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

Random thoughts thread 2006.....playoff edition.

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

  • Re: Random thoughts thread 2006.....playoff edition.

    Indeed. Or a rule about not using your off-arm to clear the way for your drive.

    Much like the rest of the league could have used a rule that made it an offensive foul to initiate contact (even if its via the kick) to hamper Reggie. Or a rule against simply knocking down a player and dunking to hamper Shaq.

    The list goes on and on.

    Comment


    • Re: Random thoughts thread 2006.....playoff edition.

      Originally posted by Fool
      Indeed. Or a rule about not using your off-arm to clear the way for your drive.

      Much like the rest of the league could have used a rule that made it an offensive foul to initiate contact (even if its via the kick) to hamper Reggie. Or a rule against simply knocking down a player and dunking to hamper Shaq.

      The list goes on and on.
      I wish the league would just start calling that crap again. But then again, back in the day, alot of the big physical players could just abuse someone on the defensive side of the ball and not get called for it. I think the refs are trying to make up for years of offensive neglect. They need to call traveling again at least. Manu Ginobli and Tony Parker took 4 step layups to the basket. When does it stop? 7 step layups? I can see that now. Lebron just running through the lane and throwing it down after he jump stops twice and takes 3 steps.

      Comment


      • Re: Random thoughts thread 2006.....playoff edition.

        Originally posted by Unclebuck
        I always hate when people say, "I told you so" Really shows a lack of class.
        Good call, UB.

        Comment


        • Re: Random thoughts thread 2006.....playoff edition.

          U guys would have said it. lol.
          STARBURY

          08 and Beyond

          Comment


          • Re: Random thoughts thread 2006.....playoff edition.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLV3a4CgYLE
            You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

            Comment


            • Re: Random thoughts thread 2006.....playoff edition.

              Reggie Evans, Jason Terry, now Avery Johnson. :shakehead

              Comment


              • Re: Random thoughts thread 2006.....playoff edition.

                If only Rick had thought of that for Jack.

                Comment


                • Re: Random thoughts thread 2006.....playoff edition.

                  JO and Asjia are on NBA PREGAME!

                  Comment


                  • Re: Random thoughts thread 2006.....playoff edition.

                    Originally posted by SoupIsGood
                    I THOUGHT I SAW THAT HAPPEN!!

                    Thats comedy gold right there. It almost looks intentional. Think he get's a fine from the NBA?

                    On a sidenote, did anyone else watch that video like 15 times and laugh every single time?

                    Comment


                    • Re: Random thoughts thread 2006.....playoff edition.

                      Originally posted by SoupIsGood

                      Comment


                      • Re: Random thoughts thread 2006.....playoff edition.

                        http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/26/sp...gewanted=print


                        N.B.A. Fans Tune in as Playoffs Add Drama
                        By LIZ ROBBINS
                        Every night has seemed like the Fourth of July during the N.B.A. playoffs, bright and breathtaking to the frantic finale, with few duds in the show.

                        Television ratings have risen like LeBron James at the rim. When Steve Nash led the plucky Phoenix Suns to a last-second victory over his former team, Dallas, in Game 1 of the Western Conference finals, the smoke had barely cleared from the Mavericks' upset of the defending champion San Antonio Spurs.

                        Why, some might wonder when rubbing their eyes the next morning, have the games been more dramatic?

                        Spurs Coach Gregg Popovich offered a concise explanation just before his team lost Game 7 at home to Dallas. "Maybe the new rules have created parity where everybody is able to attack more and everybody's best players are able to show their wares and be aggressive," he said.

                        "People can use small lineups, big lineups, there's more variation on the floor," Popovich said. "Everybody knows how to take advantage of the rules. Thus you see the scores and the dynamic play of everybody on the floor. It's not just isolation; it's attacking, it's pace."

                        In 73 games (not including last night's Detroit-Miami game), 14 have been decided by 2 points or less (tying a 1995 record) and 23 have been decided by 5 points or less. Teams are shooting 46.1 percent, the highest mark since 1993. The 2-point field-goal percentage is 49.1, the highest since 1991, according to the Elias Sports Bureau.

                        The fast pace of the games and the numbers did not just explode overnight. Five years ago, Jerry Colangelo, then the Suns' owner and chairman of the N.B.A. Board of Governors, had a game-altering conversation with Commissioner David Stern.

