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

Odd thoughts about the Chicago loss.....

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

  • #16
    Re: Odd thoughts about the Chicago loss.....

    Since the post game thread turned into an argument over whose fault the loss was, I want to move my thoughts over here:

    That would have been a big win on the road against a real good team.

    First time I've seen the boys on TV, so this might get long.

    Offense really slowed down in the 4th, mainly because the Bulls controlled the time of possession w/ all of their o-boards. Normally I'd blast JO for not being aggressive on the boards, but tonight falls on Al and Granger. They need to help out down there because the Deng and Nocioni were following Wallace's lead and hitting the boards hard.

    Tinsley looked slow during that final quarter. He wasn't attacking on the p&r like he was earlier in the game. (This is how Granger was WIDE open in the corner all night. He wasn't exactly creating his own shot for those of you frustrated that the offense didn't run through him) It seemed like every shot we took was contested and the ball movement wasn't as crisp.

    Jack played the best defense I have ever seen him play. He made Hinrich work on every possession. That late 3 was just good execution by the Bulls. I liked what I saw from Jack on that end of the floor tonight. His offense was frustrating because normally when we play the Bulls he gets a lot of post touches. It did seem like we focused too much on JO in the 4th and forgot to give Jack or Al some touches.

    JO has become the best big man in the league at taking charges. He really understands when to go for the block and when to stay planted.

    Sarunas is going to make Carlisle's PG rotation real easy to decide when O. Greene comes back. I hope he has some nice European suits because if the shots not falling, there is no reason for him to play.

    Armstrong looked a step slow tonight. It was only a matter of time. He's old, there will be the occasional off night. The end of the game was just frustration and officials overreacting. (Picking up his initial comments on WGN, he said to the ref that Hinrich pushed him into Nocioni, which obviously gave him the momentum for the tackle) I hope he doesn't get suspended because he's Tinsley ONLY backup right now.

    My final thought deals with Marquis Daniels. I was waiting to see him on TV before I commented on his game. Offensively he just looks out of place. Carlisle let him go 1 on 1 a few times at the beginning of the 4th and he scored, split 2 FTs, and airballed a floater. I like the idea of playing Armstrong off the ball and letting Daniels create a little bit. We've got to get him playing with some confidence ASAP.

    Tough loss, but still 4-3. There was more good than bad tonight.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Odd thoughts about the Chicago loss.....

      Originally posted by able View Post
      Yes we collapsed in the 4th, and no, not nice, but............

      "over the back" seems to be a call competely out of fashion, at least it did this game, while "traveling" is the "new" thing.
      3 of JO's 5 to's were just that, a travel call, add to that a charge and a lost ball and there are all TO's by JO.

      with 4 Ast, 3 Bs, nad "only" 8 reb, still team leader, I have a much harder time to call Danny on a "good" game, despite making 55 3pt shots, I would've preferred some rebounding from him, just like from Al.
      I know it is easy to blame it all on JO but when your point-guard has 5 rebounds while you PF/SF combine for 5 rebounds then something's amiss.

      In general however I was very happy with the 9 Ast, 5 reb and a Bs from Tins, as well as with JO's line, though I would have liked to see him score more, but I am also convinced that the high scoring games will come soon enough.

      This team is getting used to each other, between game 1 and now the starters have gelled, now the rotations need to gel, give it 10 more games and I am sure we will look completely different at things.

      You know I thought that was going on a lot last night as well & one play in particular I though Nacioni went over Al's back.

      But then I went back & looked at it twice & I'll be d@mned if he didn't even touch Al. He just simply outjumped him.

      Also on a side note, J.O. should only have had 2 blocks last night. Al blocked that drive in the second half, not J.O. but he got credit for it.

      Another thing I don't think we have been making a big enough deal of Jeff Fosters new shot blocking rampage. Adding this to the arsenal improves him as a defender 100 fold IMO.


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

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Odd thoughts about the Chicago loss.....

        Originally posted by Alabama-Redneck View Post
        I think part of the problem, especially in the 4th quarter, can be attributed to 4 games in 5 days. I also believe mental fatigue was very evident last night.

        As Peck said, not a bad loss. Some bad decisions at the end but not a bad loss.

        You know I totally forgot about that. It was 4 games in 5 nights, that makes me feel even better about this loss.

        I'm sure by the end of the 4th our guys were just worn out & that is when things collapsed on us.

        I'm telling you guys, this is not a bad loss at all. This is not like the Bucks collapse from last season or anything like it.


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

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Odd thoughts about the Chicago loss.....

          Originally posted by Peck View Post
          You know I totally forgot about that. It was 4 games in 5 nights, that makes me feel even better about this loss.

          I'm sure by the end of the 4th our guys were just worn out & that is when things collapsed on us.

          I'm telling you guys, this is not a bad loss at all. This is not like the Bucks collapse from last season or anything like it.


          Peck, you're scaring me, I could have written your post.

          Are you sure you are OK.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Odd thoughts about the Chicago loss.....

