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

Stuff from Stein chat

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Stuff from Stein chat

    The past couple of years it hasn't been Detroit or Indy winning. It's been Rick Carlisle. Isn't it amazing how one man not named Phil Jackson can turn around teams so fast? How is this guy SO under the radar?

    Marc Stein: (5:04 PM ET ) Carlisle is truly underrated. Always gets more from less from his teams. Can't agree with you totally, because it looksd as though the Pistons and Larry Brown are starting to feel each other, but Carlisle has instilled discipline rather quickly with a team that badly needed it.





    Christian ( Hawthorne, CA): my friend and I are having a little argument of who is the best big man in the East. I said Jermaine O'neal(20.7ppg 10.6.rebs 2.76blks) while he said Ben Wallace(9.8ppg 13.0rebs 3.08blks) Now what is your take?

    Marc Stein: (5:18 PM ET ) Jermaine does it at both ends. He's not the defender Wallace is, but he's obviously more complete.





    Walton makes a case both for and against the Pacers winning the championship, but is unwilling to committ to an unambiguous prediction for their future this season. Now that you have given the Pacers an implicit vote of confidence by promoting them to the number 1 slot on your Power Rankings, do you care to make a bold prediction as to whether they have any chance of winning it all?

    Marc Stein: (5:19 PM ET ) A chance? Sure. If they get that far, they'll have a chance. But if everyone's at full strength -- and none of the West powers really is yet -- I'm picking the West team.




    If you had to pick one guy to defend Kobe Bryant for a potentially game winning shot, who would you pick? Artest? Christie? Bowen? Kidd?

    Marc Stein: (5:25 PM ET ) Bowen. But I might be a tad biased on that one. Shoot me.





    Hey Marc, I know everyone likes to call the East the "JV League," but Indy and Detroit have held their own against the West as of late. Do you think their recent success is a fluke, or do you think the East is beginning to grow up? Also, in what year would you project an Eastern team to finally win it all?

    Marc Stein: (5:44 PM ET ) It's not a fluke, but it's still only in one-game bursts. If the West powers get healthy, almost any of them will be favorites against the East finalist. The East, as a whole, is still a mess and will remain so until some of the bigger guys start moving East. But at the top of the conference, you have to like Indy and Detroit and I'm not ready to write the Nets off, either.





    OK Marc. I'm no whiner. I try to stay balanced when looking at the NBA and my team. But really...leaving the Kings at #2 based on defensive FG? Isn't that a bit petty? Let's face it. The Kings competition hasn't been of the highest caliber yet. However, they have been winning the games that they are supposed to win, they currently have the best record in the NBA, and they have several potential All-Stars. As for the FG%...let's face it...when a team scores as many points as the Kings do, the other teams are going to have more opportunities to make baskets. Granted, the Kings should play less ole' type defense, allowing layups and such. Yet, that shouldn't distract from the fact that AS OF NOW...they are dominating the opposition. Isn't that what you said your Power Rankings are all about? Who is the top team as of this week? Thanks for hearing me out.

    Marc Stein: (5:52 PM ET ) The defensive FG stat is relevant because it's another indication that the Kings are not as dominant without Webber as their record suggests. The Kings were just as committed to scoring points last season and led the league in that category. Indy, by contrast, has routinely beaten West teams at home, carries the best road record in the league and recently went into Dallas (in my presence) and discombobulated the Mavs before then nearly sweeping the Spurs. I don't think a No. 2 ranking is dissing the Kings in any way, but that's as high as I can put them today, The Pacers, at the minute, are more worthy of No. 1 in my rankings. The Kings are going on the road now, so they will have their shot to rack up some wins that truly catch the eye.






    Just because the Pacers went into San Antonio and beat the Spurs does not push the Pacers above the Kings in the Power Rankings. Indiana may be the best team in the Eastern Conference, but they can't hold a candle to the Western Conference, let alone the West's "jock". Wake up Stein and give the Kings their propers. You epitomize the east coast bias. Get you head out of Bristol.

    Marc Stein: (5:53 PM ET ) Uh, James, since the age of eight I've lived in a Western Conference city for all but one year.
    Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Stuff from Stein chat

    Indy, by contrast, has routinely beaten West teams at home, carries the best road record in the league and recently went into Dallas (in my presence) and discombobulated the Mavs before then nearly sweeping the Spurs.
    I think that is an important point. We haven't lost to the west at home, and are doing well on the road too.
    Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Stuff from Stein chat

      Indy, by contrast, has routinely beaten West teams at home, carries the best road record in the league and recently went into Dallas (in my presence) and discombobulated the Mavs before then nearly sweeping the Spurs.
      I think that is an important point. We haven't lost to the west at home, and are doing well on the road too.
      We're 32-11 overall, and 22-6 vs. the East. If I can do the math (since I'm a CPA, I'll let you be the judge) we're 10-5 vs. the West.

      Actually, so is Detroit.

      Our Team UncleBuck Stat is now +12, Detroit is +6, Minnesota is +9 and the Kings and Spurs are each +6. It would be criminal for anybody to not have Indiana #1 in the power rankings prior to tonight's game.

      I know the top WC teams have a far better record against the East, but the fact that the Pacers and Detroit are both playing .667 against the West tells me they might not be pushovers against the West - especially if either gets HCA in The Finals.
      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
      And life itself, rushing over me
      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Stuff from Stein chat

        Just because the Pacers went into San Antonio and beat the Spurs does not push the Pacers above the Kings in the Power Rankings. Indiana may be the best team in the Eastern Conference, but they can't hold a candle to the Western Conference, let alone the West's "jock". Wake up Stein and give the Kings their propers. You epitomize the east coast bias. Get you head out of Bristol.

        Marc Stein: (5:53 PM ET ) Uh, James, since the age of eight I've lived in a Western Conference city for all but one year.
        Surprised that Stein, the Guru he thinks he is, missed that comment. We actually lost when we went IN TO SAN ANTONIO but did beat them here. I found that curious he didn't notice that comment.
        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

        • #5
          Re: Stuff from Stein chat

          Just because the Pacers went into San Antonio and beat the Spurs does not push the Pacers above the Kings in the Power Rankings. Indiana may be the best team in the Eastern Conference, but they can't hold a candle to the Western Conference, let alone the West's "jock". Wake up Stein and give the Kings their propers. You epitomize the east coast bias. Get you head out of Bristol.

          Marc Stein: (5:53 PM ET ) Uh, James, since the age of eight I've lived in a Western Conference city for all but one year.
          Surprised that Stein, the Guru he thinks he is, missed that comment. We actually lost when we went IN TO SAN ANTONIO but did beat them here. I found that curious he didn't notice that comment.
          Yeah I actually noticed that too. Aw well...too bad...
          Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

          Comment

          Previous template Next
          Working...
          X