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

I have a question . . .

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

  • #16
    Re: I have a question . . .

    Originally posted by PacerSoul
    I'd take Shaq and a note, Iverson is an amazing player and has lead his team to the NBA Finals by himself. Something Kobe has not.

    One last thing, is your notion of Shaq not being the most dominant player because of people comparing the dominance of Shaq and Jordan?

    Also, when Jordan played, defense was not as good as it is today. The emphasis of defense is more today.
    Winning in the east in 2001 and in today's game is much easier than winning in the west. Fact.

    No, I do think Shaq was/is dominant, top 4 or 5 in terms of dominance in the past 20 years or so, if you want me to judge by the period of time you set.

    You've got to be kidding about the defense reference you've just made.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: I have a question . . .

      Originally posted by Savior-Self
      Winning in the east in 2001 and in today's game is much easier than winning in the west. Fact.

      No, I do think Shaq was/is dominant, top 4 or 5 in terms of dominance in the past 20 years or so, if you want me to judge by the period of time you set.

      You've got to be kidding about the defense reference you've just made.
      Big playoff games are won with defense today. In the past, games were won on offense. Why would I be kidding?

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: I have a question . . .

        Originally posted by PacerSoul
        Shaq does make those 2-guards. Where was Dwayne Wade last year? He was home after the Pacers eliminated them and he wasn't scoring 30 pts/game. Shaq makes players around him, better. Look at least season with the Lakers role players and look at this season with players like Butler and Jones for the Heat.




        You should tell people on here to stop judging Jermaine O'Neal then. He played with one arm during the playoffs and was a warrior. Kobe's injury was minute compared to J.O.
        Dwyane Wade was a rookie guard, who was injured throughout most of his rookie season, who almost led his young Miami Heat squad past the powerhouse Pacers. Since when is a rookie not allowed to improve his game in the following season? Dwyane Wade made himself, and for the most part this season, he led the Heat. And while Shaq, injured and all, coasted through the first round, Wade led his team to a clean sweep. And while Shaq coasted the first 2 games against the Wizards and then missed the next 2, Wade led his team, to yet another sweep. Things looked clear for Miami when Shaq was dominating first quarters and the bulk of the second quarters against the Pistons and then dissappearing late in games. They needed wade. Near back to back 40 game performances gave them that. Then Wade got injured, and a blowout in game 6 and the eventual loss in game 7 was all due in part to Wade's injury.

        Shaq didn't make Wade. Again, Wade made himself.

        If losing one arm was all it took for Jermaine O'neal to rebound, than that's his problem.

        2 different injuries, believe it or not, NBA players need their legs/feet to be effective moreso than their arms/wrist. Look no further than Ron Artest playing effectively with a broken hand a year back and Horry tonight. That length of the floor isn't going to run itself, a torn ligament hurts.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: I have a question . . .

          Originally posted by PacerSoul
          Big playoff games are won with defense today. In the past, games were won on offense. Why would I be kidding?

          That would explain the Knicks, the Pacers, the Heat, the Pistons, the Rockets, the Jazz, and the other teams of the 90's that won big games with great defense.

          I didn't even have to count the Bulls.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: I have a question . . .

            Originally posted by Savior-Self

            Shaq didn't make Wade. Again, Wade made himself.
            Hey I agree with you, with a healthy Wade Miami is in the Finals but you have to realize Shaq was hurt too. Also, I take away nothing from Wade but Shaq's dominance on the court makes his teammates so much better. That's why Kobe looked so good on the Lakers and why Wade looks so good on the Heat. They are both great offensive players and powerhouses but the reason they look like MVP's is because Shaq is on the team. IF Shaq wasn't there, they would still be and are great players but they are not the MVP type players. Wade would prob. have been Finals MVP had the Heat won it all.


            2 different injuries, believe it or not, NBA players need their legs/feet to be effective moreso than their arms/wrist. Look no further than Ron Artest playing effectively with a broken hand a year back and Horry tonight. That length of the floor isn't going to run itself, a torn ligament hurts.
            Artest is just a beast. He recovered from an injury (after his surgery) that usually takes months. He's just a phenemon and a beast.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: I have a question . . .

              Originally posted by Savior-Self
              That would explain the Knicks, the Pacers, the Heat, the Pistons, the Rockets, the Jazz, and the other teams of the 90's that won big games with great defense.

