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

NBA.com's Steve Aschburner article on Pacers

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

  • NBA.com's Steve Aschburner article on Pacers

    http://www.nba.com/2015/news/feature...s=iref:nbahpts


    Plucky Pacers plug along through injury-riddled season

    Mish-mash lineups or not, Indiana goes all out game after game.

    POSTED: JAN 5, 2015 12:40 PM ET



    [IMGCaught up in the moment, Frank Vogel got a little giddy. The Indiana coach had patched together a lineup again, zagging as injuries zigged through his team once more. But the Pacers survived, following their backup-backup point guard's lead to beat Milwaukee and win for the first time in 11 tries on the road when trailing through three quarters.

    "The combinations are crazy this year," Vogel said after Donald Sloan scored five points with six rebounds and two assists down the stretch -- the same guy who had just sat through three straight DNP-CDs. "But I said to the guys before the game, 'The next-man-up wins are more fun than the regular wins.']http://i.cdn.turner.com/nba/nba/.element/img/3.0/article/headshots/SteveAschburner.png[/IMG]BY STEVE ASCHBURNER

    NBA."When you've got some guys out, and you have that next-man-up mentality, somebody getting an opportunity to play more, those wins are more fun. They mean more, they're more enjoyable. And this is one of them."

    Uh, Frank, you do remember how many "regular" wins your team had last season, right? When the Pacers stormed through the NBA, winning 80 percent of their games through the first half of the season with the league's most stable starting lineup?
    "Sure do," he said, smiling into the camera lights.

    And this -- this off-road, third-stringer, patchwork mad scramble -- is more fun?

    "Absolutely," Vogel said.

    Believe him if you will. "Fun" isn't the first adjective, though, that comes to mind for most of us in assessing what the Pacers have done and still are trying to do in 2014-15. Challenging, yes. Admirable even, sure. But having to step on the floor every night knowing you're not what you'd been, not even close, and wondering if you'll ever get back to that, that sounds like something to endure and survive.

    Then again, endurance and survival aren't the most motivating topics for locker room pep talks. And the "us against the world" stuff probably is wearing a little thin.

    "As much as you try to avoid it, you see things everywhere," Sloan said after his strong game against the Bucks. Twenty-four hours later, with George Hill (groin) and C.J. Watson (foot) still out, Sloan stepped up again with 16 points, nine assists and seven rebounds in a one-point loss to the Lakers in L.A.

    "Coming into the season, [it was] 'The Pacers aren't going to be there. The Pacers are not going to do this.' So it's definitely a sense of pride. Every time we hit the floor, we have a chip on our shoulder. Some nights it might not seem like it, but ... we can say we don't, but we see and hear a lot of stuff through the social media or through TV. Every time we hit the floor, it's 'prove a point.' "

    What Indiana is proving is how tough life can be when bad luck and bad business conspire against it. The Pacers suffered a staggering, summertime one-two punch combination when All-NBA wing Paul George fractured his right leg in a Team USA scrimmage soon after near-All-Star shooting guard Lance Stephenson bolted as a free agent to Charlotte. Gone, with nothing to show in return, was 37 percent of the team's scoring (35.5 ppg of 96.7), 31 percent of its rebounding and 40 percent of its assists.

    When you've got some guys out, and you have that next-man-up mentality, somebody getting an opportunity to play more, those wins are more fun.
    – Pacers coach Frank Vogel


    Gone, too, was that core Vogel had rode hard and, mostly, reliably to the East's No. 1 seed and through three rounds of the postseason. Indiana's starting lineup -- George, Stephenson, Hill, David West and Roy Hibbert -- showed up for 73 of 82 last year and the entire Pacers roster lost a total of only 69 games to injuries in 2013-14.

    So far this season, Vogel has navigated through 136 injuries and nine different starting lineups (four more than last season). He had his first choice only for the three games -- in after Christmas, out by New Year's -- that Hill was healthy enough at the point.
    West and Hibbert were sidelined early as well. Fact is, by this point last season, the Pacers' starting five had logged a total of 5,611 minutes. This season through 35 games, Hill, West and Hibbert have played just 1,508, with George and Stephenson, of course, logging zero.

    Said Hibbert: "I would love to be able to play with everybody healthy for about 20 minutes."

    COM

    It's no wonder, then, that Indiana has plummeted from 28-7 a year ago to 13-22 now. At this point in 2013-14, the Pacers were averaging 97.0 points and giving up only 88.6; this season, they're at 94.6 and 95.9. Their offensive and defensive ratings have turned upside-down, too: 104.1 and 99.3 last year vs. 101.4 and 102.7 now.

