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

You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

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

  • #16
    Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

    I agree, Sarunas is way off the pace, and probably would be relegated to the bench if Orien Greene stays.

    I figure Sarunas just can't handle the rigors of the NBA, but maybe the craziness of last year with the Pacers makes him wish he signed with Cleveland?!?!?!

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

      I'm not suprised at all that Sarunas played bad, he just isnt a NBA point guard, I dont know what to say to all of his followers, maybe with the Suns he would be where they dont play defense but not here.

      I said this and I wasnt hating on him at all when I said it, I would not be suprised at all if 10 games into the season he is sitting on the bench as the 3rd string PG.

      Tins always has those few games where he plays bad, but you know Tins will come back the next one and play good. As long as he is healthy I'm not worried about Jamaal.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

        Originally posted by Jermaniac View Post
        I would not be suprised at all if 10 games into the season he is sitting on the bench as the 3rd string PG.
        Agreed. He could be 4th very shortly after that.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

          Originally posted by ajbry View Post
          Agreed. He could be 4th very shortly after that.
          Or fifth. Tinsley/Armstrong/Daniels/Greene/Saras

          Saras and Marshall works for MoPete...
          This space for rent.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

            I've decided that Jackson, Jeff, and Saras should have been traded in the offseason for one player.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

              Originally posted by Just View Post
              I've decided that Jackson, Jeff, and Saras should have been traded in the offseason for one player.
              And lose our depth?

              Seriously, I agree. Not sure what we could have gotten, but we should have tried.
              This space for rent.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                Originally posted by rcarey View Post
                Yes, yes, and yes. I'm still willing to give Jamaal a chance, but I surely hope 3 names don't come to haunt us in the next few years:

                Rajon Rondo (21st).
                Marcus Williams (22nd).
                Dee Brown (46th).

                All after our picks. I'm sure Kegboy will throw in a couple other names too.
                What about Jordan Farmar? I hear he's doing great in LA.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                  I don't know if I should come right out and say this, most of you will either disagree with me or just won't want to hear it especially after a meaningless preseason game. Do I really want to bring the wrath of Pacers Digest down on me. I've really thought about it, and I'm just going to go ahead and say it.

                  Our point guards suck, and by that I mean Tinsley and Saras. If that is our one-two punch at point guard this season I will have a huge problem with this Pacers team. Saras is just terrible, I really don't need to say anything else about that, this has been discussed to death. I really don't see any reason he should even play at all. If I were the coach he'd never get off the bench.

                  Enough of Saras, let me address Tinsley. First of all when did Deron Williams become Magic, Isiah, Stockton and KJ all rolled into one. He could have scored whenever he wanted (granted our help defense was terrible) but Tinsley had no chance in trying to stop Williams and Deron isn't even a top 10 point guard or top 15 point guard.

                  I think all of Tinsley's injuries have clouded our memory of him as a player. Players always get better in fans minds as they sit on the bench. Tinsley wasn't even the 3rd best point guard on the court tonight. He certainly wasn't the Pacers best point guard tonight. It is pretty sad when the Pacers best point guard is a 38 year old journeyman. If Darrell Armstrong was a few years younger I would want him to start, I would want him to play 30-35 minutes per game.

                  It was such a breath of fresh air to see Armstrong tonight. His hustle, his defense but most of all his leadership was evident tonight. Tinsley gives you none of those three things. (yes my "clean slate" is no longer clean).

                  I expect to get crucified for this posts, and yes I know it is only preaseason, but I got disgusted watching Saras and Tinsley tonight. Is there a worse point guard combo in the NBA. I don't know. I expect Rick to rectify the situation, Saras will not be the second string point guard, you can mark my words on that. I

                  The more I see Armstrong, Greene and Daniels play the point this season the happier I'll be.

                  OK, let me get to other things tonight

                  The other area that is a concern to me is rebounding, more specially defensive rebounding, the Jazz really manhandled us in that area. The Jazz were the number 1 rebounding team in the NBA last season so maybe we should expect that. I don't see the Pacers anything more than an average rebbounding team, but maybe that is good enough.

                  Let me make a few other quick observations.

                  It was really nice walking into Conseco Fieldhouse tonight, I felt like I was home again. There were more people there than I thought there would be, and the boos for Jackson were tepid at best. When he first came into the game, there was hardly anything, even after two straight turnovers and a bad shot, there was still nothing. The other two times he came into the game, there were some boos for sure, but it wasn't much to speak of. Jax played a really tentative game though.

                  Let me get to the Pacers defense, besides the embaraasement that was the defense played by JT and Saras, the Pacers D was OK, the defense is more aggressive on the ball and in passing lanes than they have been the past few seasons (of course with that you give up some inside shots and you give up some penetration) maybe that is why JT and Saras stood out. Pacers will create more turnovers this season and that is good.

                  Maybe Tinsley and Saras just can't play the pressure defense the Pacers are trying to get them to play. But defense wasn't the only problem with those two, they weren't very good on the offensive end either.

                  I give the Jazz and jerry Sloan a ton of credit. Their halfcourt offensive system is fun to watch, they set picks, they pass the ball, they are in constant motion, and their defense is very physical - Sloan is a great coach.

                  I was impressed with Al tonight, he was extremely aggressive and was obviously the Pacers best player on the court tonight, in a lot of ways it seems like he never left the Pacers and yet he is a better player.

                  Granger was good in spots, he tends to get lost at times when JO and Al are out there.

                  I guess that is about it. Why couldn't Armstrong be 5 years.

                  Should I just delete this post and make my life easier?

                  I tried my best to stay positive after game 1 in the pre-season & look for mostly good stuff because of the way the season had already started & in all honesty there was not a whole lot of bad to report.