              I didn't even have to count the Bulls.

              I agree but today the emphasis is placed more on defense where defense was a part of winning in the past but it didn't dominate games like it does today. Today games are defensive games (look at the Pistons, Spurs, Pacers, etc etc.)

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: I have a question . . .

                Originally posted by PacerSoul
                I agree but today the emphasis is placed more on defense where defense was a part of winning in the past but it didn't dominate games like it does today. Today games are defensive games (look at the Pistons, Spurs, Pacers, etc etc.)

                Aye, same game, different era. Defense wins championships in every proffesional sport, I dare you to look back at a Knicks-Bulls or Pacers-Bulls ECF and not tell me that the defensive intensity in those games didn't match that of an Indiana-Detroit.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: I have a question . . .

                  Originally posted by PacerSoul
                  Hey I agree with you, with a healthy Wade Miami is in the Finals but you have to realize Shaq was hurt too. Also, I take away nothing from Wade but Shaq's dominance on the court makes his teammates so much better. That's why Kobe looked so good on the Lakers and why Wade looks so good on the Heat. They are both great offensive players and powerhouses but the reason they look like MVP's is because Shaq is on the team. IF Shaq wasn't there, they would still be and are great players but they are not the MVP type players. Wade would prob. have been Finals MVP had the Heat won it all.




                  Artest is just a beast. He recovered from an injury (after his surgery) that usually takes months. He's just a phenemon and a beast.

                  Naa, the reason they look like MVP's is because they're performing like MVP's. Granted, Shaq has an impact in every game that he plays, but if you put Howard Eisely, Jerome Moiso, Courtney Alexander and Micheal Curry around him to round out his starting five, I guarantee you he won't make them look any better than they are. Shaq makes the players around him better, but in a sense, they make him better as well. For all of his good traits, he has his flaws in his game. Detroit has now exposed them twice. Shaq needed Penny, Kobe, and Wade as much as they needed him.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: I have a question . . .

                    Originally posted by Will Galen
                    If you can't hit your free throws can you be considered clutch?
                    Only if you hit it!

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: I have a question . . .

                      Originally posted by Savior-Self
                      Aye, same game, different era. Defense wins championships in every proffesional sport, I dare you to look back at a Knicks-Bulls or Pacers-Bulls ECF and not tell me that the defensive intensity in those games didn't match that of an Indiana-Detroit.

                      The games weren't always in the 60's and 70's (the Pacers-Bulls series)

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: I have a question . . .

                        Originally posted by Savior-Self
                        Naa, the reason they look like MVP's is because they're performing like MVP's. Granted, Shaq has an impact in every game that he plays, but if you put Howard Eisely, Jerome Moiso, Courtney Alexander and Micheal Curry around him to round out his starting five, I guarantee you he won't make them look any better than they are. Shaq makes the players around him better, but in a sense, they make him better as well. For all of his good traits, he has his flaws in his game. Detroit has now exposed them twice. Shaq needed Penny, Kobe, and Wade as much as they needed him.
                        Detroit didn't expose him this season. He was playing injured and Wade got injured.

                        Look Shaq needs a good player to be on his team to win titles but he is the most dominant player. Respectfully we disagree how dominant Shaq is but only Shaq had a system like the "Hack-A-Shaq" named after him.

                        They look like MVP's because Shaq is on the team! WIthout Shaq they wouldn't play like MVPS!!!!!! We just disagree but I think most NBA commentators and experts would take my side on this. Shaq is just too dominant of a player (or was) but I think he will be fine next season after he rests his body in the off-season. Next year the championship will go through Heat-Pacers.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: I have a question . . .

                          Originally posted by PacerSoul
                          Detroit didn't expose him this season. He was playing injured and Wade got injured.

                          Look Shaq needs a good player to be on his team to win titles but he is the most dominant player. Respectfully we disagree how dominant Shaq is but only Shaq had a system like the "Hack-A-Shaq" named after him.

                          They look like MVP's because Shaq is on the team! WIthout Shaq they wouldn't play like MVPS!!!!!! We just disagree but I think most NBA commentators and experts would take my side on this. Shaq is just too dominant of a player (or was) but I think he will be fine next season after he rests his body in the off-season. Next year the championship will go through Heat-Pacers.
                          Detroit exposed him last season, and while yes, you can argue that he was injured this season, those "NBA commentators and experts" that would disagree with me... were widely reporting Shaq's great progression in terms of his injury having been healed. The fact that Shaq said himself that he was finally feeling good a few games into the ECF (was it game 4 or 5? Can't remember.) during the post game interviews, should serve as enough proof. If anyone would like to come in and back me up on this, feel free to do so.

