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

Isn't it great...

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

  • Isn't it great...

    the sixers are failing miserably? hah...all the talk of them being contenders cause they got webber. Webber will always be a soft cookie....
    Don't count us out yet...I like the idea of JO+JAX in the playoffs....

  • #2
    Re: Isn't it great...

    Originally posted by JOneal7
    the sixers are failing miserably? hah...all the talk of them being contenders cause they got webber. Webber will always be a soft cookie....
    Don't count us out yet...I like the idea of JO+JAX in the playoffs....

    Agreed. There's still time to start to peak. I think Detroit peaked too early and Miami hasn't peaked yet but the league is so weak they haven't needed to yet.

    It's all pretty moot as this is another year for the Spurs.
    Two=the number 2
    Too=means "also"
    To=many definitions-also known as the one to use when the other 2 (two, too) do not apply.

    Their=shows ownership-'it is their house'
    They're=they are
    There=many definitions-also known as the one to use when the other 2 (their, they're) do not apply

    Sorry but it bugs me when these are used incorrectly when I read posts on PacersDigest.com.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Isn't it great...

      Originally posted by BigMac
      Agreed. There's still time to start to peak. I think Detroit peaked too early and Miami hasn't peaked yet but the league is so weak they haven't needed to yet.

      It's all pretty moot as this is another year for the Spurs.
      .....we've "PEAKED?"



      Please tell that to my team, they've been sleepwalking for weeks......

      Kinda funny how we've peaked without our best all-around bench player....

      It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

      Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
      Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
      NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Isn't it great...

        If JO and Jamaal get healthy, I agree I wouldnt count us out yet.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Isn't it great...

          This is the season of the IF. I'm going to start calling it the IF season.

          Everything always hinges on "If this" or "if that" . Not one solid confident thing to hang our hats on, It' l abut the 'caveat'.
          ...I guess I could call it the season o the caveat.

          Let's just put a asterisk on this season and try and forget it.

          -Bball
          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, that’s teamwork."

          -John Wooden

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Isn't it great...

            Originally posted by Kstat
            .....we've "PEAKED?"



            Please tell that to my team, they've been sleepwalking for weeks......

            Kinda funny how we've peaked without our best all-around bench player....

            I say "yes" and that is because of your long winning streak and then the 3 game losing streak. So, if you were charting this on a graph, that would be a pincle, zenith, or peak and since the graph wold be on a downward direction, I would say that you've peaked. Plus the players will eventually (or already have gone there) become burned out of Larry Brown's coaching. It's happened everywhere he's been. I'd have to say 'no finals for you'. But if the Pacers were in the same situation Detroit is (in my viewpoint), I doubt I could see it either.

            Bottom line, Brown wears on players. He's a great guy and the poor me thing goes only so far before everyone tires of it. 'It's been a dream to coach the Knicks'. 'I don't know if I'm cut out to do this'. 'This is my last coaching job'. Then the qualifier, 'This is my last NBA job'. And the list goes on. If you don't think the players hear that and don't lose a bit of respect for the coach and lose a bit of the flame and passion for a championship run, KStat, you are sadly mistaken. We all saw it here when he coached here, we saw it from afar when he coached the Sixers, we saw it in LA, we saw it in NJ, we saw it in S.A. His coaching stints before that were not as well documented but his story is the same everywhere he goes. Overachievers first year. Second year a bit of a let down, third year, burnout at the end of the season, and if you're fortunate, and I hope that you are, to have him for a fourth year, there will be disention on your team, he will be the cause but maintain plausible deniability and then quit (If he hasn't already by then). So, in closing. Yes, I believe they've peaked. And Larry Brown's history shows that this is the pattern wherever he's coached. And it's holding true again this year.
            Two=the number 2
            Too=means "also"
            To=many definitions-also known as the one to use when the other 2 (two, too) do not apply.

