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'm proud of the Pacers tonight, Granger - WOW

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

  • #16
    Re: I'm proud of the Pacers tonight, Granger - WOW

    Originally posted by marcd
    Buck

    I agree, it is fun to watch again. I can't wait until Tuesday. Peja and Granger together is going to be fun to watch. I am looking forward to a lineup of Runi, Jones, Peja, Granger and Harrison.

    I think you will see these guys play with a lot of heart from here on out. The fact that there are no more distractions to deal with can let these guys play loose. Rick really seemed to let the reigns go tonight. They played some free-wheeling ball tonight. Now if we can get Jackson to stop doing his best "Travis Best impersonation" we might be ok. The crowd really seemed to get into it in the 4th, thought for a few minutes they might will them to a win. Losing Harrison really hurt, the fact that they didn't bother to call the foul on Ilgouskus really hurt, would have put us up and the offensive foul on Granger when he hit the shot hurt as well.

    If that is what happens when you play young guys with passion, I'll take it. Damn fun basketball again!

    MarcD
    I think the call against Granger was a travel wasn't it. Not much different than Z. was doing, but that's the life of a rookie/young player. David had a few go against him as well. I liked that they didn't sit and complain about it and kept playing. Let the fans complain, just put your head down and go.

    I agree with the Jax/Best comparison. His defense was o.k., but I was hoping he would stay out of the game on offense because he brought it to a screeching halt. He showed his basketball IQ at time by not realizing he didn't have the hot hand and not getting i to the guys that did.

    Overall though, I enjoyed the way they played.

    Comment


    • #17
      Danny Granger looked like the #5 pick in the draft tonight & Fred Jones almost won..

      the game for us! but...

      Jack! Yes he did score 14 points, but he slowed the tempo of the game all night, with his ball-hogging, shooting terrible shots and how he dose not pass the ball.

      Rick needs to bench him and Larry & Donnie need to trade him. Or he needs to learn how to play offence whatever style that may be. Because it is going change to, it has to!

      I very well could see with what has happened with picking up Peja & O'Neal being out for 8 weeks the team could play .500 ball with the heart they showed tonight. Now adding Peja in the mix I could see the team going in the mold of a European/Phoenix type offense, and just maybe with a little have more intensity on the defense end.

      Granger looked like a future 1st team All-Defensive player tonight. He showed me signs of the Matrix and Scotty Pippen with his all around game.

      Jasikevicius made some good plays too. And some bad ones. In fact I'll give him Harrison props to. The calls that went against him were total B.S. at least most of them. I can't believe he kept his cool & didn't get a T.
      But who am I to say? I didn't have the best seats in the house tonight. So maybe I'm wrong. It wasen't a good night for AC either but we should know by now that's to be expected.

      I was really proud to be at the game surround by bandwagon Cavs fans chearing on the ol' Blue & Gold!
      I think this team has got the potential to be great if pieced right. I guess we will just have to just sit & watch.

      1 final note to end the night..
      See ya west Artest, tell Arnold I said hi. A$$ CLOWN!

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: I'm proud of the Pacers tonight, Granger - WOW

        I enjoyed it as well. You can handle a close loss when the team gives EFFORT!! And tonight there was effort and passion.

        Ilgauskas got way too many FTs, but we still had our shot to win and didn't convert late, but it wasn't for a lack of effort. The shots didn't go down.

        Give the fans this effort and they'll win the crowd and start winning games again!

        A yes, it is NOT a coincidence that the game moved well and the passion was there with JO and Tins on the sideline. I don't know why Carlisle changes the offense with JO. There is absolutely no reason why he can't play in a motion style offense. When Saras is in, JO constantly gets the great feed on the move for an easy shot or layup. NO REASON to run that post up boring **** when JO returns.

        Water

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: I'm proud of the Pacers tonight, Granger - WOW

          Granger seemed to wear down a little in the last 5 minutes, but that is understandable, he isn't used to playing this many minutes and having to guard Bron most of the night is tough. But through 3 and a half quarters Granger was the best player on the court.

          One player who made several key plays but no one will ever mention is eric Snow, he was really hitting his shot tonight, but more importanly, he made about 4 key defensive plays in the last 4 minutes, I've always been a huge fan of his defense.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: I'm proud of the Pacers tonight, Granger - WOW

            I agree with wyou about Snow. He has always done the little things to help his team. His scoring is never going to be a strong point, but he does know how to play great defense without being a great athlete. Damon Jones could learn a lot from him about how to handle himself in a game. Has there ever been a mediocre player as cocky as he is?