            Last night was the only game ive seen on TV all season. I do think Carlisle lost this game for us. Rawle Marshall should of got his minutes much earlier, but that is a minor thing.

            I think we lost the game when we ran that ISO play for Jermaine in the post near the end of the 4th quarter. If we scored on that possession, I honestly think we would of won. All we had to do was...gee...i dunno...move the ball a little bit?

            Also jermaines rebounds weren't impressive. I can think of at least 4 rebounds that just bounced directly into his hand, he didn't do anything to get those boards. He also stole a rebound from Tinsley just to hand it right back to him, so he could get the extra rebound. Jermaine will always have a little bit of that quality (wanting to make his stat line impressive) and it is very counter productive to winning.

            But our team defense was the best i've seen it in a LONGGGGG time and I was very impressed with the first three quarters of play and especially Al Harringtons offense/defense. Granger had a good shooting night, but that was it. Carlisle is retarded for not calling his number in the 4th.

            Anyways, I would trade Jermaine for Kirk Hinrich/1st round pick in a HEARTBEAT and anybody who wouldn't is insane.

            Al Harrington is twice the offensive threat as JO and Granger can also put the ball in the hoop.

            I love Hinrichs game and Chicago would probably laugh at that trade. The bulls are going to be an elite team for the next 2-3 years if Ben Wallace can maintain his level of play.

            I am also sure we could trade Tins/Sarunas for a decent big man that can play defense to replace what we would miss from Jermaine on the defensive end.

            But I am just dreaming, I just wish Hinrich was a pacer...sorry guys i'll start to pretend like this team is gonna do real good things with JO as "our guy."
            *removed* Just keep politics and religion completely out of it, please.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Odd thoughts about the Chicago loss.....

              Originally posted by Jon Theodore View Post
              Last night was the only game ive seen on TV all season. I do think Carlisle lost this game for us. Rawle Marshall should of got his minutes much earlier, but that is a minor thing.

              I think we lost the game when we ran that ISO play for Jermaine in the post near the end of the 4th quarter. If we scored on that possession, I honestly think we would of won. All we had to do was...gee...i dunno...move the ball a little bit?

              Also jermaines rebounds weren't impressive. I can think of at least 4 rebounds that just bounced directly into his hand, he didn't do anything to get those boards. He also stole a rebound from Tinsley just to hand it right back to him, so he could get the extra rebound. Jermaine will always have a little bit of that quality (wanting to make his stat line impressive) and it is very counter productive to winning.

              But our team defense was the best i've seen it in a LONGGGGG time and I was very impressed with the first three quarters of play and especially Al Harringtons offense/defense. Granger had a good shooting night, but that was it. Carlisle is retarded for not calling his number in the 4th.

              Anyways, I would trade Jermaine for Kirk Hinrich/1st round pick in a HEARTBEAT and anybody who wouldn't is insane.

              Al Harrington is twice the offensive threat as JO and Granger can also put the ball in the hoop.

              I love Hinrichs game and Chicago would probably laugh at that trade. The bulls are going to be an elite team for the next 2-3 years if Ben Wallace can maintain his level of play.

              I am also sure we could trade Tins/Sarunas for a decent big man that can play defense to replace what we would miss from Jermaine on the defensive end.

              But I am just dreaming, I just wish Hinrich was a pacer...sorry guys i'll start to pretend like this team is gonna do real good things with JO as "our guy."
              Jon you know I share a lot of the same concerns you do regarding Jermaine. I always have.

              But in this case I just think you might be looking the wrong way.

              Jermaine did not call that isolation play at the end of the game & to be honest if it was the only time it was ran or he was the only one running it I might be willing to believe he called his own play but Jackson also had a couple of isolation plays down at the end. I think it's safe to say that Rick called those plays.

              I agree moving the ball would have been a good idea, in fact if we never ran another isolation play again for all of eternity I would be fine with it. But you have to give some credit to the Bulls here, they shut down the passing lanes.

              However I want to also agree with you that our team defense last night was very good & in fact if we could have gotten a couple of more rebounds I think we could have closed out the game.

              Still though for 4 games in 5 nights I though they did very well.


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

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Odd thoughts about the Chicago loss.....

                Observations


                1--Jackson should never take an important shot late in the game.

                2--The team defense was incredible.

                3--I believe they became very tired in the third and fell apart in the fourth.

                4--Granger should play the scoring guard spot more and Baston or Powell
                play for rebound help. Granger is far and away the Pacers best
                3 point shooter. You could see it coming last year. He looks very
                solid taking the three.

                I agree with Peck that this was not a bad loss. The team obviously made up its mind to compete and they almost pulled it off.
                {o,o}
                |)__)
                -"-"-

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Odd thoughts about the Chicago loss.....

                  No loss is a good loss, but this one was almost OK.

                  Danny G was great on the perimeter shooting, but rebounds weren't part of his success. What did he have 1? Deng had 12.

                  We clearly ran out of energy and I assume that was due to the deservedly so tired legs.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X