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

Indiana University Athletics Thread 2013-2014

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

  • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2013-2014

    Crean got a pass when he probably shouldn't have early on at IU. That first season would've been hard for anyone but he had some advantages coaching at Indiana, sanctions or not, that he wasn't able to capitalize on those first few years. We just never saw any of those games where we thought he had an undermanned IU team ultra-prepared and able to throw a scare into someone.

    But in Indiana he should've been able to have recruited some hard-nosed, blue collar players fairly quickly that in other years might not have had the chance to play at IU so would've have jumped at the chance. Add a diamond in the rough or two. A juco player or two looking to play in the big time of the Big Ten. Ultimately, decently balanced and coachable team that could be made into something that wasn't going to win a championship but who could at least be a solid team that would give it their all and follow a solid gameplan that could trip up a team or two along the way. A team that would/could/should lay the foundation for what was to come.

    That just wasn't there. And that should've been our first clue there wasn't going to be much substance in the Crean era. Now, he continued to sell the program and finally got some blue chippers in there... But can we really say he got all out of that class he should've on the court? And for having a shooter like Hulls he did a pizz poor job of running plays to get him open... or softening the middle with Hulls to get Zeller going. And Olidepo(sp?) was really the wildcard that allowed broken plays and making something from nothing to push IU over the top. But I can't say those players were ever really 'well-coached' as much as Crean just let them freelance while he worked on his mad substitution patterns.

    IOW... Crean NEEDS blue chippers for ANY success.

    His style is so erratic that I'm not convinced he'll ever bother recruiting a team with balance as a goal and instead just look for talent regardless if that leaves the team with a glut of guards and no front court depth. Which just makes things worse.

    And as these flaws get more obvious... as the howls of disapproval grow louder... as the losses mount.... Blue chippers won't be heading to IU with the needed regularity to maintain relevancy. And with a school with the rich tradition of IU, relevancy just shouldn't be a problem IF the coach is competent...
    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

    -John Wooden

    Comment


    • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2013-2014

      Originally posted by Bball View Post
      Crean got a pass when he probably shouldn't have early on at IU. That first season would've been hard for anyone but he had some advantages coaching at Indiana, sanctions or not, that he wasn't able to capitalize on those first few years. We just never saw any of those games where we thought he had an undermanned IU team ultra-prepared and able to throw a scare into someone.

      But in Indiana he should've been able to have recruited some hard-nosed, blue collar players fairly quickly that in other years might not have had the chance to play at IU so would've have jumped at the chance. Add a diamond in the rough or two. A juco player or two looking to play in the big time of the Big Ten. Ultimately, decently balanced and coachable team that could be made into something that wasn't going to win a championship but who could at least be a solid team that would give it their all and follow a solid gameplan that could trip up a team or two along the way. A team that would/could/should lay the foundation for what was to come.

      That just wasn't there. And that should've been our first clue there wasn't going to be much substance in the Crean era. Now, he continued to sell the program and finally got some blue chippers in there... But can we really say he got all out of that class he should've on the court? And for having a shooter like Hulls he did a pizz poor job of running plays to get him open... or softening the middle with Hulls to get Zeller going. And Olidepo(sp?) was really the wildcard that allowed broken plays and making something from nothing to push IU over the top. But I can't say those players were ever really 'well-coached' as much as Crean just let them freelance while he worked on his mad substitution patterns.

      IOW... Crean NEEDS blue chippers for ANY success.

      His style is so erratic that I'm not convinced he'll ever bother recruiting a team with balance as a goal and instead just look for talent regardless if that leaves the team with a glut of guards and no front court depth. Which just makes things worse.

      And as these flaws get more obvious... as the howls of disapproval grow louder... as the losses mount.... Blue chippers won't be heading to IU with the needed regularity to maintain relevancy. And with a school with the rich tradition of IU, relevancy just shouldn't be a problem IF the coach is competent...
      He recruited that player for last years team. McGary just went to Michigan instead of Indiana.