    It hasn't been pleasant. Still, it hasn't been as horrible as some feared. Players such Sloan, Solomon Hill, Lavoy Allen and Chris Copeland have gotten opportunities beyond their meager roles last season. Hibbert still is a spiral staircase in the Pacers' attack -- no matter how Vogel re-decorates, there he is -- but he has bounced back from his funk of last spring.

    Luis Scola has shouldered a bigger load, his rhythm benefiting from 15 starts. Meanwhile, newcomers Rodney Stuckey and C.J. Miles have carved out niches in Vogel's system, and the coach himself has had to adapt and improvise, too.

    Vogel isn't nearly as confident about winning when he steps on the floor, but he is more appreciative. Of the victories and of the way the Pacers have to chase them down.

    "When you have the injuries we had early in the season, you don't know how a team is gonna endure that type of losing," Vogel said. "Losing in this league is no fun -- it can separate your team, it can separate your group from the coaching staff and it can crack your chemistry and togetherness. And that hasn't happened even a little bit. That's been very, very impressive to me, the way our guys have handled the situation and the passion they've performed with every night. I couldn't be more proud of them."

    George, five months removed from his gruesome mishap in Las Vegas, has been traveling with the team and, by all outward appearances, seems in good spirits. West, however, sees behind the curtain and said: "Paul's dying to play. It's killing him, not playing."


    Said Vogel: "He's getting into some of our practice stuff, three-quarters speed. Not really pushing too hard, putting himself at risk or anything like that. But contributing to the group, being a smiling face every day. We're looking forward to getting him back ... hopefully maybe next week. Tomorrow night. I asked him if he could play tonight since both point guards are out -- I could slide him over to the 1..."

    The coach was, of course, kidding. But since that's how runaway speculation can start, Vogel added for the umpteenth time: "No, we don't expect him back this year."

    George isn't even doing media these days, but in a brief chat after the Milwaukee game, said he's fine physically and mentally. He actually worries more about West, the veteran power forward whose clock is ticking while the Pacers try to hold things together for another thrust in 2015-16.

    I just think guys are remaining positive. Guys are approaching the game with the right attitude. Given our situation, that's all you can really ask for.
    – Pacers power forward David West

    "When David joined us, it was all about trying to win a championship," George said.

    West, 34, still is the soul of the Pacers team. His production is down slightly -- from 18.5 points per 36 minutes in 2012-13 to 16.3 last year to 15.1 now -- and his shooting's off a bit. But West has a $12 million player option for next season, along with hopes that team-wide this is just a one-year blip.

    "Everybody's handling it a little different," he said. "I just think guys are remaining positive. Guys are approaching the game with the right attitude. Given our situation, that's all you can really ask for. And then obviously, we've got a team that plays hard and competes, and tries to go after and win games."


    "
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 01-05-2015, 04:26 PM.

  • #2
    Re: NBA.com's Steve Aschburner article on Pacers

    January 27th, 1994. Pacers were on a 5 game losing streak and 7 games below .500 at 16-23. The team then proceeded to rip off a 7 game win streak which would kick off a 31-12 record in the next 43 games. We concluded the season 12 games above .500 at 47-35.



    No we're not as good as we were last year but I don't feel like we're nearly as bad as our record indicates this year. Might we be in store for another magical run 21 years later?

    I'm not sayin..... I'm just sayin.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: NBA.com's Steve Aschburner article on Pacers

      I agree with Frank. These wins are much more fun. Last year we were favored to win many games. Beating bad teams just felt like relief due to the fact we didn't lose. Now, with no one expecting much, wins are far less frequent but more satisfying.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: NBA.com's Steve Aschburner article on Pacers

        Originally posted by Phree Refill View Post
        January 27th, 1994. Pacers were on a 5 game losing streak and 7 games below .500 at 16-23. The team then proceeded to rip off a 7 game win streak which would kick off a 31-12 record in the next 43 games. We concluded the season 12 games above .500 at 47-35.


        No we're not as good as we were last year but I don't feel like we're nearly as bad as our record indicates this year. Might we be in store for another magical run 21 years later?

        I'm not sayin..... I'm just sayin.
        I remember that team having some incredibly tough losses. There was a Dana Barros mid-air running three, a George Mhuresan (sp) tip-in winner, and of course the Toni Kukoc buzzer beater after Reggie's near game winner. But I still got the sense that something special was going to happen.

        I don't have that feeling this season, but our schedule is primed for a run (assuming Hill is back within five or so games). Our schedule in March, which is typically brutal, looks very easy to me.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: NBA.com's Steve Aschburner article on Pacers

          I think PG will need time to get back into game shape and I think there could even be setbacks as he does, If he comes back right before the playoffs its just to try and get him into game shape and it will be too late, I think he would need to be back by mid March we are not going to make noise in the playoffs this year.

          Comment

          Working...
          X