            Their=shows ownership-'it is their house'
            They're=they are
            There=many definitions-also known as the one to use when the other 2 (their, they're) do not apply

            Sorry but it bugs me when these are used incorrectly when I read posts on PacersDigest.com.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Isn't it great...

              Thats been going around a bit (that the Pistons have peaked) and I can understand why but my question is this. Why do the Pistons only get one winning streak before they're considered on the bad side of the "peak" perfomance for a season? This season has been pretty pathetic for the Pistons (in terms of effort) and the last winning streak was the only real confident superior (only at times) play of the season. So why if the Pistons put together a few wins once are they considered "over their peak", when teams often go on multiple streaks in a year and teams like the Spurs and the Suns aren't considered to have already "peaked" too soon when one of thier multiple streaks of wins comes to an end?

              The Pistons have played like crap most of the year. I think the question most Piston fans have is whether they can give the same kind of effort in this year's playoffs as they gave in the playoffs last year. Because except for a few very brief flashes this year they haven't. Maybe its just the "only the playoffs matter" mentality but playing a regular season at half-effort isn't fun to watch nor comforting for the fans.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Isn't it great...

                Originally posted by Fool
                Thats been going around a bit (that the Pistons have peaked) and I can understand why but my question is this. Why do the Pistons only get one winning streak before they're considered on the bad side of the "peak" perfomance for a season? This season has been pretty pathetic for the Pistons (in terms of effort) and the last winning streak was the only real confident superior (only at times) play of the season. So why if the Pistons put together a few wins once are they considered "over their peak", when teams often go on multiple streaks in a year and teams like the Spurs and the Suns aren't considered to have already "peaked" too soon when one of thier multiple streaks of wins comes to an end?

                The Pistons have played like crap most of the year. I think the question most Piston fans have is whether they can give the same kind of effort in this year's playoffs as they gave in the playoffs last year. Because except for a few very brief flashes this year they haven't. Maybe its just the "only the playoffs matter" mentality but playing a regular season at half-effort isn't fun to watch nor comforting for the fans.
                Correct me if I'm wrong but the Pistons also have had a couple of decent winning streaks this year. At least a period where they went like 15-2 or something?



                It's OK, young Skywalker (tongue in cheek). Keep in mind, we all saw first hand Larry Brown and his second, third, and fourth season. Couple that in with where we are in the season and you look at the Pistons peaks and valleys for the year and it's easy to draw the conclusion or hypothesis that I did. But it's OK that you don't see it. You are too close to see it. It's not personal or personal hatred, it's just how I see it from afar. And, yes, the Pacers have played like crap and IF they get Ron back and IF they get JO back, and IF Tinsley comes back, and IF Bender (scratch that)... they may make a decent playoff run (maybe 2nd round at best depending on their place in the standings.) If they finish in 6th place in the conference, they will play someone from the Atlantic or whatever that conference is called now. That should get them to a 2nd round matchup with, most likely, the Pistons. It may be a good series but the Pistons will win it. Then lose to the Heat and Shaq. Why? Because Detroit won't have the heart to beat a team 8 vs. 5 (refs & Heat vs. the Pistons). But I'm going to put my crystal ball away for the day.
                Two=the number 2
                Too=means "also"
                To=many definitions-also known as the one to use when the other 2 (two, too) do not apply.

                Their=shows ownership-'it is their house'
                They're=they are
                There=many definitions-also known as the one to use when the other 2 (their, they're) do not apply

                Sorry but it bugs me when these are used incorrectly when I read posts on PacersDigest.com.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Isn't it great...

                  The 13-2 streak you are talking about is the very streak that ended with the 3 loses you cite in your earlier posts. (To clearify, the winning streak you refer to in your first two posts is the same streak you later reference as "another streak where they went 15-2 or something". I'm not trying to harp on this, I just wasn't sure if my opening sentence was clear enough). Aside from that one streak there has been only one other string of games where the Pistons consistently won and that was a 6 game streak (followed by 4 consecutive losses) over marginal teams (Suns minus Nash, Celtics before Walker, the Nets before Vince got hot) and most of the wins were less than spectacular.

