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

Reggie's comments!

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

  • #46
    Re: Reggie's comments!

    Originally posted by Hicks
    If the Pacers lose 3/4 to DET, MIA, CLE, or SA, we'll read a lot of "They can't beat these teams". If they win 3/4, it's "just the regular season".
    Nope, I'm not gonna count it that way.

    The regular season only matters in getting to the playoffs, so if we lose 3/4 to them, but still make the playoffs then it starts over again. Even if we win 4/0.
    House Name: Pacers

    House Sigil:



    House Words: "We Kneel To No King"

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Reggie's comments!

      Anyways kids, gotta go to class now. Talk to ya all tonight.

      Oh and Hicks, the New Castle Trojans are going down to the Horsemen.

      My team's core is unshakable.
      House Name: Pacers

      House Sigil:



      House Words: "We Kneel To No King"

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Reggie's comments!

        DD has some valid points. I believe JO needs to change the way he plays against Detroit. Sheed knows how to defend JO. I believe against the Pistons
        JO should be a rebounding and shot blocking fool. Offensively he should be
        a facilitator. JO cannot get his little jump shot off against Sheed in the post.
        He needs to take him out of the post and hit an occasional jumper or drive
        past him to get Sheed to foul him or dunk on him.

        The team as constructed has been mentally weak the past 3 years.
        That has to change. Injuries have got to stop or stronger, more resilient
        teams(Detroit) will de-rail the Pacers again. If the Pacers can have at
        least one healthy center and 2 point guards(one being Tinsley) and
        get mentally tougher they can make it out of the east and have a good
        chance at winning the title. I believe this is the last chance for this group
        of players to prove themselves. It is time.


        owl
        {o,o}
        |)__)
        -"-"-

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Reggie's comments!

          Originally posted by Diamond Dave
          Well I'll agree that now we have a better coach.

          But thats about it, unfortunately.

          I look at their supporting cast and it is at least equal to if not better than ours with Prince, McDyess, Arroyo, etc....

          Plus the thing with them is that there starters can and will play a lot.

          I know that you see my "buts" and "ifs" as just that, "buts" and "ifs."

          However to me they are something more, they are history. We cannot expect the same problems that have plagued us each year for a while now just to go away this season.

          Plus, and Brown may have contributed to this, but the Pistons "core" just has us mentally. Rasheed always seems to outplay O'Neal, and I think that is on pure mental strength because JO is the better player.

          Billups is a historically better playoff performer, Tinsley seems to get worse.

          And Hamilton always kills us, but maybe that was Reggie, I don't know.
          Dave, I think you make a whole lot of sense for those who will listen.

          It reminds me of the old Knicks team that we couldn't seem to get past for quite some time. Those Knicks had a certain cohesion that it took us a while to mimic. More importantly, they had that arrogance/self-confidence that they would best us and enforced that will on us.

          I think the Pistons carry that same demeanor and until we get that, we don't beat them in the playoffs.

          Yeah, on paper, we look great, blah, blah, blah. People have said the same thing for years about the Mavericks. On paper, we look great, but then so do Miami, Grizzlies, etc. I think this year is a trial run to get the pieces in place.

          I don't see us having that arrogant cohesion yet. Rasheed seems to best JO cause he thinks he's better than JO. And Jo seems to sub-consciously buy into it. Tinsley can be a marvel, but Billups seems to be able to bring it when needed in a non-flashy, effective manner.

          I think we're a year away from any real title aspirations. I think even the most optimistic of us can finally ackowledge there are, and will be problems in our lockerroom. That's something fundamental that's hard to get past.

          I love this squad talentwise. Matter of fact, I think it's the most talented squad we've ever had. (except a couple of ABA teams) No hyperbole. I truly believe this. But at what point do we become a unit? How is Cabbage's personality going to affect this team late season? There obviously have been some Ron/Jermaine issues. How is that going to play out?

          Let me put it this way: When you look at the Spurs or Pistons, do you seem personality conflict issues? Or do you see cohesion?

          That is the telling mark of a title contender to me.
          Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Reggie's comments!

            All Reggie said was he favored the Pistons over the Pacers because the Pistons get along (or something like that). The fact is the Pistons made it to the finals the last two years and until they don't this year or don't make the playoffs at all they're the team to beat.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Reggie's comments!

              Am I the only one who interpreted Reggie's remark about questionable team chemistry for the Pacers to actually mean, simply, that they have Ron Artest on the team and many players believe that they cannot count on him?

              I hope the team chemistry concept boils down to only one individual, because I have to believe that Larry and Donnie have a long-range plan to deal with that as soon as Ron plays well enough long enough to reacquire legitimate trade value.
              The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Reggie's comments!

                Originally posted by pacertom
                I hope the team chemistry concept boils down to only one individual, because I have to believe that Larry and Donnie have a long-range plan to deal with that as soon as Ron plays well enough long enough to reacquire legitimate trade value.
                I told quite a few other forum members that I think that is exactly Donnie and Larry's long range plan. Ron has a fundamental ignorance, not wholly his own fault, that makes him have trouble with simple life decisions. I suspect that Donie and Larry can see that as being a crumbling brick in the locker room on which to build a title winning foundation.

