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

2012-2013 NCAA Basketball Thread

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

  • #91
    Re: 2012-2013 NCAA Basketball Thread

    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
    I didn't say Watford would make the shot at Lucas. I'm just saying the game wouldn't have been any less special if he would have.
    I violently disagree with this. The Watford shot was made 100x better because of the reaction it incited at Assembly Hall. How many times have we seen that shot of the whole arena from a camera in the corner where the fans go ballistic when the ball goes in? That atmosphere was one of the coolest things I have ever experienced in my life. That building felt alive.

    If Cal were demanding two games in Louisville, then I'd agree with you. But he was offering them in Indy.
    You say this as if it is some sort of advantage for IU. Calipari never cared about the games in Louisville--he cared about the ones in Indy. He knows UK fans travel well and always show up at those games, and it is a chance for him to sell that game to recruits in the Indy area. "Guys, you will play in your hometown in a marquee game each year." That was not a concession in any way, shape, or form.

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: 2012-2013 NCAA Basketball Thread

      Originally posted by cdash View Post
      I violently disagree with this. The Watford shot was made 100x better because of the reaction it incited at Assembly Hall. How many times have we seen that shot of the whole arena from a camera in the corner where the fans go ballistic when the ball goes in? That atmosphere was one of the coolest things I have ever experienced in my life. That building felt alive.
      Yeah, if it were at Lucas, then I'm sure the tens of thousands of IU fans would have sat there completely silent and not rejoiced at beating #1 UK.

      The only difference is that there would have also been tens of thousands of disgusted UK fans with their hands over their face in disbelief.

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: 2012-2013 NCAA Basketball Thread

        Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
        IU's negotiations resulted in no game at all. I couldn't do any worse than that, could I? Calipari offered us two games in the largest city and capital of our state, 50 miles away from our campus, in a city that easily has the most IU alumni in the country. That sounds like a decent concession to me. He was still willing to come to the state of Indiana and play the game. Whether that's better or worse than playing at AH is irrelevant, because it's still infinitely better than not playing the game at all.

        We were the ones who kept pestering Calipari about doing the game. We clearly wanted it more. When you want something more than the party you are negotiating with, sometimes you have to be willing to give in a little. And it's not like Cal was demanding two games in Louisville. He was being plenty fair, but IU fans can't see past that because of their extreme hatred for Cal.

        Our offer was a four year deal with two games in Indy and one at each team's campus. So did we really walk off in a huff because we missed out on one game at AH in a four year span? I may not have experience in negotiations, but I would hope that I wouldn't be that stubborn.

        Yay, we stood up to that a-hole Calipari! Our victory is that we have no game to play at all. We sure stuck it to him, didn't we? Is there a banner we can hang in Assembly Hall that will show that we stood up to Calipari in the summer of 2012?

        The choice this year was:

        1) Play in Indy and kick the crap out of UK with our #1 team on national TV in front of a crowd of 70K (or whatever it is), half of them UK fans, or....

        2) Stand up to Cal and not play the game at all.

        I'd go choice 1.

        Oh well, silly little egotistical wars like the one waged between Cal and Crean is why I'll never like college as much as the pros. At least egos can't stop a game from being played in the pros.
        Sometimes negotiations end up like that. It sucks, but we offered an extremely fair compromise and UK was unwilling to do that (two neutral site games, then a home-and-home). If you back off there and are like, "Okay, fine, we will do it your way" you give up all future leverage in negotiations.

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: 2012-2013 NCAA Basketball Thread

          Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
          Yeah, if it were at Lucas, then I'm sure the tens of thousands of IU fans would have sat there completely silent and not rejoiced at beating #1 UK.

          The only difference is that there would have also been tens of thousands of disgusted UK fans with their hands over their face in disbelief.
          Tell that to the 18,000 people in Assembly Hall for that game. I'm not even sure we win that game if it's in Indy. That team was clearly fueled by the incredible energy of the crowd. Assembly Hall, when it is rocking, is one of the hardest venues to play at in the country. Same for Rupp. There are plenty of neutral site games between these early season tournaments and post season tournaments. There are plenty of neutral site games in the tournament. Part of what makes college basketball so great is the atmosphere of the games--especially the rivalry games. It's huge for the fans, it's huge for the students, it's huge for the players. If that game was played in Lucas Oil last year, say the result and the way it happened was the same--no fans are storming the court. The players aren't jumping up on the scorer's table. A hoarde of fans doesn't shut down Kirkwood Avenue after the game. It's just a big win--without all the fun stuff associated with it. Not to mention all the recruits that were there that got exposed to that atmosphere and the passion of Indiana basketball. That makes a huge impression.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: 2012-2013 NCAA Basketball Thread

            I wonder where these high powered boosters were when UK fans were flipping and vandalizing cars and burning couches in the street. (For the record, I heard the same thing about the UK boosters being butthurt on one of the 1070 shows earlier this week, Grady and Joe I think)

            Hmm... no wonder Calipari wants to play so many neutral sites....

