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

Let there be no doubt...

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

  • #16
    Re: Let there be no doubt...

    87-81...we lose 92-88 from Game thread.

    And this is why Rick lost the game AGAIN!! for us! How many times is he going to take out a cohesive lineup that is playing great defense AND SCORING AT THE SAME TIME....to put in a defensive lineup to close the game.

    DUMB **** AGAIN!!!!! IF we keep scoring while playing good (not great) defense, we WIN. Score ONE FRICKING point to end the game with your "defensive unit" and YOU LOSE!!

    And yet, once again, our defensive line up CONTINUES to give up points....so what the hell is the point of putting in your defensive unit!!!! If THEY CAN"T STOP ANYONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    frickin idiot coach

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Let there be no doubt...

      I wonder if Carlisle's tendency to pull out the "hot offensive" player is a result of him deciding to put in more defensive minded players in hopes of holding the lead.

      I'm not saying its the right thing...I'm just saying that I've seen that before.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Let there be no doubt...

        I've thought Carlisle has played Sarunas a little 'short' in the last few games. Today it bit us. Sarunas has been in a bit of a slump lately so Carlisle got away with putting him on a short leash but today he was having a good game and deserved to stay in during the 4th qtr IMHO. To get the maximum benefit from a player like Sarunas, Carlisle is going to have to live with some things.

        I thought Harrison could've gotten more minutes as well.

        I don't think AJ was playing bad but today he was nothing special either. I suppose Carlisle would argue he had to pull Sarunas for defensive reasons during the last minutes of the game. That type of use of Sarunas, and when JO returns and going back to the JO ISOball game, will be why this is Carlisle's last season

        I don't think he and Bird are on the same page. It's just a feeling I am getting from their comments. I'm not all that confident in my above prediction... But if we see us going back to JO ISOball upon his return then I'll feel fairly confident in that prediction (and I feel fairly confident we'll be going that direction because that is Rick's 'thing').

        That all said... I don't have too many complaints about today. It was a close, competitive game. The defending champs had the moxie down the stretch to pull it out. Once again we played some good basketball without JO in the lineup.

        No longer than this team has been together it isn't an embarassment to lose to the defending champs in the closing seconds. It was a shame though... because we had this game. I can't say we were outcoached... we were overcoached is more like it. Pop didn't do anything special to win... he let us lose it.

        -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


        • #19
          Re: Let there be no doubt...

          Originally posted by Bball
          I've thought Carlisle has played Sarunas a little 'short' in the last few games. Today it bit us. Sarunas has been in a bit of a slump lately so Carlisle got away with putting him on a short leash but today he was having a good game and deserved to stay in during the 4th qtr IMHO. To get the maximum benefit from a player like Sarunas, Carlisle is going to have to live with some things.

          I thought Harrison could've gotten more minutes as well.

          I don't think AJ was playing bad but today he was nothing special either. I suppose Carlisle would argue he had to pull Sarunas for defensive reasons during the last minutes of the game. That type of use of Sarunas, and when JO returns and going back to the JO ISOball game, will be why this is Carlisle's last season

          I don't think he and Bird are on the same page. It's just a feeling I am getting from their comments. I'm not all that confident in my above prediction... But if we see us going back to JO ISOball upon his return then I'll feel fairly confident in that prediction (and I feel fairly confident we'll be going that direction because that is Rick's 'thing').

          That all said... I don't have too many complaints about today. It was a close, competitive game. The defending champs had the moxie down the stretch to pull it out. Once again we played some good basketball without JO in the lineup.

          No longer than this team has been together it isn't an embarassment to lose to the defending champs in the closing seconds. It was a shame though... because we had this game.

          -Bball
          Yes, if RC goes back to the ISO ball again, it'll be time to show him the door.
          It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Let there be no doubt...

            Originally posted by Bball
            I suppose Carlisle would argue he had to pull Sarunas for defensive reasons during the last minutes of the game. That type of use of Sarunas, and when JO returns and going back to the JO ISOball game, will be why this is Carlisle's last season

            I don't think he and Bird are on the same page. It's just a feeling I am getting from their comments. I'm not all that confident in my above prediction... But if we see us going back to JO ISOball upon his return then I'll feel fairly confident in that prediction (and I feel fairly confident we'll be going that direction because that is Rick's 'thing').

            -Bball
            I believe these comments are right on the money. Larry keeps talking about how much he is enjoying our ball movement and Rick likes the post up crap...and he WILL revert back. Larry also loves Sarunas and his ability to shoot, pass (great anticipation passes) and desire.

            Larry should pull a Pat Riley and take over the team!

            Water

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Let there be no doubt...

              Originally posted by pizza guy
              Yes, if RC goes back to the ISO ball again, it'll be time to show him the door.
              After the, "at least", 3rd game he's lost this way, the door is probably already open!

