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

3/4/15 Game Thread #60: Pacers vs. Knicks

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

  • 3/4/15 Game Thread #60: Pacers vs. Knicks

    SACRED OOPS


    -VS-



    Game Time Start: 7:00 PM ET
    Where: The Fieldhouse, Indianapolis, IN
    Officials: T. Washington, T. Brown, L. Holtkamp

    Media Notes: Indiana Notes, New York Notes
    Television: FSI / MSG
    Radio: WFNI 1070 AM, 107.5 FM / WEPN 98.7 FM
    NBA Feeds:

    REMINDER: Per PD policy, please do not share a link to, describe how to search for, request a link to, or request a PM about streaming video of a NBA game that is not coming directly through the NBA. Not even in a "wink-wink, nudge-nudge, know-what-I-mean" round-about sort of way. Thank you


    25-34
    Home: 14-14
    East: 17-16
    12-47
    Away: 3-26
    East: 9-31
    Mar 06
    Mar 07
    Mar 10
    Mar 12
    7:00pm
    7:30pm
    7:00pm
    7:00pm
    HIBBERT
    WEST
    MILES
    HILL
    HILL
    BARGNANI
    AMUNDSON
    EARLY
    HARDAWAY JR.
    GALLOWAY


    PACERS
    Paul George - Fractured Right Tibia/Fibula (out)

    KNICKS
    Carmelo Anthony - left knee surgery (out)
    Jose Calderon - sore left achilles (out)



    Albert Burneko: Anthony Mason Was From The Future

    We'll mostly remember Anthony Mason for toughness, the way that we remember the Riley-era
    Knicks teams on which he made his reputation. Which, fine. He got in fights, on- and off-court;
    he deployed his elbows and extra-large *** with abandon and occasional malice; he glowered
    and wheedled and provoked, the way NBA players did in the '90s. Anthony Mason was tough.

    I must confess, though, that—both as a 10- or 11-year-old kid first becoming aware of Anthony
    Mason during the Knicks' rise to a kind of doomed rivalry with Michael Jordan's Bulls, and now
    as a grown man—I never had much use for the particular brand of toughness we're usually
    talking about when we talk about those Knicks. The sneering puffed-chest goon ****, the implied
    I'll cut you for scoring on me of it. It's dumb and silly and not a little pathetic, even when you
    set aside the basic silliness of sports—"They're playing with a ball!"—and make allowances for
    the very real differences between basketball as playground pastime and as profession.

    In any case, this way of remembering those Knicks teams, and Mason, who died this past
    Saturday from congestive heart failure, makes too much of what ultimately wasn't so huge a
    difference between them and any other NBA team from those ugly early- to mid-'90s years.
    They didn't (or didn't just) intimidate and foul and fight their way to wins; they passed and
    made baskets and played defense, like anybody else, just with shittier looks on their faces. In
    the 1993-94 season that turned out to be the high-water mark of the Riley years, they
    committed the fourth-most personal fouls in the NBA—but they also shot a lot of threes (relative
    to their era and glacial pace), passed the ball more creatively than many nominally more
    finesse-oriented teams, and played good actual defense, which is not the same thing as just
    flattening every ball-handler who comes near the paint. They, like the Bulls and Rockets and
    everybody else, won because they were good at playing what was, recognizably, basketball.

    Anthony Mason embodied this gap between the Riley-era Knicks' reputation and reality better
    than anyone. His game had a staccato, skittering quality to it; his feet never seemed to get
    more than two inches off the floor, even when he jumped. And his free-throw shooting
    technique, for most of his career, was a hilarious wreck: an elaborate, halting, multi-stage affair,
    like a ritual meant to lull the rim to sleep.


    But however neatly that jerry-rigged and duct-taped mess might dovetail with the myth of
    Anthony Mason, Basketball Golem—for all that we're now remembering him as the avatar of a
    no-skill all-will notion of basketball as a headbutting contest between australopithecines—Mase
    was a wondrously and diversely skilled actual basketball player: a combo forward who could
    handle the ball, knock down jumpers, defend wings out on the perimeter, and bang with bigs
    around the hoop. Also, and most entertainingly, he was a sharp-eyed and creative distributor of
    the ball. He threw bounce passes with expert touch and impish imagination, a trait we're more
    comfortable associating with slick, Euro-inspired, analytics-optimized modern teams like the
    Spurs than with the prison-yard shiv-sport we like to remember those Knicks teams practicing.
    Knicks fans may hate this to their curdled, Bulls-hating marrow, but he had at least as much in
    common with Scottie Pippen as he did with anyone else in the league.

    In the 1999-00 season, his third with the Charlotte Hornets and deep into the downslope of his
    career, 33-year-old Anthony Mason started, played 48 minutes, and guarded 23-year-old
    destroyer-of-worlds Vince Carter pretty much throughout a 110-101 overtime win over the
    Toronto Raptors. Which, I think we can all agree, is the work of a tough *******.