                There are too many emrging players on teams we could possibly makes deals either due to our connections with them (Golden State, Philly, NY) or a history of being dealers or teams on the brink (Mavs, Grizzlies.)

                Yeah, polish Ron up, makes him bright and shiney, then tell the Mavs how they need a stopper like him for Maquis and Diop, or some such thing. (I don't know how the salaries work out, just giving a frex.)

                I didn't take Reggie to be infering Ron, but that seems a pretty valid interpretation.
                Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Reggie's comments!

                  Until someone beats the Pistons and gets to the Finals, the Pistons still have to be considered the favorite. They haven't lost any key players. You may say they will go down because of the loss of Larry Brown, but the players are still the same if not better. You may say that the Heat or Pacers are now the better team because of the offseason moves in Miami or because of Ron being back or Sarunas. I'll say it once they beat the Pistons in the playoffs. They're still the East Champs, like it or not.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Reggie's comments!

                    I know this is as good as blasphemy, but has anyone considered Reggie to be one of the "problems" in the lockerroom?

                    As I said earlier (ok long time ago) Reggie was looked upon by most as"uncle Reg" the team leader. He himself however did not want to be that leader, except by "example"

                    Considering his age and experience he was lightyears away from most team members that also "mattered" like Ron, JO and Tins, all generations younger, coming from completely different backgrounds etc.
                    Is it at all possible that Reggie could not "relate" to the remaining team members, or does it HAVE to be Ron Artest?

                    I am willing to believe what I hear and read about Ron and JO, and I "taste" a far better chemistry at the moment, and when I then relate Reggie's remark, I think that He nad JO would not have been a problem, but they were "the establishment" on the team, Ron, Jax, Tins, and others, might have been "scared of" by that or saw it as a canyon they could not (or did not want to) cross.

                    We are in a new situation and imo we must realize that things are very different from previous years, certainly if it comes to "chemistry" and such. This team is much closer in age, been together some time, and disapproval of one teammate NOW unlike the disapproval of Reggie, is far more a peer matter then it was before
                    Also JO is now the "real" leader of the team, and not the token one with the nestor in the background.

                    Strangely enough I am not that worried about chemistry this year.
                    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                    If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                    Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Reggie's comments!

                      I firmly reside in pacertom and Skaut Ech's camp. The Pacers are just being patient at this point. I think that Bird is willing to see if the team can play championship caliber basketball as currently constructed (i.e. with Ron). But, I also believe Bird is trying to polish up Ron, so to speak, and will jump on the right trade offer.

                      I think unless we are, at the very least, in the NBA finals this year (and competitive), Ron will be playing for a different team by the start of next season. And, I wouldn't be the least bit shocked if it was by the trade deadline this season if we are "underachieving."

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Reggie's comments!

                        Reggie the problem? Reggie not a good team mate?

                        These are two questions posed above by two differant posters.

                        Now I put this to the entire forum.

                        Does anybody want to take this challenge head on?

                        Is there anyone who is going to argue that the reason for the teams problems over the past couple of years is that Reggie Miller was the problem or that he could not get along with team mates?

                        Is there one person who is going to stand up & say that Ron Artest is a better team mate than Reggie Miller or that given a choice between Ron Artest & Reggie Miller the focus of the teams problems were Reggie?

                        Or if you don't want to use Ron insert the name Jermaine.

                        I was never EVER Reggie Millers biggest fan, but given the choices from above????? It's not even close.


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

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Reggie's comments!

                          Originally posted by Diamond Dave
                          Did Ben lose his cool?
                          Hmmmm Did Ben lose his cool or was it a calculated move that worked far better than he ever imagined.... ?

                          -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


                          • #58
                            Re: Reggie's comments!

                            Originally posted by Peck
                            Reggie the problem? Reggie not a good team mate?



                            Is there anyone who is going to argue that the reason for the teams problems over the past couple of years is that Reggie Miller was the problem or that he could not get along with team mates?
                            The closest I could see an argument being built would be over either arguably Reggie's legacy starts and/or possibly the money he commanded for the last 2 years that maybe some felt would've been spent elsewhere for a stronger team (if Reggie would have taken a more drastic paycut).

                            Reggie coming off the bench would've allowed Al his coveted starting spot if Artest played SG. I suppose an argument could be made that some of the team didn't like "Reggie the Deferrer" any more than some of the fans and felt he either could contribute more... or should do that off the bench. ...Or maybe some felt his defense wasn't up to the standards of the rest of the team (and by playing such a deferring role on offense) he held them back.

                            Of course if any did feel that way, 11/19 changed everything anyway. It also provided everyone a glimpse that Reggie had more in the tank than anyone ever imagined (except for 3ptMiller).

                            -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


                            • #59
                              Re: Reggie's comments!

                              Originally posted by Diamond Dave
                              Once again, regular season.

                              And your right about them without LB, thats why they won't return to the finals.

                              I still expect them to beat us.
                              You expect the Raptors to beat us

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Reggie's comments!

                                Who cares who Reggie picked? The much beloved Peter Vecsey says Pacers in 6 over the Spurs......
                                PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X