            In conclusion, I don't care how much moolah these panty waisted boosters are putting into college athletic programs. Screw em!
            Last edited by Sandman21; 12-01-2012, 02:35 PM.
            "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

            "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: 2012-2013 NCAA Basketball Thread

              Originally posted by cdash View Post
              Tell that to the 18,000 people in Assembly Hall for that game. I'm not even sure we win that game if it's in Indy. That team was clearly fueled by the incredible energy of the crowd. Assembly Hall, when it is rocking, is one of the hardest venues to play at in the country. Same for Rupp. There are plenty of neutral site games between these early season tournaments and post season tournaments. There are plenty of neutral site games in the tournament. Part of what makes college basketball so great is the atmosphere of the games--especially the rivalry games. It's huge for the fans, it's huge for the students, it's huge for the players. If that game was played in Lucas Oil last year, say the result and the way it happened was the same--no fans are storming the court. The players aren't jumping up on the scorer's table. A hoarde of fans doesn't shut down Kirkwood Avenue after the game. It's just a big win--without all the fun stuff associated with it. Not to mention all the recruits that were there that got exposed to that atmosphere and the passion of Indiana basketball. That makes a huge impression.

              I understand and respect that you think it was better at AH. It was clearly an awesome atmosphere. I'm just saying that a buzzer shot at Lucas is still something that would have forever lived in IU lore.

              EDIT: My point is simply that playing it at Indy is superior to not playing it at all. Winning a war with Cal means nothing to me.
              Last edited by Sollozzo; 12-01-2012, 02:26 PM.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: 2012-2013 NCAA Basketball Thread

                Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                EDIT: My point is simply that playing it at Indy is superior to not playing it at all. Winning a war with Cal means nothing to me.
                Trust me, being from Southern Indiana as well, those Kentucky games meant more to me that any Purdue game ever will. I don't think we have seen the end of the rivalry. It will be back. Maybe not for a few years, but it will be back.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: 2012-2013 NCAA Basketball Thread

                  Originally posted by cdash View Post
                  Trust me, being from Southern Indiana as well, those Kentucky games meant more to me that any Purdue game ever will. I don't think we have seen the end of the rivalry. It will be back. Maybe not for a few years, but it will be back.
                  I agree that it's not over. What part of Southern Indiana are you from?

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: 2012-2013 NCAA Basketball Thread

                    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                    I agree that it's not over. What part of Southern Indiana are you from?
                    Evansville. Lots of UK fans from across the river seem to sprout up there


                    Speaking of Kentucky, this Baylor/UK game is awful. Both teams are brimming with talent and length, but man they are making stupid mistakes left and right. Kentucky's ranking is based off name alone. This is not a top 10 team, and I don't think they will be at season's end--point guard play is going to kill them this year.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by cdash View Post
                      Evansville. Lots of UK fans from across the river seem to sprout up there


                      Speaking of Kentucky, this Baylor/UK game is awful. Both teams are brimming with talent and length, but man they are making stupid mistakes left and right. Kentucky's ranking is based off name alone. This is not a top 10 team, and I don't think they will be at season's end--point guard play is going to kill them this year.
                      Holy **** I am from mount Vernon

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2012-2013 NCAA Basketball Thread

                        Originally posted by Dgreenwell3 View Post
                        Holy **** I am from mount Vernon
                        Yeah! We are holding it down for the Tri-State area on PD.

                        Is it possible for both teams to lose a game? I'm really not trying to harp on Kentucky, but neither them nor Baylor deserve to win this game.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2012-2013 NCAA Basketball Thread

                          Butler and Ball State tied 33-33 at halftime. The same Ball State team that Indiana mauled a week ago. Bulldogs still having some offensive issues.

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2012-2013 NCAA Basketball Thread

                            And there you go Kentucky goes down. Biggest thing UK is lacking right now is confidence. They look like scared kids. Also Wiltjer is terrible
                            Baylor is a stupid team who probably should have won by 15+


                            Comment


                            • Re: 2012-2013 NCAA Basketball Thread

                              Originally posted by cdash View Post
                              Trust me, being from Southern Indiana as well, those Kentucky games meant more to me that any Purdue game ever will. I don't think we have seen the end of the rivalry. It will be back. Maybe not for a few years, but it will be back.
                              My bias towards having it in Indy is because I went to several of the games with my family growing up: 1997, 1999, 2003, 2005. I just remember always having a great time and marveling at the sea of blue and red on the streets and in the Dome. Good memories. My freshman year at IU (06-07) was the first year we played at Rupp. The next year was the Gordon year and I had season tickets, but the UK game was unfortunately one of the games I didn't get. I did go in 09-10, but our team was crap that year. So the only IU-UK game I've been to at AH is the one we lost. I didn't see either of the two wins.

                              So I do admit that my own personal experiences play into my bias.
                              Last edited by Sollozzo; 12-01-2012, 06:56 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2012-2013 NCAA Basketball Thread

                                I also loved the games when the fan base was split down the middle. Great atmosphere.

                                This UK team is going to take a long time to gel. I believe they'll be a top 10-15 team by the end of the season but that might be their ceiling this year.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X