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

Pacers/Lakers postgame

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

  • #91
    Re: Pacers/Lakers postgame

    Not only he has that silly mini dance(supposedly signalling the foul call) but he looks straight back in case someone says something and get ready for a T.

    As for the game you realize that nothing changed,right?We can only take the glamorous win and maybe Ian.I want to see some stability from him first.Other than that, nothing new.Continued to shoot poorly and once again many missed free throws.West is a beast(we already knew that) and Hill's last basket was such a clever shot and what a beauty.
    Never forget

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Pacers/Lakers postgame

      Thank god for Kobe or we might have lost that game.


      Awesome that Kendrick was at the game. I wonder if he picked up some damn Dominos on the way home.

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Pacers/Lakers postgame

        and it has begun...

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=1TBd0tlld3U
        Never forget

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Pacers/Lakers postgame

          Originally posted by Johanvil View Post

          I give the win to Crawford! (whisper) I like the result much better.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Pacers/Lakers postgame

            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
            Who is KDot?
            Kendrick Lamar - Hip hop artist
            Recently released an album, which I think was album of the year (AOTY)

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Pacers/Lakers postgame

              Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
              Thank god for Kobe or we might have lost that game..
              ?? The other Lakers outside of Kobe shot a combined: 12-48 for the game. 25%.

              Kobe ALMOST won the game all by himself.

              I'm glad the Pacer's won, but the Lakers definitely didn't lose because of Kobe Bryant's effort. Especially considering the fact he had the flu.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Pacers/Lakers postgame

                Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                Despite how mediocre his individual game appeared today, aside from a couple bad shots George moved the ball well when he needed to. And despite getting special attention from Artest and Kobe both for his suspect ballhandling, he only had 2 TOs.

                And let's not forget on the other end he was guarding Kobe. Which he did a FANTASTIC job of, btw. He dug into Kobe, pushing him away from the basket before the catch. He contested shots without fouling. 4 fouls against Kobe in 32 minutes played? Yes please. He consistently bothered him with his length.

                And his obligatory 9 rebounds.

                There's a reason his +/- stat was +16 in a 2 point game.
                I was very happy with his rebounding/limited TO's. That was huge.

                His defense was very good, except for about a 45 second stretch when LA tied it up. Got lost twice, came over late once, and generally was ineffective. Hard to play defense at a high level, against a guy like Kobe, for 30+ minutes. So, I'd agree overall he was quite good on that end.

                Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                No one is going to acknowledge this....but despite the stupid mistakes and the willingness to take a shot on the offensive end.....Young should get some credit for defending Kobe. Offensively.....yep....I'd rather have Young wait on the other side of the court when the rest of the 4 are on the offensive end.....but defensively...he really bothered Kobe.
                Sam shut him down at one point, Kobe was dribbling like throwback Travis Best. I don't get the hate for Sam, he's a hustler that is never out of the play, shooting 41% on 4 attempts per game. It isn't like he's taking 8 shots every time he comes in *cough* Gerald Green *cough* shooting 37% on 8 attempts per game.

                Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                Honestly, I've always felt Kobe is the perfect superstar for Paul George to guard. He prefers to set up on the weak side and go to work because he's normally quicker, longer, and smarter than the players guarding him. But PG is nearly as quick, has better length, and he has the 1-on-1 defensive instincts to rival Kobe's offensive genius.
                I'd argue Paul is quicker, longer, and almost as strong. Kobe is just...Kobe. Creative, good at working officials, sweet jumpshot. However, if Paul was more aggressive offensively, I think Kobe would have had a much worse night. Paul is a great "anti-Kobe" when it comes to defense, really bothering everything Kobe wants to do.

                Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                ?? The other Lakers outside of Kobe shot a combined: 12-48 for the game. 25%.

                Kobe ALMOST won the game all by himself.

                I'm glad the Pacer's won, but the Lakers definitely didn't lose because of Kobe Bryant's effort. Especially considering the fact he had the flu.
                Exactly. Sorry, but Pau/Howard/Jamison/Meeks/Morris/Duhon/Artest all looked awful, and outside of Pau/Dwight, they are awful. Pacers win this going away if Kobe isn't playing.

