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

12/14/2012 Game Thread #23: Pacers Vs. Sixers

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 12/14/2012 Game Thread #23: Pacers Vs. Sixers



    Game Time Start: 7:00 PM ET
    Where: The Fieldhouse, Indianapolis, IN
    Officials: S. Foster, D. Collins, K. Fitzgerald

    Media Notes: Indiana Notes, Philadelphia Notes
    Television: FOX Sports Indiana / Comcast SportsNet Philadelphia
    Radio: WFNI 1070 AM / WPEN 97.5 FM
    NBA Feeds:

    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

    Home: 6-3
    East: 5-5
    Away: 4-4
    East: 8-8
    Dec 15
    Dec 18
    Dec 19
    Dec 21

    Danny Granger - left knee tendinosis (out)
    Lance Stephenson - right ankle sprain (out)

    Andrew Bynum - bilateral knee bone bruises (out)
    Jrue Holiday - left foot sprain (questionable)
    Royal Ivey - strep throat (out)
    Damien Wilkins - right calf strain (questionable)

    Who would you choose to be your point guard?

    (Yrs Active)
    A (2007-2013)
    B (2010-2013)

    Player A might be the starting PG for the Sixers tonight, per Doug Collins.
    Player B should be practicing dribbling instead of eating or sleeping, per PD.

    Tim Donahue: Which Wing Gets the Nod Down the Stretch?

    This week, the Pacers have edged out a win in Chicago and out-classed Portland at home
    to bring their record on the season above .500 for the first time since November 3. Given
    how depressing this team looked over its first 10 games of the year, that is actually a big
    step forward. But for a franchise that entered the season expecting to have home-court
    advantage in the first round of the playoffs, this season has still been a disappointment.

    One of the many things lost to this Pacer team in Danny Granger’s absence this season
    has been a sense stability down the stretch in games. Pacer coach Frank Vogel and Pacer
    fans knew that – with rare exception – the wing combo of Danny and Paul George would
    be on the floor come the final few minutes of the fourth quarter.

    This season, Vogel seems to have been experimenting with a running mate for George
    late in games, choosing from a trio of Lance Stephenson, Sam Young, and Gerald Green.
    Prior to Friday night’s game against Denver, Mike Wells of the Indianapolis Star asked
    Frank how he made the choice.

    “It’s typically, I’m goin’ with Lance, but if either Sam or Gerald are going good, I’ll
    consider those guys,” said Vogel. “If there are match-up situations that are tough for
    Lance, we’ll consider one of those other guys, as well.”

    But what exactly is “going good?”

    What makes Vogel go with Gerald Green or Sam Young over Lance Stephenson
    “Sam has a knack for impacting the game in a variety of ways,” said Vogel. “Offensively,
    with cuts and offensive rebounds and making the open three every now and then. Just
    being a ball mover. But he has the ability to really change a game defensively and to
    have special performances on the defensive end.”

    He continued. “Gerald has the ability...CONTINUE READING AT 8p9s

    Brian Ward: Where's the Respect?

    Typically, in this league made for TV, production equals respect. I'm not talking about
    respect from the national media, or respect from the fans, I'm talking about respect
    from the refs. When you're an unknown rookie, you don't get the borderline whistles.
    When you're mostly a jump shooter who rarely ventures into the lane, you don't get
    the borderline whistles. When you're a finesse player who shies away from contact,
    you don't get the borderline whistles. Jrue is none of those things anymore, and it's
    about time he started getting the benefit of the doubt.

    Here's some perspective on the team as a whole, first. The Sixers have been
    outscored by 43 points so far this season. From the line, they've been outscored by
    48. In the past two games, they've been outscored by 35 from the line. Two home
    games, they've attempted 25 fewer free throws than the star-less Pistons and Bulls.
    That's shameful.

    Part of the problem is the horrendous Sixer bigs. They're pretty much all either too
    slow, too weak, too dumb or some combination of the three to protect the paint.
    Spencer Hawes is helpless as a weak-side defender unless the play is telegraphed
    and he has three or four seconds to get himself into position. Even then, it's 50/50
    whether he'll get whistled for the foul he commits. Poor interior defense is part of
    the problem, but it's not the part that's most frustrating.

    The NBA, at its worst, is barely better than professional wrestling. When a superstar
    is in a game, the deck is stacked absurdly in their favor. If you look at LeBron the
    wrong way, he's going to the line. If OKC ever goes into a scoring drought, all they
    need to do is give the ball to Kevin Durant anywhere in the vicinity of the basket
    and he's more likely to get a trip to the line than not. Paul Pierce's plaintive wails
    lead to a handful of whistles every game when no one comes close to making
    contact with him. It's sad to watch. It's something teams without superstars have
    to overcome. Whether it's a mandate from the league to protect the game's stars,
    human nature because those players are head and shoulders above everyone
    else or a downright act of cowardice and playing favorites by the refs, it's
    institutional and has been basically since Michael Jordan started scowling at the
    refs, if not longer.