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: I'm proud of the Pacers tonight, Granger - WOW

              Originally posted by Bball
              I was proud of them as well. That game was a display of "playing the right way". Do that long enough and it will pay dividends.

              I've already said that I believe the team plays better without JO on the court. If they don't actually play better, it sure looks that way to me. I don't know whether to blame the player or the system but I know what I see so it didn't suprise me to see them find some effort and competitiveness without him this evening. I'm not down on JO per se' but I'm down on seeing the team play when he's on the court. Potentially, of course the team SHOULD be better with JO... but potential is one thing, reality another.
              I didn't see the game but IMO the Pacers do play better without JO. The ball and player movement is much better and the other 4 don't stand around and watch.

              That said, they aren't a better team. Despite Detroit, the league is still about stars and players making plays.

              Be nice to have both but when you have a dominant post player, I'm not sure that happens very often (though if JO's passing skills were better it could).
              The poster formerly known as Rimfire

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: I'm proud of the Pacers tonight, Granger - WOW

                UB, what happened to you being furious if the team came out and played well just because Ron was gone?

                Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: I'm proud of the Pacers tonight, Granger - WOW

                  Originally posted by Kegboy
                  UB, what happened to you being furious if the team came out and played well just because Ron was gone?



                  oops.

                  Since when do you pay attention to what I post.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: I'm proud of the Pacers tonight, Granger - WOW

                    What happened to Cro? When I heard that JO would be out I thought at least Cro should be getting to the free throw line. I see from the box score he shot 5 times and 4 of them were 3-pointers, did he not drive or go inside any? Or just not get any calls?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: I'm proud of the Pacers tonight, Granger - WOW

                      I loved it when Harrison made a poor offensive play and Rick was gonna yank him and sent Pollard to the scorer's table. David then drew a charge. Rick told Scot to come back to the bench and let David stay in.

                      Maybe Rick can tolerate the inevitable mistakes as long as he hustles.
                      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


                      • #26
                        Re: I'm proud of the Pacers tonight, Granger - WOW

                        Cro was having a hard time with Gooden, Granger was playing so well, and the pacers needed either Harrison or Pollard in there to try and contend with Z.


                        Just checked the box score and Granger played 43 minutes and Cro played 33 , it didn't seem like Cro played that many.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: I'm proud of the Pacers tonight, Granger - WOW

                          Croshere was horrible last night.

                          He had a couple of really good defensive stands against big Z, but I hated his offense.

                          He cannot just be a three point specialist. My gut feeling is that he could have drawn some fouls on Big Z if he would have taken it to the rack.

                          If he gives you anything on the offensive end we win that game.

                          He hasn't played consistantly well for about 3 weeks now, I wonder if he was affected by the rumors of him going to LA with Ron.


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

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: I'm proud of the Pacers tonight, Granger - WOW

                            I still don't like the fact that Rick benched Danger in the dying seconds. Give the guy a chance to take the last shot since he was hot the whole game. Crayyy-zeeee
                            http://Twitter.com/dRealSource

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: I'm proud of the Pacers tonight, Granger - WOW

                              Originally posted by denyfizle
                              I still don't like the fact that Rick benched Danger in the dying seconds. Give the guy a chance to take the last shot since he was hot the whole game. Crayyy-zeeee

                              He took him out on one of the plays because we knew we had to foul. And DG was not in the game for the last 10 seconds (when Cro shot and missed the three) but besides that Granger was in there. He played 42 minutes. Rick put AJ in the game for that last play.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: I'm proud of the Pacers tonight, Granger - WOW

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck
                                He took him out on one of the plays because we knew we had to foul. And DG was not in the game for the last 10 seconds (when Cro shot and missed the three) but besides that Granger was in there. He played 42 minutes. Rick put AJ in the game for that last play.
                                That was exactly what I was referring to. He should've been there in the last play. AJ was cold from the bench. Cro was having a horrible night. Why not give the guy who worked for the win all night to have a chance and win it for you. RC didn't have to design a play for him, just the fact that he was in there and have a crack at being the hero.
                                http://Twitter.com/dRealSource

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X