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

Harrington and Jackson in the starting lineup tonight

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

  • #16
    Re: Harrington and Jackson in the starting lineup tonight

    Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
    Party at Buck's house!!!
    You didn't get my invite. Oops I forgot. Nevermind.

    I'm shocked at how the Warrior coaches and his new teammates, and the media in the Bay Area all think that Jackson will thrive in the Warriors system. I think that Jackson is much better in a halfcourt system where he can use his greatest advantage his height to post up and to shoot his rainbow jumper - he's also better in a physical defensive system - an aggressive system where he can gamble.

    And I think most Pacers fans agree with me on this. Is there anything uglier than Jackson running a fastbreak - I don't think so.

    Should be very interesting

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Harrington and Jackson in the starting lineup tonight

      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
      I guess I cross my fingers and hope that GS ends up sick when Diogu finds a role with the Pacers. How that happens with him being a pure low-post PF I don't know. But I do like his offensive game.
      One thing that is very underrated in Diogu's game is his face up shooting. He's not just a post up player. He can hit the open 15-18 jumper without any problems. I have concerns about his defense and I don't think his rebounding is as good Bird and Walsh seem to think it is. But Diogu can make shots. That is his greatest asset.

      So I think he and JO can and will play pretty well together

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Harrington and Jackson in the starting lineup tonight

        Guessing 10 or so combined TO from Jack and Al tonight...
        "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Harrington and Jackson in the starting lineup tonight

          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
          Yep. That's why I made my rant about the Heat game and that terrible FG% allowed missing Jack and Al.

          This is also why for the last few years I've gone off pretty badly when people list Jack as some terrible defender. Sure he's no Bowen or anything, but he is willing to get physical with guys and force them off their spots. Speed guys can hurt him, but bigger SG/SF types (like James, Wade) who like to work inside the arc more and flash a little of their own strength are guys he has matched up well with in the past.

          GS's defense is dreadful, and 2 of the major parts of that just joined the Pacers.

          True. Fair point there.


          I hear all this talk about the improvement, but I see a total wash in most things, a downgrade in defense, a downgrade in rebounding between Dunleavy and Harrington (compared because Dun is too slow for SG duty, too small for C play, just like Al), and somehow even less speed.

          The Pacers didn't get Richardson and Biedrens coming back, but to hear some of the talk you'd think they did.


          Having said that, clearly the Oakland press is unaware that Jack is no uptempo flier himself and that Al's defense this year isn't a ton better than what he is replacing. They have improved...SLIGHTLY.

          And Saras is about to find out what not playing is all about. Honestly I have no sympathy for his crybaby fanboys who spent every day telling us what an idiot Rick was for not utilizing Cabbages better. I think Saras is about to find out the same things Fred, AJ and Croshere just learned...that with RC you actually got some playing time that other coaches aren't willing to hand out.



          As much as I enjoyed Jack as a Pacer, I will be interested to see how his dynamic with the new coach works out. He won't feel comfortable enough to rip into him for a few months, but if he gets back to his old habit of yelling at the coach as he comes out of the game I suspect it won't get the same leeway with Nelson.


          We are going to be sick seeing Harrington continuing his 3P% at 40% with this Warriors team, especially if Murphy continues his "hot" 1 for 11 January.

          I guess I cross my fingers and hope that GS ends up sick when Diogu finds a role with the Pacers. How that happens with him being a pure low-post PF I don't know. But I do like his offensive game.
          Come on Seth, I think that you're going to be pleasantly surprised by how well Murphy and Dun fits into our team. JO will benefit the most from their presence. Defenses will not be able to sag on JO and he'll have more one on one situations.

          Unlike most posters, I don't think Diogu, was the primary player in the deal. Although, I think that he'll work just fine alternating with Jeff. That way we will have a good rebounder down low at all times.

          I believe that we can win 47-50 ball games yet this season and when the playoffs come around will be a well-oiled machine and the players will be comfortable with each other. You can't play the game on paper like you've been trying to by comparing the stats of each player. We may be somewhat weaker on individual defense but have a stronger team defense.
          .