    He also ran point for the Hornets, initiated the offense, handled and distributed the ball, and
    finished with 31 points, 14 rebounds, and 11 assists. That, I think we can all agree, is not the
    work of a goon...CONTINUE READING DEADSPIN


    Pacers
    Candace Buckner @CandaceDBuckner
    Jared Wade @8pts9secs
    Tim Donahue @TimDonahue8p9s
    Tom Lewis @indycornrows
    Ian Levy @HickoryHigh
    Whitney @its_whitney

    Knicks
    Frank Isola @FisolaNYDN
    Alan Hahn @alanhahn
    netw3rk @netw3rk
    Mike Kurylo @KnickerBlogger
    Seth Rosenthal @seth_rosenthal
    Chris Herring @HerringWSJ

    This is the darkest timeline.

  • #2
    Re: 3/4/15 Game Thread #60: Pacers vs. Knicks

    Who the hell is Early.

    LOL @ that Knicks starting line up.
    https://twitter.com/DrogsNavan

    Change is neither good or bad, it simply is.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 3/4/15 Game Thread #60: Pacers vs. Knicks

      Originally posted by IrishPacer View Post
      Who the hell is Early.

      LOL @ that Knicks starting line up.
      Early is a rookie from Witchita St. He was good in college. But I agree, their starting lineup is full of cab drivers, and we should easily win
      Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 3/4/15 Game Thread #60: Pacers vs. Knicks

        Originally posted by IrishPacer View Post
        Who the hell is Early.

        LOL @ that Knicks starting line up.
        Pretty damn good kid from Wichita St. I honestly hope he makes it in the league. He was fun to watch the last 3 years in college. We played him twice a year at ISU so I was really pulling for him to have a good transition into the NBA
        Indiana State University Alum. Hardcore Pacers fan. Racecar Driver in need of sponsorship.

        www.jjhughesracing.com

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: 3/4/15 Game Thread #60: Pacers vs. Knicks

          Whew. I was going to get really nervous if we were missing ATC for another game. No ATC, and a RoboDoug who is mysteriously unwilling to total up Guess the Score figures - it's like a PD mid-season collapse!
          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


          • #6
            Re: 3/4/15 Game Thread #60: Pacers vs. Knicks

            Originally posted by BillS View Post
            Whew. I was going to get really nervous if we were missing ATC for another game. No ATC, and a RoboDoug who is mysteriously unwilling to total up Guess the Score figures - it's like a PD mid-season collapse!
            I blame UB's offcourt issues while leading PD in Technical fouls, add in Trader Joe's strange interest in pursuing a Folk Song career while partying all night long before games, Grimp's continual fawning over GH alongside PacersPride ongoing admiration for Hibbert.....and you have too many locker room issues that is starting to cause this PD Mid-season collapse.
            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: 3/4/15 Game Thread #60: Pacers vs. Knicks

              Originally posted by CableKC View Post
              I blame UB's offcourt issues while leading PD in Technical fouls, add in Trader Joe's strange interest in pursuing a Folk Song career while partying all night long before games, Grimp's continual fawning over GH alongside PacersPride ongoing admiration for Hibbert.....and you have too many locker room issues that is starting to cause this PD Mid-season collapse.
              All I'm saying is, we got some selfish posters in here.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: 3/4/15 Game Thread #60: Pacers vs. Knicks

                Originally posted by TMJ31 View Post
                All I'm saying is, we got some selfish posters in here.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: 3/4/15 Game Thread #60: Pacers vs. Knicks

                  Originally posted by cdash View Post
                  Sorry, the joke practically begged me to post it. Had to be done. Lol.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: 3/4/15 Game Thread #60: Pacers vs. Knicks

                    This would be a nice game to win!
                    Go Pacers!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: 3/4/15 Game Thread #60: Pacers vs. Knicks

                      Read that Frank Vogel said he's giving Roy Hibbert the night off for rest. Mahinmi is starting and Lavoy will back him up tonight.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: 3/4/15 Game Thread #60: Pacers vs. Knicks

                        Originally posted by BenR1990 View Post
                        Read that Frank Vogel said he's giving Roy Hibbert the night off for rest. Mahinmi is starting and Lavoy will back him up tonight.
                        What?

                        I guess Vogel doesn't respect the Knicks
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: 3/4/15 Game Thread #60: Pacers vs. Knicks

                          Originally posted by BenR1990 View Post
                          Read that Frank Vogel said he's giving Roy Hibbert the night off for rest. Mahinmi is starting and Lavoy will back him up tonight.
                          With our upcoming schedule I am on board with this. Get Roy rest against a team we should beat anyways for the stretch run.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: 3/4/15 Game Thread #60: Pacers vs. Knicks

                            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                            What?

                            I guess Vogel doesn't respect the Knicks
                            PacersPride called Frank at noon. By 4:30 Frank promised to bench Roy if PP would promise to hang up and not call back.
                            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


                            • #15
                              Re: 3/4/15 Game Thread #60: Pacers vs. Knicks




                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X