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

Dropping in standings helps Lakers in playoffs (article also says Pacers are fav

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Dropping in standings helps Lakers in playoffs (article also says Pacers are fav

    http://www.timesstar.com/Stories/0,1...080351,00.html

    YEAR AFTER YEAR, one of the most fascinating segments of the NBA schedule is the final couple of days in the regular season.

    David Stern and his officers of political correctness annually have studied these games with a microscope, looking for evidence of teams intentionally losing to gain some type of advantage.

    Everyone knows this occurs at the bottom of the standings, where a 13-game losing streak through Sunday assured Orlando the favorite's role at the draft lottery next month.

    But you might be surprised to hear this kind of thing actually occurs quite often among teams gearing up (or down) for the playoffs.

    The Warriors were victims of the commissioner's scrutiny in 1992, when they entered the final day of the regular season locked into the No.3 playoff position. Still to be determined was their first-round playoff opponent: Seattle or San Antonio.



    Clearly, Don Nelson had a preference. His guys matched up much better with the Spurs, whom they had upset the previous year in the playoffs, than the SuperSonics, an athletic squad that beat the Warriors with regularity in the Nelson era.

    Lo and behold, the Warriors, by virtue of a final-day matchup with Seattle, had a chance to assure a first-round pairing with the Spurs. A Golden State loss would have pushed the Sonics into the No.5 playoff spot, one game ahead of San Antonio, which then would have headed to Oakland for the playoff opener.

    But having been warned Stern's people would be watching, the Warriors went all-out to beat the SuperSonics in the home finale -- and did so, 108-106. However, in what was in essence a meaningless game, they suffered a huge loss when Chris Mullin was injured in the game.

    The All-Star proceeded to struggle through the playoff series against Seattle, shooting 42.9 percent and scoring 17.8 points -- well off his regular-season numbers (52.4 and 25.6) -- and Nelson learned a valuable lesson. The hometown crowd should have seen a lot more of Tom Tolbert in that regular-season finale.

    A dozen years later, Nelson's Mavericks are battling Memphis for the fifth playoff spot in the West. The winner of their head-to-head tonight in Dallas will clinch that No.5 spot and a matchup with the fourth-place finisher.

    The Lakers currently hold down that No.4 spot, and don't think the Mavericks -- and Grizzlies as well -- haven't noticed.

    If it were assured L.A. would finish fourth, you could rest assured neither Dallas nor Memphis would have much interest in winning tonight.

    But the Lakers still have the potential to move up -- not that they necessarily want to.

    Presuming Minnesota captures top seeding in the West, finishing fourth has its advantages. If everything went according to form in Round 1, the Lakers then would draw the history-challenged Timberwolves in the Western semifinals, while the powerful Kings would have to deal with the defending-champ Spurs.

    The road to the Finals is a lot rockier from the No.3 hole, where the Lakers probably would have to eliminate both the Kings and Spurs, the latter after having had a war with the former in Round 2.

    One other team Stern's crew could have been monitoring was Houston, especially after the 69-point egg it laid in Salt Lake City on Saturday night. The Rockets would have loved nothing better than to drop from the seventh spot in the West to No.8, thus drawing Minnesota in Round 1 rather than the Kings or Lakers.

    But the Rockets rebounded with a win Monday at Seattle, clinching the seventh seed and a matchup with the top team in the Pacific Division.

    In the East, the team to avoid is Detroit -- and three teams (the Bucks, Heat and Hornets) are very anxious to do just that. Only in this case, just the winners will be rewarded (with a 4 vs. 5 series), whereas the least of the trio will finish in the No.6 spot and have the unenviable task of squaring off with the Pistons in Round 1.

    After Monday's games, only one first-round pairing -- Boston vs. Indiana -- was set, but that won't stop me from making predictions:

    Round 1: No matter who they play, the Kings, Spurs and Lakers will roll through the first round, one of them eliminating the Mavericks and prompting Mark Cuban to fire Nelson. But look for Denver to upset Minnesota as it has the key ingredient to stopping the Timberwolves -- a defensive stopper (Andre Miller) who can match up with Sam Cassell.

