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

01/05/2006 Game Thread 30: Pacers vs Warriors

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

  • FINAL BOX SCORE

    Indiana Pacers STATISTICS
    STARTERSMFG3FGFTORTRATOSTLBLKPFPTS
    S. Jackson, SG4112-231-42-5063400327
    A. Croshere, PF336-143-62-23111221217
    D. Granger, SF294-81-14-4163120313
    A. Johnson, PG253-100-33-602411109
    D. Harrison, C153-40-00-025021036
    BENCHMFG3FGFTORTRATOSTLBLKPFPTS
    J. Foster, C261-10-02-2110010044
    S. Jasikevicius, PG242-52-46-6012200312
    F. Jones, SG213-81-34-5022110611
    E. Gill, SG10-00-00-000000010
    J. O'Neal, PFDid Not Play
    S. Pollard, CDid Not Play
    S. Walker, PFDid Not Play
    R. Artest, SFDid Not Play
    J. Bender, SFDid Not Play
    J. Tinsley, PGDid Not Play
    Totals 34-738-2123-307431514722699
     46.6%38.1%76.7% 
     
    Golden State Warriors STATISTICS
    STARTERSMFG3FGFTORTRATOSTLBLKPFPTS
    M. Dunleavy, SF418-121-42-2153110119
    B. Davis, PG376-150-24-5175001516
    I. Diogu, PF356-100-04-52100302316
    J. Richardson, SG306-141-64-8130311417
    T. Murphy, PF253-111-31-224100138
    BENCHMFG3FGFTORTRATOSTLBLKPFPTS
    D. Fisher, PG290-80-45-602032045
    A. Biedrins, C92-20-00-002000004
    Z. Cabarkapa, PF51-10-00-002020022
    C. Cheaney, SG40-10-00-011001010
    M. Ellis, PG41-20-00-000000002
    A. Foyle, CDid Not Play
    C. Taft, PFDid Not Play
    M. Pietrus, SGDid Not Play
    A. Miles, PGDid Not Play
    Totals 33-763-1920-28836912552389
     43.4%15.8%71.4% 
    Your horse is dead, get off it already...

    Comment


    • GAME RECAP FROM YAHOO.COM

      http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/recap?gid=2006010509
      • Indiana 99, Golden State 89

        By JANIE McCAULEY, AP Sports Writer
        January 6, 2006

        OAKLAND, Calif. (AP) -- Stephen Jackson had 27 points, five rebounds and three assists and the Indiana Pacers jumped to a quick lead they nearly relinquished in the waning moments of a 99-89 victory over the Golden State Warriors on Thursday night.

        Derek Fisher made two free throws with 1:46 left to get Golden State within 91-89, before Jackson scored and was fouled on the other end but missed a free throw.

        Austin Croshere added 17 points, nine rebounds, two assists and two steals for the Pacers, who bounced back from a 106-86 loss at Denver a night earlier that started their four-game West Coast swing.

        Beat-up Indiana had lost five of six, but played like a healthy team with a winning streak, opening up a 20-point lead after the first quarter and holding a comfortable cushion until the final minutes. Fred Jones added 11 points for the Pacers before fouling out with 4:11 left.

        Baron Davis had 16 points, seven assists and seven rebounds and rookie Ike Diogu added 16 points and a career-high 12 rebounds for his first double-double. Mike Dunleavy had 19 points, six rebounds and four assists for Golden State, which looked sluggish and uninspired for most of the night after returning from a three-game road trip. Richardson had 17 points.

        Dunleavy hit a 3 with 7:19 to go to get Golden State within six, but the Warriors didn't get closer until two free throws by Richardson at 2:21 to make it 91-87.

        Pacers center and leading scorer Jermaine O'Neal arrived in the second quarter to rejoin the team, but he didn't play for the third straight game because of pneumonia and a sore back. He sat on the bench in street clothes. Jamaal Tinsley missed his fourth straight game for Indiana, which improved to 7-9 on the road.

        Every time the Warriors threatened, the Pacers had an answer.

        Diogu scored back-to-back baskets to pull the Warriors within 62-52 with 7:05 remaining in the third, then had a big block on the other end.

        Golden State won three straight on the heels of a six-game losing streak before Tuesday's 104-94 defeat at Memphis. The Warriors lost two players to injury in this game: Troy Murphy and Calbert Cheaney.

        Murphy, Golden State's top rebounder and third-leading scorer, sprained his left ankle with 4:11 left in the third period and didn't return. He had eight points and five rebounds in 27 minutes.

        Murphy's 3 with 5:54 left in the second quarter pulled Golden State within 40-28, but Indiana answered with five straight points and a 16-11 run to end the half for a 56-41 lead.

