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

Post Game Thread 1/21/2015 - Pacers @ Hawks

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

  • #46
    Re: Post Game Thread 1/21/2015 - Pacers @ Hawks

    Originally posted by Guardshock View Post
    Detroit figured it out. They turned it around and honestly it's amazing. Too bad we don't have a Josh Smith on our team we can release lol

    Quite frankly, the Pacers don't have Drummond, Monroe, or Jennings on their them to work with.

    I posted earlier in the season I didn't feel the Pacers could win 36 games like Jimmy did his 1st 2 years. Maybe now they won't even be able to win another 15 games the 2nd half of the season. This team just seems to be going thru the motions and nothing else. Why would anyone want to be in Bird's position right now? He's got one humongous daunting task this draft and off season before him! Can only hope he gets it right.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Post Game Thread 1/21/2015 - Pacers @ Hawks

      Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
      From a coaching perspective, what could we do differently? Defensively we're fine, but offensively we are a wreck.

      Outside of bringing West off the bench in order to add more activity to our starting 5 - idk what more you can do from a coaching perspective. I'd be curious to hear suggestions.
      How about play the players that deserve it?

      Or keep trotting out a guy who doesn't care and checked out before the season even started like West.


      How many years are you gonna give Vogel to coach a descent offense?

      It's hard to be an "elite" coach when you can't coach one end of the floor. Without Hibbert he wouldn't be able to coach defense either.
      "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Post Game Thread 1/21/2015 - Pacers @ Hawks

        Originally posted by Guardshock View Post
        Detroit figured it out. They turned it around and honestly it's amazing. Too bad we don't have a Josh Smith on our team we can release lol
        yes that is my point. Waiving Josh Smith changed the team drastically. Teams get into a rut and it takes something drastic to change the momentum. That is why a coaching change often jump starts a team for awhile at least.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Post Game Thread 1/21/2015 - Pacers @ Hawks

          There were a number of games where the Pacers were ahead or within 2 points late where Frank called a time out to set up an offensive play which blew up in the Pacers face even fans went wtf was that. Winning 3 or 4 of those and this team is 19-24 and in 7th in the east. A few prime examples are the recent Sixers, T'wolves and Hornet games all very disheartning losses , spinning this team with very little margin for error into as of now a 6 game losing streak.

          With Pop even with the injuries I believe he would have this team at around .500 at 23-21, 22-22, 21-23 even with the injuries this team has scandered many winable games.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Post Game Thread 1/21/2015 - Pacers @ Hawks

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            yes that is my point. Waiving Josh Smith changed the team drastically. Teams get into a rut and it takes something drastic to change the momentum.
            Do you feel there is a Pacers player that if gone, could change this team?

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Post Game Thread 1/21/2015 - Pacers @ Hawks

              Originally posted by doctor-h View Post
              It doesn't matter what I think the record would be with another coach. It would OBVIOUSLY be just a guess anyway. I absolutely would not put Vogel in the top tier of coaches in the NBA IMO. What do you think the record would be with Pop as the coach or Carlisle? The way it looks right now Vogel is getting very little out of these guys and we still have half the season to go. At the very least get some development out of your young guys and you cannot do that if they don't play. A good coach will see improvement in play as the season goes on even if that doesn't relate to the win loss column. The team will not go backwards. As far as Pop and Carlisle being more stubborn I don't agree with that at all. They hold all their players accountable to come into the game and play the way their system dictates. We don't know from one game to the next what our system is. You hear them say play thru Roy and David then you see them go away from that constantly. You see them talk about ball movement and the ball is stagnant most of the time. When you hear your assistant coach on television imploring the team to just play with energy and pride something is definitely wrong with the message getting thru.
              And we're kind of back to it. You say none of the players on the floor are more than just flawed average players, PG and GHill aren't good enough to raise the level of the team beyond average, and Vogel isn't in the top tier of coaches. Either the last two years we were incredibly lucky or Lance should be MVP.

              I think at most a couple more wins with Pop or Carlisle, and that's ONLY based on reputation because I don't see anything they could do differently with this level of talent that wouldn't leave a hole somewhere else. You can only hold players accountable for what they are able to do, you can't force them to be more talented.
              BillS

              A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
              Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Post Game Thread 1/21/2015 - Pacers @ Hawks