                  I can't argue with the perspective issue as neither of us can change the point from which we see things but you mention "peaks and valleys" which I don't think are there. Its been mostly marginal play as well as record. I would say that "peaks and valleys" more accurately describes last season as the Pistons seemed to always be on either a winning or losing streak and then the Sheed trade happened. Anyway, like I said before, I understand that non-fans can see a string of losses after a winning streak and call "peaked!" (which I've certainly done as well) but I don't see the only real winning streak coming to an end as the pinnacle of the season, especially since its probably the one time the team has played 48 minutes of mostly good basketball for more than a game or two in a row.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Isn't it great...

                    I think that the only difference between this year and last year is that this year the Pistons don't have anyone that can come in, instantly start, and make them a better team.

                    Last year you guys were desperate for anything. Sheed comes in and boom, you guys are off to the races. Now that all that hype has settled down, there's nothing really left.

                    I think you guys need a spark of sorts and I just don't see you getting it unless of course you're betting on a bench player coming back from injury. Good luck with all that.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Isn't it great...

                      Originally posted by Harddrive7
                      I think that the only difference between this year and last year is that this year the Pistons don't have anyone that can come in, instantly start, and make them a better team.

                      Last year you guys were desperate for anything. Sheed comes in and boom, you guys are off to the races. Now that all that hype has settled down, there's nothing really left.

                      I think you guys need a spark of sorts and I just don't see you getting it unless of course you're betting on a bench player coming back from injury. Good luck with all that.
                      This is all a bit of wishful thinking, I believe.

                      We're going to coast on occasion from here on out, because we really have NOTHING to play for until late april.

                      We can't catch Miami, and Cleveland has no chance of catching us.

                      So basically we're locked into the #2 seed.

                      We lose three straight west coast road games, and all of a sudden its because larry brown has "worn down" his players? Huh?

                      We've got more than enough ammo to beat Miami. The only question is, will we beat them.

                      It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                      Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                      Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                      NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Isn't it great...

                        Originally posted by Kstat
                        We lose three straight west coast road games, and all of a sudden its because larry brown has "worn down" his players? Huh?
                        No, it's not really the losing streak, IMO it's the whole picture. I think it's just because we've seen his work and LB really hasn't given anyone any reason to think otherwise.

                        edit: You warned us about Rick and we warned you about Larry. Larry is just fanning out the way we thought he would is all.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Isn't it great...

                          Originally posted by Harddrive7
                          No, it's not really the losing streak, IMO it's the whole picture. I think it's just because we've seen his work and LB really hasn't given anyone any reason to think otherwise.

                          edit: You warned us about Rick and we warned you about Larry. Larry is just fanning out the way we thought he would is all.

                          ....except if you go off of "what you've seen," then you'd expect larry to wear down his players by year 4 and 5...not years 2-3, which are usually his BEST years....

                          It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                          Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                          Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                          NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Isn't it great...

                            Originally posted by Kstat
                            ....except if you go off of "what you've seen," then you'd expect larry to wear down his players by year 4 and 5...not years 2-3, which are usually his BEST years....

                            Hmmn, I may be wrong here but I was under the impression that it was his thrid year that players would start tuning him out and then he would be gone by the 4th year.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Isn't it great...

                              Originally posted by Harddrive7
                              Hmmn, I may be wrong here but I was under the impression that it was his thrid year that players would start tuning him out and then he would be gone by the 4th year.
                              well, the 4th year of his last job, he made the NBA finals.......

                              basically the common theme here isn't based on ANYTHING people have seen from the pistons this year, its, "we just hope the defending champs decide to suddenly quit when the playoffs begin because they don't like their coach." I mean, that IS the point you're trying to make, right?

                              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X