        The Pacers made eight of their first 11 shots to Golden State's 3-for-11 as Indiana jumped to an 18-7 lead. Golden State got almost no production from its talented backcourt. Richardson and Davis were a combined 3-for-10 for nine points and three assists. Fisher missed all five of his shots and had just one assist.

        Notes

        Warriors coach Mike Montgomery was evasive about Golden State's possible interest in acquiring injured Indiana F Ron Artest, who last month asked to be traded. Yet Pacers coach Rick Carlisle acknowledged the Warriors are apparently one of many teams interested in Artest, who has been on the inactive list for the last 13 games and isn't traveling with the club. "I've heard Golden State mentioned, but I've heard 17 or 18 other teams mentioned. What I can tell you is whoever ends up with him is going to get a top-10 player who's a real difference maker," Carlisle said. ... Golden State waived G Aaron Miles and Indiana waived C Samaki Walker. ... Cheaney strained his left quadriceps early in the second quarter and didn't return.
      Your horse is dead, get off it already...

      Comment


      • Re: 01/05/2006 Game Thread 30: Pacers vs Warriors

        Great Game and great service, thanks BC and PG, you guys make this place NO 1 !!!!

        Have a good Night all and enjoy ya friday, I'm off home for the weekend, 2 rounds of planned, one tonight and one sunday morning

        Thanks My Pacer Digest Buddies for the great thread, ( once again )
        Ya Think Ya Used Enough Dynamite there Butch...

        Comment


        • Re: 01/05/2006 Game Thread 30: Pacers vs Warriors

          I love readin recaps like these thanks for postin it!

          Comment


          • Re: 01/05/2006 Game Thread 30: Pacers vs Warriors

            Great Game and great service, thanks BC and PG, you guys make this place NO 1 !!!!
            Doin what I can to help

            Comment


            • Re: 01/05/2006 Game Thread 30: Pacers vs Warriors

              The 1st half...we either did great on the defensive end ( where the Warriors really sucked it up on the scoring end ) and kept significant pressure on the offensive end.

              The 2nd half....we came out flat and worse...nearly lost it with less then 2 minutes left.

              2 things to note while I was at the game.

              1 ) Sarunas seems underutilized in the game on the offensive end where he seems to be behind the offensive totem pole somewhere behind or next to Croshere. I don't know if there are no plays called for him....or once he passes the ball got to either Freddie or SJax or is being handled by AJ......but he becomes an afterthought as a scoring option.......I wasn't expecting to see it go back to Sarunas.

              Admittedly...not many of his shots were making it in. But I am beginning to wonder....on an offensive end....if he is a streaky shooter where he can get into an offensive flow only if he gets more touches. Half the time...when he was on the floor.....he would run around screens and end up on the wing positions waiting for someone to see or pass him the ball....most of which wouldn't come to him. Maybe its me.....but he seemed really frustrated throughout the game and really seemed down on himself.

              2 ) Ike Diogu is a frickin beast. This guy should be playing 30+ minutes a game for the Warriors. Everytime he touched the ball and was anywhere near the basket....which was pretty much all the time....I was sure that he was going to make a basket cuz he really hustles and fights for the shot and better yet....he is somehow able to draw the foul to get to the line...while somehow making the shot. I really wished the Walsh made a move for him much earlier in the Artest sweepstake to try to get him from them....specifically before the Warriors figured out that they should try something different and put him into the game to see what he can do.

              I took a few pictures at the game.......nothing special....but I'll try to upload them tomorrow.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • Re: 01/05/2006 Game Thread 30: Pacers vs Warriors

                Another thing to add:

                3 ) Hulk seemed more like Bruce Banner. He seems capable of being a rather solid low-post scoring threat....but seems limited by foul trouble. Especially after getting a foul....he either seems surprised or frustrated. I remember there was a sequence where he came in....then instantly got a 3rd foul...then got pulled the next second and replaced by Foster. I sense that there is a certain lack of confidence in his play....kind of like what someone else mentioned here before.....where he gets down on himself for causing a foul....then turns around to the bench to see if Carlisle is going to pull him from the floor. I really feel for the guy....cuz he really seems like he's trying on the floor......he just has a tendency to get into foul trouble. After the game...I saw Tinsley at the bus where he was all decked out in his suit...talking and waiting to board the bus...all professional and stuff. Then I see Harrison...and he's wearing a dress shirt and some slacks.....where the shirt wasn't tucked in.....kind of like he was heading out to the mall or something. You can tell that he's still this young guy learning the ropes and getting used to the NBA life. BTW...Tinsley and Harrison were cool enough to sign my Wife's Warriors/Pacer program.

                4 ) Is Pollard injured? When I was waiting by the bus...I saw him come out....but he seemed like he was limping a little...barely gave a thumbs up to the crowd and then sat in the front of the bus...simply waiting to leave. I don't recall....but I don't think he played at all....despite suiting up.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment

                Working...
                X