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

OK... I believe those that say Sjax won't pass to Saras

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

  • #31
    Re: OK... I believe those that say Sjax won't pass to Saras

    This was the first game this year that I saw in person and I watched in awe and dismay how splintered this team is! Jackson refused to have any interaction with Saras for ANY of the game as far as I saw, except for a moment when yelling at him during a time out (Foster noticed it and sort of shook his head).
    Jax has to go IMHO after I witnessed all of this. His buddy of Negativity this night was Tins. They both seemed pretty distant to most of the rest of the team exept JO some times, they know where their bread is buttered.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: OK... I believe those that say Sjax won't pass to Saras

      Originally posted by Gamble
      Jackson just isn't a smart bb player its that simple. He is talented though
      and when he gets his touch it doesn't matter if its forced or not.
      The first half of his season with the Hawks sucked and then
      he got comfortable and was amazing. I'll still give him a year, i mean look
      at what people put up with RON.
      There's a difference between Ron's situation and Jackson's. Ron hurt the Pacers when he was off the court, not when he was on it. Jackson hurts the Pacers when he's on the court. He may have a couple of great nights every season like against the Wizards, but in the end, he remains the main disruptor of letting the Pacers play team basketball.

      So I say : hit the road, Jax, and don't you come back no more no more no more no more, hit the road, jax, and don't you come back no more.
      Word on the street is he doesn't want your money, he only wants to please your ears...
      Bum in Berlin on Myspace

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: OK... I believe those that say Sjax won't pass to Saras

        Trade Jax for Ron and this team will be OK.
        I am still in the give Ron another chance camp. Kind of lonely here but both of us will survive. I hope.

        I have always thought Jax was the (a) main problem with the Pacers and Ron was second. Ron gave his all on the court.
        I saw the play where Steve Jackson would not pass to Saras, Saras smacked his hands together in disgust and moved on. I think if Jax had passed him the ball we would have scored a layup. If Jax had broken to the basket he would have gotten the return pass.

        I say let Ron return and trade Jax.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: OK... I believe those that say Sjax won't pass to Saras

          Guys don't You worry 'bout Saras&SJAX issue.

          In Lithuania PG's are trained (since they are like 10 yrsold) like they can come up to the guy that has messed up the offencive flow and hit him into stomach. BECAUSE THE POINTGUARD IS THE NEXT MAN AFTER COACH WHEN YOU PLAY BBALL GAME. And if the PG is shouting to the man with the ball to pass it HE HAS TO DO IT. Coma.

          If SJAXs is not listening to Saras or Tins or even AJ while he's at PG spot that guy has to go or to get beaten into his head untill he'll understand that. coma, again.

          If Pacers (franchise+fans) see the potential in SJAX as a part of this team than he has to be benched after each time he acts like that. You should deal with hime as with PAVLOV'S DOG - no pass (when neaded) - bench. no pass - bench. I think that trick should work if You will practice it for like 5-10 games (a month). The reflex should come to him, that if he passes - he plays. No pass - bench. )

          I can BET, that Saras HAS TOLD EVERYTHING THAT YOU COULD WISH AND IMAGINE THAT YOU WOULD SAY TO SJAX in a locker room.

          Saras is not a TRU WARIAR (or how some of ex-pacers call themselves). HE IS A TRUE GENERAL. coma.

          I can asure You if he was pissed this time and Coach C. didn't put SJax in his place for his behaviour in next 2-3 games You will see Saras coming up to Sjax like his going to beat **** out of him. That's what LT pgs are about.

          The adoptation period has gone - Saras will start acting like he is used to... or then he should be 1st who will have to be traded and Pacers could remain that "Hommies...boys in da hood... OGs" kinnda team, that will NEVER NEVER NEVER reach conference finals in next 10 years with this attitude.

          Brawls, fights and this Mike Tyson like behaviour will be trademark of this franchise...

          Don't want to upset You. Maybe my "slang" language isn't so deep and good, but I'm sure that You understand what I mean.

          As I see Mr. Reggie was the last Intelegent starter of this team (Saras still has no full support from JO, Tins... wierd, but he had some from Ron). \

          My guess is That SJAX is the key and the answer to all "THAT" bull**** thats cookin right now inside the team....

