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

Frustrated Ramblings....

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    Frustrated Ramblings....

    OK pass me the Kool Aid and a chaser of Haterade.... I am convinced that Artest was the engine that made this team run. He was our MVP last season. I'm thoroughly frustrated and right now feel convinced that JO has been totally exposed this season as soft and overrated. I severely question his ability to lead or ever lead for that matter. Just another talented player whose ego is bigger than his game which simply shrinks his ability when it is needed most.

    Reggie, to a fault (IMHO) has deferred to JO these past seasons all (I assume) in an attempt to prepare him for moments like this and what has it gotten us? Let's not pretend he was a force in these playoffs last season. He had one good game against the Pistons... and we lost that.

    I guess he did show up against Boston a couple of years ago... in a contract season. And we lost that series as well.

    This team played it's best team basketball of the season while JO was out. That all went into the crapper the moment JO returned. He played one good game during this year's Boston series and we won it handily (by 'good' I mean he passed the ball and let the game come to him).

    I know he's injured but the problems I am seeing aren't anything to do with his woeful shooting exhibition, they have to do with selfish play and a steadfast refusal to pass the ball let alone make quick decisions with it. If anything, his shoulder is making these other (lacking) aspects of his game even more glaring.

    The problem IMHO is a few inches above his shoulder....

    He's 26 years old... and he has been force-fed the role of leader on this team since 2000-2001. And what has it gotten us? Perhaps therein lies the problem, he was simply handed the reins of the team (was that a coaching decision, management, Reggie Miller, who?). Maybe he should've been required to earn that... Or maybe it was hoped he'd finally 'get it' if we kept pushing him... Or maybe we had to do it because some of the whispers of 'prima donna' are true and we had no choice or face sulking and cancer problems.

    Why are our shots not falling someone asked... Because the offense runs thru JO and if he bogs it down then it is totally out of sync. That's why this team was not nearly so woeful with its jumpshooting when JO was out and Dale showed how to set pics, block out and rebound.

    I'm not going to be surprised if JO's name comes up in trade rumors this summer. I'm having a hard time picturing a couple of former Celtics (Bird and Carlisle) actually wanting to see the ball going into a blackhole game after game. I know some of you think JO's untouchable but I think this season has shown just how far he has to go and I'm not sure the team is seeing the progress we need or they want. He's being eaten alive by the team directly ahead of us in a title chase.

    I hate to say this but I now believe that Artest is actually who matters on this team. Not JO. And I question if they can co-exist.

    Lastly, I think back to an article I read talking about LA's interest in JO when it was known Shaq would be traded. The writer questioned Indy's lack of interest. He said 'sure JO might give the Pacers a longer term shot a winning but Shaq could bring the Pacers their first championship and make them an immediate favorite'. Point being, the farther you look into the future the cloudier it gets. Things happen you can never imagine. The future is now. The Pacers need to quit being about "Next Year" and start focusing on the here and now.

    Also, Carlisle is a great coach IF you have a mature and coachable team. But Carlisle either by design or style will let you hang yourself with very few in game adjustments. The system is what it is and you best perform in it. JO does not.

    Detroit may be good BUT they aren't THAT good. This isn't about Detroit... it is all about the Pacers.

    I'd prefer to see the return of the 'jump shooting' team with Dale setting screens and plays ran for Reggie... and JO on the bench... than what we are getting now. JO is not the strong point of this team. He is the weak point. Actually, with the way he's being put into the center of the offense he's the key piece to beat and that simply destroys the Pacers. And he's all too happy to oblige the opposing team and take the bait.

    Yes, I am rather steamed right now.

    -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
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Frustrated Ramblings....

    Originally posted by Bball
    This team played it's best team basketball of the season while JO was out. That all went into the crapper the moment JO returned. He played one good game during the Boston series and we won it handily.

    I know he's injured but the problems I am seeing aren't anything to do with his woeful shooting exhibition, they have to do with selfish play and a steadfast refusal to pass the ball let alone make quick decisions with it. If anything, his shoulder is making these other (lacking) aspects of his game even more glaring.

    The problem IMHO is a few inches above his shoulder....

    -Bball
    He knows he is injured. He knows he can't play well. He knows he can't hit a shot against the Wallace Brothers. Yet, he still plays like he can do it from the block.

    I admit, I am very frustrated with JO right now, but this is showing that maybe he can't be a rounded-player. He should study this series a lot this off-season.
    AKA Sactolover05

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Frustrated Ramblings....

      Amen bball. We need to find JO's e-mail address and send him a copy of this one.

      IndyToad
      Breaks your heart

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Frustrated Ramblings....

        Originally posted by Bball
        Reggie, to a fault (IMHO) has deferred to JO these past seasons all (I assume) in an attempt to prepare him for moments like this and what has it gotten us? Let's not pretend he was a force in these playoffs last season. He had one good game against the Pistons... and we lost that.