    When you're on the outside looking in (like the Sixers have been since Iverson's
    prime), it can be maddening...CONTINUE READING AT DEPRESSED FAN

    Tom Sunnergren: The Evan Turner Backlash, Backlash

    There aren’t a whole lot of areas, in sport or otherwise, where the opinion of the
    casual observer and the studied wisdom of the experts dovetail, so it’s worth noting
    that entering this season the two occasionally warring factions were in almost
    perfect agreement on this point: Evan Turner’s awfulness.

    The reasoning went like this: he hurt his team directly by being a poor shooter and
    missing shots, then indirectly because the opposing player tasked with covering him
    could, secure in the knowledge that if ET hazarded an FGA he’d likely miss it, drift
    off him and into the lane; shrinking the floor and undermining scoring opportunities
    for his teammates.

    The things Turner did well — like being the best defensive rebounding guard of all-
    time last season, for starters — were either glossed over by these critics, or
    explained away as insufficient to offset the harm he did to the Sixers’ offense.
    There were numbers involved in some of these arguments.

    Sometime in early November though, the sentiment swung; slowly at first, then
    more abruptly.

    Something like a pro-Turner consensus began to emerge.

    Corner 3s started dropping and glowing pieces cropped up in well-regarded
    publications. Twitter became a ‘twitter with authentic affection for the Buckeye’s
    idiosyncrasies; the herky-jerk handle, the occasional offensive eruptions, the
    bizarre stat lines, that voice. He’s been, along with Holiday and Thad Young,
    recognized as a key component of the Sixers “promising” triune core.

    The snark stopped. He’s become, if not loved, liked.

    I’ve been glad to see it, despite the fact that it doesn’t really make any sense.

    Here’s a thought exercise. Take a gander at the per 48-minute averages of these
    three players.

    Though most of us, assuming they played the same position, would prefer player
    one to the other two, anyone with a solid read on what these numbers mean would
    agree that 1.) the difference between the three is marginal and 2.) we’re dealing
    with sound, well-rounded players here.

    These three players are, in ascending order, Evan Turner in ’10-11, ’11-12, and

    Mike Wells @MikeWellsNBA
    Jared Wade @8pts9secs
    Tim Donahue @TimDonahue8p9s
    Tom Lewis @indycornrows

    John Mitchell @JMitchInquirer
    Brian Ward @depressedfan
    Liberty Ballers @Philly76ersBlog
    Philadunkia @philadunkia
    This is the darkest timeline.

  • #2
    Re: 12/14/2012 Game Thread #23: Pacers Vs. Sixers

    C'mon Green, please have a really strong game.
    First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.


    • #3
      Re: 12/14/2012 Game Thread #23: Pacers Vs. Sixers

      I want to see Gerald Green post ups in this game. If we are to use him, let's use him to his strengths.

      If Jrue doesn't play then our chances are good. A win in Philly would be big, atm.
      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.


      • #4
        Re: 12/14/2012 Game Thread #23: Pacers Vs. Sixers

        Any news on Lance? If he's out I wonder if we'll see O.J. get some PT...


        • #5
          Re: 12/14/2012 Game Thread #23: Pacers Vs. Sixers

          Ready for this game..this would a big win..


          • #6
            Re: 12/14/2012 Game Thread #23: Pacers Vs. Sixers

            Just heard Turner speak, he sounded weird. I don't know if it was some kind of technical glitch, or if that is how he actually sounds.


            • #7
              Re: 12/14/2012 Game Thread #23: Pacers Vs. Sixers

              Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
              Any news on Lance? If he's out I wonder if we'll see O.J. get some PT...
              I haven't heard anything, so hopefully it's just a game...two games max.
              First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.


              • #8
                Re: 12/14/2012 Game Thread #23: Pacers Vs. Sixers

                Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                Just heard Turner speak, he sounded weird. I don't know if it was some kind of technical glitch, or if that is how he actually sounds.
                He had issues with his vocal cords as a child or something like that.
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!


                • #9
                  Re: 12/14/2012 Game Thread #23: Pacers Vs. Sixers

                  According to some Sixers forums Jrue will be out for the game against us and probably the Lakers as well.
                  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.


                  • #10
                    Re: 12/14/2012 Game Thread #23: Pacers Vs. Sixers

                    No Jrue Holiday....hopefully thats a positive for us.
                    Larry Bird and Ryan Grigson- wasting the talents of Paul George and Andrew Luck


                    • #11
                      Re: 12/14/2012 Game Thread #23: Pacers Vs. Sixers

                      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                      He had issues with his vocal cords as a child or something like that.
                      That sucks a lot.


                      • #12
                        Re: 12/14/2012 Game Thread #23: Pacers Vs. Sixers

                        If Kwame is starting at C. Anyone think that Roy will have his best offensive game tonight?
                        First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.


                        • #13
                          Re: 12/14/2012 Game Thread #23: Pacers Vs. Sixers

                          Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
                          If Kwame is starting at C. Anyone think that Roy will have his best offensive game tonight?
                          He does have a beef with Kwame. Let's hope that he has a monster game then
                          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.


                          • #14
                            Re: 12/14/2012 Game Thread #23: Pacers Vs. Sixers

                            Nice, Hill
                            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.


                            • #15
                              Re: 12/14/2012 Game Thread #23: Pacers Vs. Sixers

                              Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
                              If Kwame is starting at C. Anyone think that Roy will have his best offensive game tonight?