    The Pacers, Nets and Pistons might as well have byes in their Eastern openers. The 4 vs. 5 series is the NBA equivalent of the NCAA Tournament play-in game. It might be close, but who cares?

    Conference semifinals: Those concerned about the current form of the Kings should be reminded a lot can change in two weeks. It'll be at least that long before Sacramento faces a quality second-round opponent, and probably will do so riding the momentum of an easy Round 1 waltz.

    It would be a shame if the Kings and Lakers met in Round 2, so it says here it won't happen. The Kings will outlast the Spurs, with the Lakers easing past the Nuggets.

    As in the West, the East's 2 vs. 3 matchup should be a doozy. You know the Pacers, sitting pretty atop the East, are hoping the Nets give the Pistons a fight, because the longer that series goes, the less chance the winner has of surviving the Eastern finals. I'm picking the Pistons.

    Conference finals: It's the Kings-Lakers and Pacers-Pistons. That's like having the NCAA and NIT title games on the same night. Two great series, but in the end, two best-of-7's decided a week earlier when the Spurs and Nets did the Lakers and Pacers a huge favor by taking their opponent the limit.

    I'll take the Lakers and Pacers on that alone, with each series going at least six games.

    NBA Finals: Now I understand why Pacers coach Rick Carlisle has been resting Scot Pollard all season. He usually gets his money's worth when battling Shaq and those six fouls could be critical, especially if the big guy is having problems at the line.

    The Ron Artest-Kobe Bryant duel would be tremendous, but the Lakers have far too many weapons -- as well as the biggest one. I'm picking L.A. in six only because the Lakers haven't been in a rush to do anything this season.


    (of course this article is out of California so you have to expect them to pick the Lakers and frankly I cant argue the point too much. I think we might make a decent show against them but we just dont have anything to match up with Shaq)
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Dropping in standings helps Lakers in playoffs (article also says Pacers are

    I don't want to dispute the article on intentional losses for playoff jockeying but I don't really see how it applies much to the West other than interesting conversation. I actually thought it best that the Mavs tank the game against the Griz to avoid LA. But they didn't. They actually played finley who was reported out to rest injured ribs.

    I realize the Griz had a nice year and the Mavs had a frustrating year but I find it hard to believe any of the top 4 seeds would rather play the Mavs than the Griz, Rockets or Nugtz for that matter just for what they think is a more favorable 2nd round matchup. I don't expect the Mavs to beat the Lakers or Spurs if they play but the mavs are now an experienced playoff team that has had some playoff success. They were 36-5 at home. It may be wishful thinking but IMO, the Mavs were not focused during the year. They got up for home games and games against the top teams. Throw in the Walker failed point forward experiment that consumed 2/3 of the year and they still were only a handful of stupid losses away from a top seed in the West. The Mavs will be a tough out for anybody that draws them.

    I know I'm biased as a Mavs fan by my most desirable opponent is the Kings. The Kings have had the opportunity to get the best record in the league and blew it. Then they had the opportunity to get the best record in the West and have blown it. They have had the opportunity to clinch the 2 seed in the West and are on the verge of blowing that. Is Bobby Jackson that important to them. I think that team is more likely headed for big changes than the Mavs.

    Plus the top 4 seeds in the West have really been a total mess for the last couple of weeks. Don't really see how the Lakers could predict anything about future playoff opponents. Two weeks ago it appeared that LA was headed for the 1 seed. Seems to me that would have been ideal for them. A 1st round matchup with Denver with a 2nd matchup againt the 4 or 5 seed. They blow it. It is quite likely the Spurs can overtake the Wolves. The Griz have been a very good team at home (one of the best in the league). A win over the Wolves almost guarantees they would face Minny instead of a potential matchup with the Spurs or maybe LA. I think Memphis plays tough tonight. If that happens then a 4th seeded team would probably clash with the spurs in the 2nd round.

    Comment

    Previous template Next
    Working...
    X