                Dwight seems disinterested most of the time, Pau has Roy 'esque mental issues/a coach that doesn't value him. Outside of Kobe, this team is exactly what people were afraid of: a hodge-podge of stars that absolutely don't fit together. Throw in an offensive system that requires non-stop running, and this team isn't setup for success.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Pacers/Lakers postgame

                  Re: bench scoring, it'll be much improved once Danny comes back. Presumably Danny will take Lance's place and Lance can get many of the DJ and Sam Young/Green minutes.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Pacers/Lakers postgame

                    Originally posted by PacersHomer View Post
                    Best moment of the game.

                    So good that he got a standing ovation by Danny.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers/Lakers postgame

                      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                      Just tell him to take some PED's so his shooting percentage goes up . ..... or maybe just tell him to stop stupid shots.
                      How DARE you question the basketball intelligence of Green's shots....

                      lol
                      "They want to be famous. We want to be champions. They want to be rappers and backup dancers. We want to play football." - T.J. Ward, Denver Broncos

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers/Lakers postgame

                        Couldn't watch the game. Glad for the win, but both teams have been struggling this season and this game showed just that.
                        First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers/Lakers postgame

                          Originally posted by TheDon View Post
                          Not to tone down the fun or anything on this game and ripping on the Lakers. But, I remember last year what happened when we were all so Happy with Roy leading us to victory against the Lakers only to follow it up by playing the kings next and getting absolutely murdered on the offensive glass. If I were Vogel that would be the first point I make coming off of this win with regard to the next opponent.
                          Buzzkill.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers/Lakers postgame

                            I know the FG% was low for both teams, but I thought this was a fantastically entertaining game. Tons of energy on both sides, and in the crowd. Lots of drama. Close finish with a lot of clutch shots and theatrics.

                            Indy led this game for most of it, and when a guy scores over half of his teams points, you generally don't want to see them win the game, because that's not team basketball. So the good guys won in this case. I knew when they said Kobe was game-time decision because of the flu --- he was going to play, and he was going to go off on us. That's what he ALWAYS does. He's a big drama queen, lol... why can't he play like that all the time. Because he wants the attention.
                            There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers/Lakers postgame

                              Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                              ?? The other Lakers outside of Kobe shot a combined: 12-48 for the game. 25%.

                              Kobe ALMOST won the game all by himself.

                              I'm glad the Pacer's won, but the Lakers definitely didn't lose because of Kobe Bryant's effort. Especially considering the fact he had the flu.
                              True, the other Lakers shot 12 for 28, including Dwight who shot 7-10. I was very happy they ran their offense through a 34 year old jump shooter with the flu instead of the best center in the league. Besides that last game-tying three that was absolutely going in, I was rooting for Kobe to shoot every time. He was sloppy with the ball and there was absolutely no rhythm in their offense because Kobe wanted to have a "flu game" and played hero ball. Had he taken half the shots and played a little more conservatively with the ball the Lakers would have had a better shot at winning the game.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers/Lakers postgame

                                Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
                                True, the other Lakers shot 12 for 28, including Dwight who shot 7-10. I was very happy they ran their offense through a 34 year old jump shooter with the flu instead of the best center in the league. Besides that last game-tying three that was absolutely going in, I was rooting for Kobe to shoot every time. He was sloppy with the ball and there was absolutely no rhythm in their offense because Kobe wanted to have a "flu game" and played hero ball. Had he taken half the shots and played a little more conservatively with the ball the Lakers would have had a better shot at winning the game.
                                Anytime D12 got the ball anywhere close to the rim, we simply fouled him and made him shoot free throws. Yes he was 7-10, but we probably negated at least another 6 or 7 FGA's with trips to the FT line. Dwight is no longer looking like the best C in the league. That freakish strength is still there, but he whines to the refs wayyyy too much, and if you can stop his initial move, he's pretty much screwed.

                                I'd be much more afraid of Kobe, than Dwight at this point right now.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X