                  However if you go back & look at my report I really glossed over the p.g. spot other than O. Greene.

                  Why? Because my report would have read almost word for word like yours just did, including the fact that I intentionally left out Armstrong because I would have said exactly what you did. The fact that he is our best p.g. at the moment scares the living crap out of me. Now Greene looks to be somebody who can be servicable but he is not a star in waiting.

                  Jamaal was just flat in that first game from what I saw & Saras was just plain old Saras. He was good in a fast break & he can direct a man towards the basket but other than that......

                  Good report btw, but p.g. is now my biggest concern. Which is funny because center has been my biggest concern for years & we've really not done much to improve that. But our p.g. situation has deteriorated IMO.


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

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                    Originally posted by Peck View Post
                    I tried my best to stay positive after game 1 in the pre-season & look for mostly good stuff because of the way the season had already started & in all honesty there was not a whole lot of bad to report.

                    However if you go back & look at my report I really glossed over the p.g. spot other than O. Greene.

                    Why? Because my report would have read almost word for word like yours just did, including the fact that I intentionally left out Armstrong because I would have said exactly what you did. The fact that he is our best p.g. at the moment scares the living crap out of me. Now Greene looks to be somebody who can be servicable but he is not a star in waiting.

                    Jamaal was just flat in that first game from what I saw & Saras was just plain old Saras. He was good in a fast break & he can direct a man towards the basket but other than that......

                    Good report btw, but p.g. is now my biggest concern. Which is funny because center has been my biggest concern for years & we've really not done much to improve that. But our p.g. situation has deteriorated IMO.
                    This is semi-shocking because I expected Jamaal to be kind of good. He usually is when he plays. It'll be interesting to see. I still think we're judging them too quickly here but we'll see.

                    I do agree with UB on the rebounding though. Danny al-Jermaine combined for 10 rebounds and to be honest, I think Danny's going to get lost with JO and Al. I think a move to the bench might not be the worst thing ever for him. Also, adding Jeff to the starting lineup would certainly help rebounding-wise.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                      You know UncleBuck, its hard to have a conversation with you because you say stuff everyday that im thinking of and i cant do nothing but saying "I agree!"... so here it goes again...... I agree with you UB!

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                        its one preseason game people, it could have been one of many factors..rick could have been testing some new stuff/ the players were distracted by Jack...media etc

                        Sure it wasnt the best playing, but im not gonna rush to judge..after all its the preaseason. I will say this thought they do need to play alot better or PGs didnt play good at all and thats unacceptable.
                        If you havin' depth problems, I feel bad for you son; I got 99 problems but a bench ain't one! - Hicks
                        [/center]
                        @thatguyjoe84

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                          My wife, Pizza Guy and I attended the game last night and enjoyed the experience. However, the game was poorly played. There were too many fouls called which did not allow the Pacers to get into any kind of rythm or flow.

                          Steve Jackson was booed just one time that meant anything. The others were halfhearted efforts. Probably brought on by a poorly played, boring excuse for a ball game. I thought it was fitting the first time Jax got the ball he threw it away. Sort of like his career at this point.

                          I was dissapointed in the over all effort through the first three quarters. If AL had not connected well from the line we would have lost by 20+.

                          Armstrong was good in the fourth quarter. At least he tried.

                          I was hoping to see Baston play but he didn't. (sore foot)

                          Is JO one of the most over hyped, over paid players in the league? I thought so tonight. Being it was his first game back plus it being Jacksons first game back probably accounts for the awful flow of the game. It just never seemed to get going. The crowd wanted to get into it but there was nothing to get into. Tinsley seemed lethargic, Danny was OK but there was a total lack of all out effort tonight.

                          Sarunas couldn't get anything going either. The ball just does not move around enough to take advantage of his talents. Especially when Jax and JO are in there. David developed an attitude, got a tech and sat out for the last quarter or more. I was hoping he had matured some over the summer. Oh well.

                          There was speed, quickness, energy and effort shown on the floor tonight, unfortunately, it was all from the Utah Jazz.

                          The announced crowd was around 12500 but it seemed to lack even that number. Lots of empty seats. It was just a preseason game so it has to get better. right?

                          All in all, I came away from the game feeling flat. Not excited and not totally depressed, just flat.

                          It has to get better.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                            UB, I agree about Saras! He can't handle the ball, couldn't last year and from what i've read evidently hew has not improved over the summer. Deron Williams was the 2nd best PG in the draft last year and will be a great player in the years to come. He was tough at Illinois and I expected him to be solid in the NBA. So don't take Deron so litely. Jamal prob. fired up a blunt on the way to the game... its a preseason game you know? Armstrong was brought in as a safety blanket. The guy can handle the ball, not a big scorer but a good dish man. I could see Armstrong playing some minutes this year. I wouldn't put so much in this preseason game. We have 18-19 guys on this team and some of them won't play a single minute this year for the P's. I want to evaluate this team after our final roster is set and we've had a chance to play 4-5 games.
                            "He wanted to get to that money time. Time when the hardware was on the table. That's when Roger was going to show up. So all we needed to do was stay close"
                            Darnell Hillman (Speaking of former teammate Roger Brown)

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                              yeah if people are gonna bash runi they can take it elsewhere...people need to really stop trying to blame him its not his fault.
                              If you havin' depth problems, I feel bad for you son; I got 99 problems but a bench ain't one! - Hicks
                              [/center]
                              @thatguyjoe84

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: You aren't going to want to hear what I have to say, my thoughts on game 2

                                People have every right to blame Saras - our "prized" free agent acquisition of last offseason has done absolutely nothing to help this team. There's really no possible way we can let him off the hook, he has flat-out *removed*

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X