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Harrington and Jackson in the starting lineup tonight

            I still wish we could have gotten Pietrus in the deal... that would have made me a total believer.
            This space for rent.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Harrington and Jackson in the starting lineup tonight

              Originally posted by Anthem View Post
              I still wish we could have gotten Pietrus in the deal... that would have made me a total believer.
              If we could have gotten Air France, instead of Dunleavy I would have been much happier.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Harrington and Jackson in the starting lineup tonight

                Originally posted by Dat Dude View Post
                If we could have gotten Air France, instead of Dunleavy I would have been much happier.
                I don't think JO would agree with you. Dunleavy is a good role player. He's not a great shooter but he'll make the open shot, which is important when playing in zones. Also, he is anything but selfish and will get JO the ball. From what I've read, he's also a good entry passer, which will be key. JO's scoring will rise with this trade. He could never work in games once the other teams closed a zone in on him. Now he's got players that understand spacing, moving without the ball, and passing. I'm really happy with this trade from that perspective and I think JO is too.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Harrington and Jackson in the starting lineup tonight

                  Honestly, as is the case with most mid-season trades (Iverson, Webber), I expected Ellis and Barnes to be in the starting lineup tonight, opposed to Al and Stephen. Giving them confidence initially should help ease the transition. I'm definitely looking forward to their debut, especially because they're already big pieces to the Warriors, even in their first game.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Harrington and Jackson in the starting lineup tonight

                    Pietrus is hands down the dumbest basketball player in the league. Baron constantly is in his ear telling him what his latest mistake was. I watch a ton of Warrior games and all he does is stand in the corner and launch 3s so that Nellie can limit the chances for him to screw up. Obviously his athleticism can hide his low b-ball IQ, but he just doesn't have a feel for the game.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Harrington and Jackson in the starting lineup tonight

                      I know this is a little off topic but who do you think will start for the Pacers tonight? Pacers.com has the lineup of Tins/Quis/DG/JO/Jeff. But I had made the assumption that some of our new guys would be in our starting lineup.
                      I think KP is a Captain Planet fan. He believes that the collective will of five decent starters can outweigh the power of top-level talent. Too bad Herb won't cut the check for their Planeteer rings.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Harrington and Jackson in the starting lineup tonight

                        Just saw on realgm that Baron Davis is suspended for tonights game... Link
                        "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Harrington and Jackson in the starting lineup tonight

                          Yep, looks like Saras may be starting as well. God I hope they get blown out.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Harrington and Jackson in the starting lineup tonight

                            Originally posted by rexnom View Post
                            I, too, am puzzled here. Does GS not know how much Jack struggles on fast breaks and how he will just slow down any offense? It's weird. I guess they have him in there to guard LeBron but still...the fact that they think so highly of his play befuddles me. He doesn't really fit with them at all.
                            I think they know all about Jax's shortcomings as well as what he does correctly. I think they just wanted fresh faces as much as the Pacers did.

                            For example, Dun had 18 pts and 13 boards in his last game against the Clippers and he was booed, and they were playing at home. It seems that he never lived up to his #3 pick and the fans were disillusioned with him. However, we know he's not a #3 pick and he should fit in just fine here because we aren't expecting miracles from him.
                            .

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Harrington and Jackson in the starting lineup tonight

                              Well after being strong most of the game Jack finished with a set of missed that really hurt his FG% 9-18 was nicer than 10-25.

                              Still the Warriors had a shot at the win when Jackson took the final 3. Up to that point he was 5-9 from 3 (55%) which makes it a good option. They blew it when they lost the lead midway through the 4th.

                              OT vs the Cavs without Baron Davis. Solid start.

                              Great numbers for Jackson except for the late shooting. Rebounds, assists, steals. Maybe had a chip but still.

                              Al, terrible from the floor but 2-5 from 3. But how about the rebounds - SIX OFFENSIVE, 12 total.

                              Even Saras had a nice offensive night, not really that different from what he did in Indy though.


                              Of course Murphy put up great numbers, Dunleavy didn't. The only major Pacer with a sub 1.00 PPS on the night.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Harrington and Jackson in the starting lineup tonight

                                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                                Well after being strong most of the game Jack finished with a set of missed that really hurt his FG% 9-18 was nicer than 10-25.

                                Still the Warriors had a shot at the win when Jackson took the final 3. Up to that point he was 5-9 from 3 (55%) which makes it a good option. They blew it when they lost the lead midway through the 4th.

                                OT vs the Cavs without Baron Davis. Solid start.

                                Great numbers for Jackson except for the late shooting. Rebounds, assists, steals. Maybe had a chip but still.

                                Al, terrible from the floor but 2-5 from 3. But how about the rebounds - SIX OFFENSIVE, 12 total.

                                Even Saras had a nice offensive night, not really that different from what he did in Indy though.


                                Of course Murphy put up great numbers, Dunleavy didn't. The only major Pacer with a sub 1.00 PPS on the night.

                                Probably not a good idea to have a guy shooting 29% on 3's taking the last shot from downtown.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X