              And it is a shame! Because if he would just finish the game the same way he coached his team into a big enough lead to win....all would be great!

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Let there be no doubt...

                Originally posted by rcarey
                Part of the reason we won that Detroit game was because down the stretch, Carlisle was playing for the win, instead of playing "not to lose".

                In the last few minutes of the game, I was getting the impression that Carlisle had reverted back to his old ways; playing "not to lose"...and that didn't exactly work out.
                I agree.I guess you can't teach an old dog new tricks. All he thinks about is getting stops instead of keeping the pressure on their defense.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Let there be no doubt...

                  Originally posted by Broken Record Bball
                  Once again we played some good basketball without JO in the lineup.
                  Really man, it's getting old. We have yet to see how Jermaine will do now that we have the ability to really stretch the floor. Think back to the ECFs to that one game where Cro was knocking down those outside shots and pulling the Wallaces out of the paint so Jermaine and Al could pound away on the inside. Seems to me Jermaine has had to adjust his game because of deficiencies in our shooting and size (and injuries)—he's had to fill a lot of holes; a pretty big burden had been placed on his shoulders. I'd like to see how he performs now that Peja is here and David, Scot and Jeff are stepping it up.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Let there be no doubt...

                    Originally posted by Harmonica
                    Really man, it's getting old. We have yet to see how Jermaine will do now that we have the ability to really stretch the floor. Think back to the ECFs to that one game where Cro was knocking down those outside shots and pulling the Wallaces out of the paint so Jermaine and Al could pound away on the inside. Seems to me Jermaine has had to adjust his game because of deficiencies in our shooting and size (and injuries)—he's had to fill a lot of holes; a pretty big burden had been placed on his shoulders. I'd like to see how he performs now that Peja is here and David, Scot and Jeff are stepping it up.
                    Yes.

                    Also, I think this offense needs Jermaine. Too many times do we hit Jeff or some other stiff on a cut to the basket, only to have them screw it up. This offense needs someone who can finish in the post. I think Jermaine will flourish, assuming Rick sticks with this offense....
                    You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Let there be no doubt...

                      Originally posted by Harmonica
                      We have yet to see how Jermaine will do now that we have the ability to really stretch the floor.
                      If we'd have had JO today, we would have won this game by 12.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Let there be no doubt...

                        Originally posted by Outlaw
                        All he thinks about is getting stops instead of keeping the pressure on their defense.

                        I wonder, if we had a contending team, could we actually win it all with a coach that favors defense so highly above offense?

                        Rick is a great coach, but to win the championship, you need to be a balanced team. Oftentimes, the unbalanced teams go overboard with the scoring and offense at the cost of defense...... but could we have the opposite problem?
                        You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Let there be no doubt...

                          Originally posted by Pacesetter
                          If we'd have had JO today, we would have won this game by 12.
                          That little chat we had with JO during the game, 3-6 weeks is the time table..3 to 6..

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Let there be no doubt...

                            so when is Jermaine getting back? It feels like it's been 20 weeks...say what? We're not even on 3 weeks yet? Oh boy. So is he coming back after 4, 6, 8, or 10 weeks? I thought that last report was 4-6.

                            ed. thanks for answering my question pacers_gurl...

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Let there be no doubt...

                              Originally posted by Harmonica
                              I'd like to see how he performs now that Peja is here and David, Scot and Jeff are stepping it up.
                              Me too...
                              But we can't ignore we're playing good ball without him. We can't ignore the elephant in the living room. It doesn't mean it is his fault... it doesn't mean it is not. But at some point we'll all need an answer as to 'why' it is. Right now the easy answer is that Rick's been misusing this team (or dealing with a patchwork team) and the addition of Peja will allow JO to take us to another level.

                              When JO returns I'm sure there will be some answers... and I'm fairly certain there will be some more questions.

                              -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


                              • #30
                                Re: Let there be no doubt...

                                Ironic that people say that Carlisle pulled Peja and Sarunas in order to insert a more defensive lineup. Lack of defense down the stretch is what killed us. We failed to stop San Antonio in their last 6-8 real possessions straight. If we'd maintained the defensive level we'd played previously, we win this game.

                                A few factors that hurt us down the stretch:

                                1. In inability to get defensive stops down the stretch, including excessive fouling.

                                2. Carlisle's questionable substitions patterns and late game play calling.

                                3. Stephen Jackson. That guy is a menace to to society. I'm ok with that to an extent. I don't mind a streak shooter. But what I can't stand is his ball hogging. That guy is a total black hole. With Artest gone, an some restructuring in progress, this is an opportunity to get rid of our attitude cancers, of which Stephen Jackson is clearly the leading one. No way should a guy who refuses to pass be in the game down the stretch.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X