          Js

          Disclaimer: i hope i didn't get too offensive. The fact is that I want pacers to win as much as You all do. i feel that this won't change even when Saras will end his career down here.

          EDIT: I feal that Ron realy has had some serious conflicts with SJAX and was not supported on that by JO and that's why his "...This would be better for the team..." didn't sound some mistified right now.
          Wait a minute, whoa! Whoa! You don’t actually believe this crap! Do you? Dummy! Brain washed alien souls? E-meter and thetan levels? Those people out there buy that crap. But I thought you were smart enough to see what’s really going on!
          What's better than telling people a stupid story and having them believe you? Having them pay you for it, stupid!

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: OK... I believe those that say Sjax won't pass to Saras

            Originally posted by hoopsforlife
            Trade Jax for Ron and this team will be OK.
            I am still in the give Ron another chance camp. Kind of lonely here but both of us will survive. I hope.

            I have always thought Jax was the (a) main problem with the Pacers and Ron was second. Ron gave his all on the court.
            I saw the play where Steve Jackson would not pass to Saras, Saras smacked his hands together in disgust and moved on. I think if Jax had passed him the ball we would have scored a layup. If Jax had broken to the basket he would have gotten the return pass.

            I say let Ron return and trade Jax.
            Ron is my favourite NBA player and at first I was also hoping Donnie and Larry would sooth things over with him. Looking at what was happening on court, Jackson was the man who had to be traded in my opinion. But now I realized there's no way Ron will not be traded : the man, known as a famous line crosser, has crossed every line one man is able to cross by himself.

            It will be weird and frustrating though seeing him play on another team firing up their defense (and offense) instead of ours.

            For now, I can only hope Jackson will be traded along with Artest (see previous post).
            Word on the street is he doesn't want your money, he only wants to please your ears...
            Bum in Berlin on Myspace

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: OK... I believe those that say Sjax won't pass to Saras

              Originally posted by Julius Sour
              Guys don't You worry 'bout Saras&SJAX issue.

              In Lithuania PG's are trained (since they are like 10 yrsold) like they can come up to the guy that has messed up the offencive flow and hit him into stomach. BECAUSE THE POINTGUARD IS THE NEXT MAN AFTER COACH WHEN YOU PLAY BBALL GAME. And if the PG is shouting to the man with the ball to pass it HE HAS TO DO IT. Coma.

              If SJAXs is not listening to Saras or Tins or even AJ while he's at PG spot that guy has to go or to get beaten into his head untill he'll understand that. coma, again.

              If Pacers (franchise+fans) see the potential in SJAX as a part of this team than he has to be benched after each time he acts like that. You should deal with hime as with PAVLOV'S DOG - no pass (when neaded) - bench. no pass - bench. I think that trick should work if You will practice it for like 5-10 games (a month). The reflex should come to him, that if he passes - he plays. No pass - bench. )

              I can BET, that Saras HAS TOLD EVERYTHING THAT YOU COULD WISH AND IMAGINE THAT YOU WOULD SAY TO SJAX in a locker room.

              Saras is not a TRU WARIAR (or how some of ex-pacers call themselves). HE IS A TRUE GENERAL. coma.

              I can asure You if he was pissed this time and Coach C. didn't put SJax in his place for his behaviour in next 2-3 games You will see Saras coming up to Sjax like his going to beat **** out of him. That's what LT pgs are about.

              The adoptation period has gone - Saras will start acting like he is used to... or then he should be 1st who will have to be traded and Pacers could remain that "Hommies...boys in da hood... OGs" kinnda team, that will NEVER NEVER NEVER reach conference finals in next 10 years with this attitude.

              Brawls, fights and this Mike Tyson like behaviour will be trademark of this franchise...

              Don't want to upset You. Maybe my "slang" language isn't so deep and good, but I'm sure that You understand what I mean.

              As I see Mr. Reggie was the last Intelegent starter of this team (Saras still has no full support from JO, Tins... wierd, but he had some from Ron). \

              My guess is That SJAX is the key and the answer to all "THAT" bull**** thats cookin right now inside the team....

              Js

              Disclaimer: i hope i didn't get too offensive. The fact is that I want pacers to win as much as You all do. i feel that this won't change even when Saras will end his career down here.

