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

I don't remember this at all

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

  • I don't remember this at all

    http://slam.canoe.ca/NBAPlayoffs99/jun2_mil.html

    Wednesday, June 2, 1999
    Miller takes his shots at Ewing

    INDIANAPOLIS (AP) -- About an hour after Reggie Miller hit the two free throws that won Game 2, he sat at the podium for his news conference and spotted Patrick Ewing entering in the room.
    "As long as you make the last (shot), that's all that matters," Miller said. "Right, Pat?"
    The jab was too easy for Miller to resist, coming after Ewing's last-gasp jumper hit the back of the rim.
    After restraining himself for more than a week and not saying anything even remotely controversial, Miller struck with his first dig. And the remark figures to only fuel the animosity that makes the Pacers-Knicks rivalry such a great one.
    "It's going to be a war," Ewing said.
    Both teams took the day off Wednesday since the series, tied 1-1, will not resume until Saturday at Madison Square Garden.
    By then, the hostility will shift the other way -- most of it aimed squarely at the No. 1 Knick killer of the decade, Miller.
    At Market Square Arena, the Knicks had to put up with taunting Indiana fans. Some of them behind the New York bench unleashed a stream of insults. Others showered the players with beer and hurled coins as they left the court.
    During the game, the jeering of Ewing became so intense that he waved his arms in an emphatic "bring it on" gesture completely out of character for the 14-year veteran. At another point, Ewing mixed it up in a friendly manner with four Pacers fans sitting alongide the players' seats.
    "They don't like me here," Ewing said.
    Ewing's animated Rileyesque gesture, coming as it did when the Knicks were falling behind by 17 points, was somehow indicative of the confidence he and his team are playing with this postseason.
    A month and a half ago, a 17-point deficit would have spelled certain doom for a team struggling to incorporate so many new additions and uncertain if it would make the playoffs -- or whether its coach would survive to see another day on the bench.
    These days, however, there is a fearlessness and cockiness to the Knicks that has surprised the Pacers.
    "We won, and it was not a pretty win, but a win is a win," Antonio Davis said. "New York will not go away. We must get ready to get in their house and go to work. We're looking forward to it."
    Most irritating to both teams was the way Game 2 was officiated by the veteran crew of Dick Bavetta, Hue Hollins and Joe Forte. New York was whistled for 40 fouls, including five on its point guards in the first nine minutes of the game. Miller hit the winning free throws with 2 seconds left after Chris Childs was whistled for his sixth foul.
    "We let the officiating overwhelm us at first," Houston said.
    Indiana's Rik Smits was limited to 13 minutes because of foul trouble, with a couple of the calls that went against him among the most questionable of the night.
    After Miller made his free throws, New York had one last chance. Charlie Ward, a former Heisman-winning quarterback at Florida State, whipped a court-length pass to Ewing near the opposing free throw line.
    Ewing wheeled and tossed up a high-arching shot that caromed off the rim.
    "It was a good look -- just missed," said coach Jeff Van Gundy, who contained himself when asked to comment on the officiating.
    Larry Johnson, Childs and Chris Dudley fouled out, Thomas, Ewing and Ward had four apiece and Marcus Camby had five -- the last of which was a blocking foul with 31 seconds left that the Knicks strongly felt should have gone the other way.
    "When your best players are sitting next to you," Van Gundy said, "it's not a great feeling."
    Said Childs: "We took their best shot, and I'm pretty sure there's going to be more shots taken, but I'm telling you, this is a special, special group of guys. We have so much fight and determination in us. We're going to play to the end."

  • #2
    Re: I don't remember this at all

    I remember that very well.

    IMO Reggie didn't really mean it quite the way it came across,

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: I don't remember this at all

      Nah UB...he bolded the part in the article where the Pacers fans weren't acting civilized.
      "If I have the ball, I will shoot it, you have to believe that," - Stephen Jackson

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: I don't remember this at all

        Originally posted by PHC Fan
        Nah UB...he bolded the part in the article where the Pacers fans weren't acting civilized.
        That one was kind of scary. I had good seats that game so I didn't get beer dumped on me but just before leaving the building three guys told me they were gonna beat the crap out of me in the parking lot because I was wearing my 33 jersey. I went with a crowd though and they didn't.

        Game 6 in '95 had me a bit nervous too. I had nosebleed seats and got a lot of things yelled at me and a beer shower which was fun.

        Conseco in 2000 was much better. Of course you guys won and it wasn't quite as brutal of a game.
        The poster formerly known as Rimfire

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: I don't remember this at all

          I don't remember this either.
          The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: I don't remember this at all

            I do. Ugly, ugly, ugly game. I remember Reggie calling out Patrick, and I remember seeing fans throwing **** at Knicks players. Very disturbing.
            Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: I don't remember this at all

              Oops.

              I don't remember it at all.

              The only game that I've been to where fans threw anything, was in the 1995 eastern conference semi finals agaisnt the Knicks. Brown had to grab the microphone.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: I don't remember this at all

                Originally posted by Unclebuck
                Oops.

                The only game that I've been to where fans threw anything, was in the 1995 eastern conference semi finals agaisnt the Knicks.
                Can't remember the year but we were playing the Rockets and Reggie got Olijawon (sp) in the air. Reggie got fouled but they called it the other way with a second or two left (similar to Iverson/Tinsley this year). Anyway that was not a pretty site with lots of stuff tossed.
                You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: I don't remember this at all

                  I think there was a game a number of years ago where we were playing Houston and the NBA had just started trying to clean up all the physical play. It was early in the season and it just seemed like there was a foul called every time down the court. The fans were frustrated and some coins were thrown on the floor. After the game I think I remember Reggie saying he was proud of the fans sticking up for the team. Does anyone else remember this?
                  Can we get a new color commentator please?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: I don't remember this at all

                    Originally posted by RWB
                    Can't remember the year but we were playing the Rockets and Reggie got Olijawon (sp) in the air. Reggie got fouled but they called it the other way with a second or two left (similar to Iverson/Tinsley this year). Anyway that was not a pretty site with lots of stuff tossed.


                    It was early on in 1994-1995. In Reggie's book, he gives an account of it, I'll post it on here sometime.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: I don't remember this at all

                      Originally posted by Reggie4Three
                      After the game I think I remember Reggie saying he was proud of the fans sticking up for the team. Does anyone else remember this?
                      Thats has to be the most ironic thing I have ever read

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X