        I think the most disturbing part of this series is Reggie not even attempting to throw the team on his back for another game. It is clear to me that Reggie's ankles had nothing to do with his year last year, it was all his willingness to defer. But I honestly can't comprehend how anybody, Rick and Reggie included, could be convinced that is a good decision.

        One of the flaws of Rick, who is a great coach I might add, is that he is so danged predictable. I remember last year hearing that all the Pistons players knew our plays and it made it easier to defend. I understand that with perfect execution things shouldn't matter, but if there was ever a time for a surprise attack... now is it!

        You said Rick didn't make good half-time adjustments, and I had never realized how true it is. For all of the wonderful things Rick is, a "changer" he isn't. I think some of this may be influenced by the steadfastness of Larry Bird as a coach.

        I also appreciate your candor on JO. Although I think you may be a tad harsh on him for this playoff season, I don't think you are for his career. JO should be playing better at his age than his peers b/c he has been in the league longer than many of them. Look at how well Miami's Wade is playing. Wade is playing with ice in his veins at a very young age.
        “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
        motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
        Reggie Miller

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Frustrated Ramblings....

          Bball, your post started off so well, but then I think you just were way to critical of J.O.


          I will say (and I know many will jump all over me when I post this) if anyone thinks for one minute that a team with Dale, Jeff, Reg, Jax, and AJ (the March team, the jump shooting team) would score any better against the Pistons defense you are sorely mistaken.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Frustrated Ramblings....

            Awesome post. Agree with everything you said, and have done so for a while now.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Frustrated Ramblings....

              By the way Bball..

              Listening to Slick on the radio he was talking alot about making adjustments. He mentioned he had just diagramed on a napkin how to stop Rip Hamilton on double screens.

              They also did a tremendous job getting mismatches on the Pacers.
              “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
              motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
              Reggie Miller

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Frustrated Ramblings....

                Originally posted by Bball
                Lastly, I think back to an article I read talking about LA's interest in JO when it was known Shaq would be traded. The writer questioned Indy's lack of interest. He said 'sure JO might give the Pacers a longer term shot a winning but Shaq could bring the Pacers their first championship and make them an immediate favorite'. Point being, the farther you look into the future the cloudier it gets. Things happen you can never imagine. The future is now. The Pacers need to quit being about "Next Year" and start focusing on the here and now.
                Pacers were certainly interested in Shaq and would've have put JO on the table had Shaq shown any desire whatsoever in coming to Indy. It simply wasn't going to happen because if I remember correctly, Shaq had to approve the trade.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Frustrated Ramblings....

                  Originally posted by Harmonica
                  Pacers were certainly interested in Shaq and would've have put JO on the table had Shaq shown any desire whatsoever in coming to Indy. It simply wasn't going to happen because if I remember correctly, Shaq had to approve the trade.
                  My memory is that the Pacers were one of the teams Shaq publically listed... altho I have no idea what was said in private.

                  -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

                  • #10
                    Re: Frustrated Ramblings....

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck
                    Bball, your post started off so well, but then I think you just were way to critical of J.O.


                    I will say (and I know many will jump all over me when I post this) if anyone thinks for one minute that a team with Dale, Jeff, Reg, Jax, and AJ (the March team, the jump shooting team) would score any better against the Pistons defense you are sorely mistaken.

                    Friday March 25, 2005 @ Detroit
                    Pacers 94
                    Pistons 81

                    -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

                    • #11
                      Re: Frustrated Ramblings....

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck

                      I will say (and I know many will jump all over me when I post this) if anyone thinks for one minute that a team with Dale, Jeff, Reg, Jax, and AJ (the March team, the jump shooting team) would score any better against the Pistons defense you are sorely mistaken.
                      Maybe I am being naive but to me the offense the Pacers are running now is easy to defend, and made more easy by how JO is playing in it.

                      ...And we scored 94 points at Detroit without him. I can't forget that.

                      -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

                      • #12
                        Re: Frustrated Ramblings....

                        Come now, comparing the regular season with the playoffs is not a fair or good comparison

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Frustrated Ramblings....

                          Rick is the one calling the damn plays, maybe you should blame him.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Frustrated Ramblings....

                            It seems as though in many aspects, Carlisle is running an offense that we have become accustomed to.........

                            although it was only successful when another very important HALF of the puzzle was here too...

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Frustrated Ramblings....

                              Originally posted by btowncolt
                              Harmonica is right on this one. It's one of the things I would have responded to.

                              Shaq had no interest playing, or re-signing in Indiana. We would have made a push to get him otherwise. When Donnie was asked at the time who he thought it would take to get Shaq, he said something along the lines of "At least JO" without even saying that he thought that was unreasonable or that JO was untouchable. But he then did say that Shaq didn't want to play here, which made the debate moot.
                              Before we get too sidetracked, the point wasn't wholly about bringing Shaq here. It was just an example of making a grab for a championship 'now' rather than thinking far out into the future and hoping the stars align.

                              -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

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X