                        "I was in New York, and I told him how down I was on the game and as much as I loved the game, I didn't like it the way it was played," Colangelo said yesterday in a telephone interview from Dallas. "We had a long conversation, and he said, 'Go ahead, put a committee of people together and go at it.' "

                        A committee was formed in March 2001, and it included executives, former coaches and players like Jerry West, Rod Thorn, Dick Motta, Jack Ramsay and even Miami center Alonzo Mourning. It introduced rules to discourage isolation plays, reduce physicality (hip and forearm checks) and enable cutters to move through the lane unimpeded.

                        "It was becoming more and more of a contact sport, which takes away from the finesse part, making it almost impossible to play," Thorn, the Nets president, said yesterday.

                        After 2004, when the Pistons won their defense-oriented title, referees cracked down on hand-checking along the perimeter. The zone defense was made legal again in the 2001-2 season, further opening the floor.

                        As a result, the high pick-and-roll has become so prevalent, young superstars like James and Miami's Dwyane Wade are slashing a familiar path to the basket.

                        Stu Jackson, the N.B.A.'s senior vice president for basketball operations, said officials had altered their interpretation on block-charge calls. "Referees have a tendency to call blocks when there are ties, and all of those factors have served to encourage players going to the basket," Jackson said.

                        Jason Terry, the Mavs' 6-foot-2 guard, has noticed. "Definitely this is the most dunks I've had in my whole career," he said last week, "just because the lane is so open now, if you blow by someone you can get to the basket and finish."

                        Dirk Nowitzki, Terry's teammate, and the Suns' Boris Diaw are doing the same. Nowitzki has adapted his 3-point-shooting game toward the trends of athleticism and penetration.

                        To speed play, the league changed how long a team had to bring the ball over midcourt to 8 seconds from 10. The Suns have not needed that much time since Nash signed two years ago and won two M.V.P. awards while pushing the tempo to the brink.

                        "Hopefully the wave of the future is the history of the past," Bob Cousy, the Boston Celtics' Hall of Fame guard, said yesterday in a telephone interview. "Transition, that's the way all the teams played in my day."

                        The Suns have perfected it. "For Coach Mike D'Antoni, this is what he believes in anyway," said Colangelo, the Suns' chief executive and chairman. "Then you got to have the right people."

                        Or person. Nash, as the Dallas Mavericks' owner, Mark Cuban, rationalized after letting him go, is the best possible fit for D'Antoni. The Suns, averaging 110.5 points in the postseason, are playing even smaller because the 6-11 Amare Stoudemire played in only three games this season because of a knee injury. With Nash averaging 10.6 assists and the Suns shooting 48.5 percent, he is facilitating the flow, planning the pick-and-roll party.

                        It is this kind of play, rather than individual personalities, that piques the viewers' interest, Cuban said. "Pick the one rivalry that everybody across the country is tuning into," he asked last week. "That's the point, you can't. I think great games sell."

                        He, too, believed the new rules helped create the greatness, promoting versatile players and better shooters like Nowitzki, Josh Howard, Terry and Devin Harris.

                        "I thought the New York Knicks have a brilliant roster — if you put them in a system when you're pushing them," Cuban said, adding that he did not want to indict Coach Larry Brown's style. "That's our roster."

                        Cuban said, "Shaq isn't as dominant and you look at the perimeter players, it's a different type of dominance."

                        But will this diminish the diversity of the league, specifically Shaquille O'Neal?

                        Jackson noted that Miami's style has worked for the Heat. Although O'Neal is contending with quick whistles, Wade has taken advantage of the double-teams O'Neal still attracts. The Heat posted the second-best shooting percentage in the second round — 49.3 percent — against the Nets. The Clippers had the best percentage, at 50.9.

                        "It's harder to cover people, wing people, in particular, without fouling," Thorn said.

                        Cousy argued that defenders needed to improve, but bemoaned how coaches interpreted that by turning the game into a grinding, walk-it-up affair. "This Dallas-Phoenix series is near and dear to my heart," Cousy said. "For the old-timers, it's refreshing to see."



                        Home
                        World U.S. N.Y. / Region Business Technology Science Health Sports Opinion Arts Style Travel Jobs Real Estate Automobiles Back to Top
                        Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company
                        Privacy Policy Search Corrections XML Help Contact Us Work for Us Site Map

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X