      Comment


      • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2013-2014

        Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
        Basketball isnt about Xs and Os it is about Jimmy's and Joe's


        Take all of the good players a way from a good coach he will look pretty bad. I have never seen a coach win a game.
        well, to a degree, you are right.
        the best coaches in the world aren't going to win much if they have substantially inferior personnel. phil jackson certainly wouldn't be considered to be the coaching god many out there seem to think he is if he had no mj and scottie or shaq and kobe.
        he benefited greatly from having some of the greatest players of all time playing for him no doubt.

        however, a good or great coach with good talent can beat a one-trick pony with great talent and do it pretty consistently too.
        i have seen it play out many times. heck, take last year's squad for example:
        butler beat iu because stevens knew crean is all about the fastbreak transition points. he made it clear to his team that the most important thing was to take away the transition points as often as possible because iu in half court is a very beatable team- even with 2 future 1st round picks playing because they just aren't well prepared for a grind it out game.
        bo ryan was also aware of this. and last year's 2 games were exact clones of each other. wisconsin did a good job of denying those easy buckets and made iu play a bunch of half court ball and wisconsin was in control from the start in both games.
        and yes, sometimes the entire team might have an off night shooting but, i saw syracuse's zone do a great job of preventing iu's transition game from ever developing. they were prepared to deal with us- we we NOT prepared for them. good coaches not only prepare their teams for their opponents, they are also prepared to make adjustments when needed.
        maybe next year it will happen but i have yet to honestly feel that the team has gotten better as the season rolls on. this iu team will not get any better- i feel safe saying that.

        Comment


        • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2013-2014

          At this point in the game, with no one in foul trouble, there is absolutely no reason to trot out a lineup of Stan Robinson-Jonny Marlin-Jeff Howard-Hanner Perea-Austin Etherington. None. Why do that Crean?

          Comment


          • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2013-2014

            Yogi is carrying us with his end of the shot clock three pointers today.

            IU is like the opposite of the Pacers: They keep it close in the first half, then the opposing coach makes the correct adjustments and they turn it on in the second half and run us off the court.

            Comment


            • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2013-2014

              We would have a solid tournament resume if we had just beat a couple of these sub-par teams we've lost to.
              There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.

              Comment


              • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2013-2014

                Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
                We would have a solid tournament resume if we had just beat a couple of these sub-par teams we've lost to.
                Yeah, but about 100 other teams could say the same thing. Right now, we really have no resume. We have one good win (vs Wisconsin), but even that one has been tainted due to the major slump the Badgers are mired in. This would be a big one, but there's still a long way to go, and we haven't had one of our patented scoring droughts yet.

                Comment


                • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2013-2014

                  Michigan is just so poised. Every time our crowd gets into it they just go down and score.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2013-2014

                    Well that was certainly a pleasant surprise.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2013-2014

                      Fire Crean already!!!


                      So who gets the credit Yogi or Crean for putting Yogi on Nik??

                      Great game plan I would have never tried Yogi on Nik.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2013-2014

                        This was a nice win but all it did was buy Crean time unfortunately. We're still sub .500 in conference with a tough remaining schedule although if we play like this at home the rest of the year no one will beat us.

                        At least we haven't thrown in the towel and show promise unlike that school to the north.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2013-2014

                          Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                          Fire Crean already!!!


                          So who gets the credit Yogi or Crean for putting Yogi on Nik??

                          Great game plan I would have never tried Yogi on Nik.
                          Crean gets credit for managing the substitutions well, and for sticking Yogi on Stauskas. Credit where credit is due.

                          Yogi gets the lion's share of the credit for the win. He was unconscious. One win does not exonerate the rest of Crean's asshattery.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2013-2014

                            Originally posted by cdash View Post
                            Crean gets credit for managing the substitutions well, and for sticking Yogi on Stauskas. Credit where credit is due.

                            Yogi gets the lion's share of the credit for the win. He was unconscious. One win does not exonerate the rest of Crean's asshattery.
                            Crean wins just enough to keep his job and avoid the hot seat. He did it at Marquette and he is doing it at IU.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2013-2014

                              Tournament isn't out of the realm of possibility now. Looking at our schedule think we have to win the next 3 to have a chance.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2013-2014

                                Originally posted by Mad-Mad-Mario View Post
                                Tournament isn't out of the realm of possibility now. Looking at our schedule think we have to win the next 3 to have a chance.
                                Don't let them suck you in.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X