveland as they are 7-3 in their last 10 games. The Pacers need to come out strong and play strong for 48 min.


    • #3
      Re: 4/14/2012 Game Thread #60: Pacers Vs. Bucks

      DC is still out? Get better soon little dude.

      PG better stick to Ellis. I think Hill can keep Jennings in check. Key to the game is to ensure they both don't shoot lights out.
      First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.


      • #4
        Re: 4/14/2012 Game Thread #60: Pacers Vs. Bucks

        I don't think we will win this game.
        You Got The Tony!!!!!!


        • #5
          Re: 4/14/2012 Game Thread #60: Pacers Vs. Bucks

          I like the Bucks as a team. I think that they deserve the playoffs. They will be hungry tonight. We have to take them seriously.

          I'm hoping for good games by PG and Roy. They will be instrumental in tonight's success. Atlanta is going to have an easier 3 game stretch so we need to take as many wins as we can.
          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.


          • #6
            Re: 4/14/2012 Game Thread #60: Pacers Vs. Bucks

            Originally posted by AesopRockOn View Post
            I don't think we will win this game.
            back to backs are tough, but the starters got good rest in the 4th last night. Also, DC not playing is good for us this game imo. We get to start the game with such a defensive intensity against their back court, we can set the tone early.


            • #7
              Re: 4/14/2012 Game Thread #60: Pacers Vs. Bucks

              Bucks are all about Swag. If we can shut the swag down, we win this game.

              There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.


              • #8
                Re: 4/14/2012 Game Thread #60: Pacers Vs. Bucks

                So ready for this game! Another W for the win column.

                Btw, go Nets!
                "I have never taken the high road, but I tell other people to ’cause then there’s more room for me on the low road."


                • #9
                  Re: 4/14/2012 Game Thread #60: Pacers Vs. Bucks

                  Originally posted by AesopRockOn View Post
                  I don't think we will win this game.
                  I don't think you are correct, sir.
                  "I have never taken the high road, but I tell other people to ’cause then there’s more room for me on the low road."


                  • #10
                    Re: 4/14/2012 Game Thread #60: Pacers Vs. Bucks

                    This is one of those games where having George Hill start is going to really help us. Hill and PG can both contain Jennings and Ellis. The rest of their team is mediocre at best. I'm still kinda iffy about this game, hopefully we go 16 games over .500%.


                    • #11
                      Re: 4/14/2012 Game Thread #60: Pacers Vs. Bucks

                      apparently dwight is going to be out of games for at least 2 weeks to treat his back.

                      which prompted this response from stan van gundy



                      • #12
                        Re: 4/14/2012 Game Thread #60: Pacers Vs. Bucks

                        Originally posted by PGisthefuture View Post
                        The rest of their team is mediocre at best.
                        Ersan Ilyasova is not mediocre.

                        But I agree with the rest.
                        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.


                        • #13
                          Re: 4/14/2012 Game Thread #60: Pacers Vs. Bucks

                          Bold Prediction: Roy Hibbert gets his first triple double.
                          Time for a new sig.


                          • #14
                            Re: 4/14/2012 Game Thread #60: Pacers Vs. Bucks

                            Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                            Bold Prediction: Roy Hibbert gets his first triple double.
                            You so crazy.

                            I'm in.
                            "I have never taken the high road, but I tell other people to ’cause then there’s more room for me on the low road."


                            • #15
                              Re: 4/14/2012 Game Thread #60: Pacers Vs. Bucks

                              Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                              Bold Prediction: Roy Hibbert gets his first triple double.
                              I'm in.
                              "What you do is so loud, I can't hear what you say" -Andrew Luck
                              "If you turn the other cheek, I'm gonna hit you in the other cheek, too" -Charles Barkley
                              "Ego is edging greatness out" -Rick Pitino
                              Junior at the University of Louisville
                              Greenfield-Central High School Alum '14
                              Follow me on Twitter @steagles1
                              1000th post - 4/16/12 2000th post - 6/24/12 3000th post - 3/8/13


                              • Working...