                Originally posted by doctor-h View Post
                It doesn't matter what record we think Pop would have with this team it would be speculation anyway. The point is it would absolutely be better. As for other coaches that would do better, how about Carlisle, Rivers, Spoelstra, VanGundy, the guy in Atlanta, Kerr, and Tibbs. Most coaches would not insist in trying to fit square holes into round pegs they would not be so stubborn to not tweak it some. These guys were doing pretty well at the start of the season, playing the right way, trusting each other, hustling and playing together. The injured come back and we go right back to the same ole same ole. The league has figured that out and its time to try something different.
                I sometimes wonder if you're even a pacers fan..
                Indiana State University Alum. Hardcore Pacers fan. Racecar Driver in need of sponsorship.

                www.jjhughesracing.com

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Post Game Thread 1/21/2015 - Pacers @ Hawks

                  I don't believe that David West is dogging because he's not interested. Did anyone ever consider that he may well be hurt or sick or just fighting to keep himself afloat? Or, maybe he has quit trying to make this sow's ear of a team into a silk purse. Maybe David IS going through the motions to get to the end of the deadline and if he doesn't get traded to a contender, will shut himself down for the year.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Post Game Thread 1/21/2015 - Pacers @ Hawks

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    yes that is my point. Waiving Josh Smith changed the team drastically. Teams get into a rut and it takes something drastic to change the momentum. That is why a coaching change often jump starts a team for awhile at least.
                    Hmmmm.... that is kind of the second sneaky subtle remark you have made about Vogel and the team today.

                    Are you wondering if maybe he has lost the team?


                    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Post Game Thread 1/21/2015 - Pacers @ Hawks

                      Originally posted by BillS View Post
                      And we're kind of back to it. You say none of the players on the floor are more than just flawed average players, PG and GHill aren't good enough to raise the level of the team beyond average, and Vogel isn't in the top tier of coaches. Either the last two years we were incredibly lucky or Lance should be MVP.

                      I think at most a couple more wins with Pop or Carlisle, and that's ONLY based on reputation because I don't see anything they could do differently with this level of talent that wouldn't leave a hole somewhere else. You can only hold players accountable for what they are able to do, you can't force them to be more talented.
                      Again have not said PG is not a great player but the rest of them are just average or flawed. This team does not have 1 star player besides Paul George and I think that would be pretty much the consensus around the league. What player do you think doesn't have a flaw or is a star. You absolutely can put a flawed player in a position to do what he does best and that is exactly what Pop is great at. That is what a coach should do if said player is not good enough to do anything within the system that helps the team then he needs to be gone.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Post Game Thread 1/21/2015 - Pacers @ Hawks

                        Originally posted by Peck View Post
                        Hmmmm.... that is kind of the second sneaky subtle remark you have made about Vogel and the team today.

                        Are you wondering if maybe he has lost the team?
                        I am!

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Post Game Thread 1/21/2015 - Pacers @ Hawks

                          Originally posted by Guardshock View Post
                          I sometimes wonder if you're even a pacers fan..
                          I am not an delusional Pacer fan. How could anyone be a fan of this garbage?

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Post Game Thread 1/21/2015 - Pacers @ Hawks

                            I still stand by my statement that no other coach would have a better record coaching this team, regardless of doctor-h's unique ability to know how fictional coaching scenarios would play out.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Post Game Thread 1/21/2015 - Pacers @ Hawks

                              Originally posted by BenR1990 View Post
                              I still stand by my statement that no other coach would have a better record coaching this team, regardless of doctor-h's unique ability to know how fictional coaching scenarios would play out.
                              Is that different than your fictional coaching scenarios as to how it wouldn't. I don't even understand how you could argue that Vogel is equal to one of the best NBA coaches of all time. Are you kidding me?

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Post Game Thread 1/21/2015 - Pacers @ Hawks

                                Originally posted by doctor-h View Post
                                You absolutely can put a flawed player in a position to do what he does best and that is exactly what Pop is great at. That is what a coach should do if said player is not good enough to do anything within the system that helps the team then he needs to be gone.
                                When a team blows up like this one did and you end up with a bunch of hobbled players trying to fill in for players too injured to even hobble, you can put them in the best individual position you want and still have holes. No matter how good a coach is, you can't cover up every hole when there are this many. You no longer have a "system" because the players you planned the system around are out and the remaining players aren't good enough to craft a new system out of whole cloth.

                                This is simply a horrible year to try to determine if anyone left on the floor is capable of doing better when not being asked to play above their heads. I think the only conclusion we can draw is that David is definitely on the downhill slide and that none of the remaining players could hit a bucket if their lives depended on it. So, on the offensive end, I would agree we don't have another star in the group remaining on the floor. I am of the opinion that we still have a star defense, and therefore we don't need a star so much as consistent scorers. Just someone who can hit an open shot.

                                I think if we had guys who could actually hit the open shots they have been getting, the opinion about the team and Vogel would be quite different.
                                BillS

                                A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                                Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X