                          Pacersoul, I don't know if you know this, but players that haven't had Shaq on there team have won the MVP before.

                          All kidding aside, I'll explain again that even though Shaq is the most dominant player in the league* (I'll address what the asterisk means after I finish my thought.), if you were to put four scrubs around him, he would falter just as much as the next great player. Jordan never won without Pippen. Bird never won without McHale/Parrish, Magic never won without Kareem. If you look at Shaq's first season, you'll see that his Orlando team managed to finish only 41-41 in the regular season, ultimately missing the playoffs. That was before Penny. If you look at his tenure with the Lakers, until Kobe finally came along roughly 3 seasons in, Shaq and the lakers were consistantly swept in the first round. In Miami, without Wade, the Heat were blown out in game 6, and game 7, without a healthy Wade, Shaq couldn't deliver the goods. The formula is simple, 2 superstars. With or without Shaq, unless you're the Pistons.

                          Btw, you're right about Jordan never having a "Hack-a-Jordan" gameplan drawn up for him. He had "The Jordan Rules".

                          Next season, the title does go through Miami and Indiana if both teams can stay healthy and out of trouble. That I do agree with.


                          Now, for the asterisk. I think the Shaq of today is earning his "most dominant" title based simply on respect and... well, the fact that he's Shaq. Whether it be the refs, or the opposing team that guards him every night, Shaq is rarely left in one on one coverage, Shaq rarely gets called for his punishing clear out moves, and overall, he's just given too much leeway to do whatever he wants. Going into this season, having heard that he had lost 30 pounds and what not, how many of us can honestly say that we thought any team other than Detroit would consider guarding Shaq one on one in the post? Exactly. Now, after watching Superman weaken a bit, how many teams are going to at least attempt to stop him by trying to guard him one on one? I can bet that there'll be a few.

                          His mobility is declining, his age is getting up in the danger zone for big men, his ability to take over a game is all but gone. Shaq is no longer the player who can carry you with 35 points and 23 rebounds, he's not THAT Shaq. He's a seasoned veteran, a champion, a person who just usually goes through the motions nowadays. He'll dominate you the first quarter, maybe the first half, he'll coast the third and then he'll make a few buckets in the fourth and finish it off with a few foul shots. That's Shaquille O'neal. His importance, in today's game, lies in who he is, not who he was. His teammates look for guidance, confidence, leadership... that's what he does best. I'm sure you've heard the Jamie Fox "he showed them the rings at a team dinner" story, or the "Flash, they can't stop you" phone call or the "Rasual, keep your head up, your time will come" motivational transcripts. Everyone has, and we'll continue to hear about them. Every few games he'll remind us who he is, whether it be an emphatic dunk or two, three, maybe four. He'll prove that he's more than some shadow of his former self, and he'll "remind" everyone else. Then he'll take a few games to coast, only as he can, go through the motions and rest his old, aging body. As great players get older, the game becomes much more of a cerebral one than a physical/talent one. Shaq's mastered the art form.

                          All in all though, I still think he's an amazing player and person, and he should've won the MVP this season. His contribution is one that cannot be matched based only on box scores and stat sheets.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: I have a question . . .

                            I know I'm beating a dead horse.

                            But if J.O. ever shoots 1 of 7 in the 4th quarter of an NBA Finals game, I shudder to think how he would be criticized in this forum. It would be taked about and used as proof for certain arguments for years and years.

                            TD had a great game overall though

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: I have a question . . .

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck
                              I know I'm beating a dead horse.

                              But if J.O. ever shoots 1 of 7 in the 4th quarter of an NBA Finals game, I shudder to think how he would be criticized in this forum. It would be taked about and used as proof for certain arguments for years and years.
                              TD has two titles under his belt. That tends to make fans a little more forgiving.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: I have a question . . .

                                Originally posted by Harmonica
                                TD has two titles under his belt. That tends to make fans a little more forgiving.
                                Jermaine will have one next season. I would love to see a J.O.-Duncan Finals next year.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X