              EDIT: I feal that Ron realy has had some serious conflicts with SJAX and was not supported on that by JO and that's why his "...This would be better for the team..." didn't sound some mistified right now.
              Thank you for that post. I totally have to agree with you and thats why I think Jax is the main problem and not Ron. If Saras is trained to lead then let him lead. Are you listening RICK...?

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: OK... I believe those that say Sjax won't pass to Saras

                When it comes to Ron and Jackson, I become more convinced every day that it's not a case of "either/or", but "and".

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: OK... I believe those that say Sjax won't pass to Saras

                  Originally posted by Hicks
                  When it comes to Ron and Jackson, I become more convinced every day that it's not a case of "either/or", but "and".
                  I believe last night was the event that made me put Sjax into the 'he's part of the problem, not part of the solution' camp.

                  I saw nothing to make me believe Tinsley doesn't still belong in that camp.

                  And I am seeing a lot that tells me Carlisle doesn't have control (or respect) of this group of players. I don't have an answer there... Either he needs to get consistent and get control and management get his back, players not in or refusing to get with the program need traded, or a coach needs brought in who will get their attention (that could be an assistant coach but more likely a replacement for Carlisle). It's almost like Carlisle is a lame duck coach right now and the team is jockeying for position to fill the power vacuum. I don't know which of those is the answer. I'll say this, if Carlisle has tried to gain control he's been mighty unsuccessful.

                  And nobody much commented on this so maybe it was missed BUT what does this Bird quote (just prior to Artest's trade demand) mean or say:

                  Originally posted by Bird
                  Bird was aware of Artest's frustration with his offensive touches.

                  ''I know exactly what's going on in his mind," Bird said. ''He's thinking to himself, 'I work my *** off on defense on every single play, every single day. I should be allowed to take two bad shots a game.' And you know what? I agree with him.

                  ''It was the same thing with Robert Parish. He ran the court in transition all the time. Most other centers didn't, but he did -- every time. So, once in a while, when I was running the break, I'd wait and give him the ball, because he deserved it."
                  http://www.pacersdigest.com/forums/s...ad.php?t=16872

                  Our problems don't begin and end with Artest. IMHO, he's just a sideshow 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

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: OK... I believe those that say Sjax won't pass to Saras

                    Which brings us back to the departure of Brown. Charlie maybe can't
                    handle him and if thats the case then i would rather get rid of Jax than
                    Rick. Time will tell.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: OK... I believe those that say Sjax won't pass to Saras

                      Julius Sour,
                      The truth is - Cabbage gives you gas, but I get what you're saying. Maybe you could say "Cabbage makes you have strong gas" ...uhm, no, that doesn't work either...

                      Edit- both of these sayings work equally well with your pic of Runey!

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: OK... I believe those that say Sjax won't pass to Saras

                        Well, I think Bball is on to something. I don't like advocating the firing of coaches around here, but I'm getting the feeling that Carlisle is the white elephant in the room as far as problems might go.
                        ...Still "flying casual"
                        @roaminggnome74

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: OK... I believe those that say Sjax won't pass to Saras

                          Originally posted by Roaming Gnome
                          Well, I think Bball is on to something. I don't like advocating the firing of coaches around here, but I'm getting the feeling that Carlisle is the white elephant in the room as far as problems might go.
                          I think Rick's personality, along with a being a micromanager, may grate on some of the players. I have heard him speak many times and I am left with the following impression: He is short on personality and charisma, and I believe his delivery of criticism might be offensive to some of the players. Some people good at X's and O's are not necessarily good personnel people. I am pretty sure Rick is that type.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: OK... I believe those that say Sjax won't pass to Saras

                            I saw Jack pass to Saras tonight! And Saras drained a 3.
                            Here, everyone have a : on me

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: OK... I believe those that say Sjax won't pass to Saras

                              I saw Jax siting on the floor tonight and not giving a dam about the "D"

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: OK... I believe those that say Sjax won't pass to Saras

                                Originally posted by ssmall
                                I saw Jax siting on the floor tonight and not giving a dam about the "D"


                                I saw that as well...
                                Here, everyone have a : on me

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X