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

Pacers Vs. Sonics Postgame thread

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

  • #31
    Re: Pacers Vs. Sonics Postgame thread

    Originally posted by Isaac View Post
    The Pacers led this game 10-3.
    Ah, did not make it me until into the 2nd and the Pacers were down by about 10, I just assumed they started out that way i guess.
    No matter how much success Larry Bird attains in Indiana he'll never top that first command to fire Thomas. -Peter Vecsey. NY Post 12/4/07

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Pacers Vs. Sonics Postgame thread

      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
      I do need to say that Watson, a player I've wanted for 3 season now, looked impressive to me
      UB, I respect your posts... but the last two players you want on this team are not that great to begin with.. I am referring to Quis and Dunleavy..

      they may be good players, but they are not game changers... they dont forces teams to match up...

      In Stephen Jackson's defence, atleast I have read quotes that say teams prepare for Stephen Jackson .....

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Pacers Vs. Sonics Postgame thread

        Of course Teams prepare for Jax, they put metal detectors at the Players enterance!
        No matter how much success Larry Bird attains in Indiana he'll never top that first command to fire Thomas. -Peter Vecsey. NY Post 12/4/07

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Pacers Vs. Sonics Postgame thread

          Originally posted by stew View Post
          UB, I respect your posts... but the last two players you want on this team are not that great to begin with.. I am referring to Quis and Dunleavy..

          they may be good players, but they are not game changers... they dont forces teams to match up...

          In Stephen Jackson's defence, atleast I have read quotes that say teams prepare for Stephen Jackson .....
          Yeah but Steven Jackson, Al Harrington are .

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Pacers Vs. Sonics Postgame thread

            Someone can correct me if I am wrong.....but we outrebounded them 53 to 35...and we still lost.....I'm guessing cuz we played cr@plike defense.....they shot 55% from the field.
            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Pacers Vs. Sonics Postgame thread

              Originally posted by TheDon View Post
              Yes it was the same shot and it worked earlier, but the phrase "going to the well one too many times" comes to mind. Like I said...it was predictable. regardless of whether or not it worked on play X does not mean it will work on play Y that's flawed logic.
              Yeah, remember how Reggie would always miss that shot everyone knew was coming....or ANY decent player.

              WTF surprise are you looking for here? Let's keep in mind that whatever they choose to do, the player has to be able to make the play. Just a bit before that Murph forced a drive to the lane when nothing really opened up outside for him. That was a charge, just part of the collapse.

              They ran a standard PnR with Foster on that final play and the Sonics jumped all over it with pressure. And again the biggest issue is that Tins drew lots of attention and yet the Pacers still couldn't put back the offensive rebound, just as they failed to pull in the defensive rebound after Ray missed his shot.

              At some point you have to execute. Tricks are not what most late game plays in the NBA (for any team) are built on.

              And finally, do you really think Tins scored the other layup on pure surprise, that the Sonics "never saw it coming"? Like any other late shots, it comes down to who can make a play more than anything.


              Murphy came off his man while watching the Ray miss bounce and that space is explicitly how they got the rebound and bucket (plus Tins fouling when he grabbed his arm in an attempt to stop the putback). When the ball went up both Foster and Murph had inside position on their guys. By the end of the play this wasn't true. That's execution and if they complete that task they win the game, period.


              Anyway, the concern should fall much, much more on how they lost their late lead to the point that they needed to make a bucket.

              74-83, DunDun in for Granger (and put back on Allen)
              88-90, Granger returns for Dunleavy and they procede to go back up by 7 at one point 92-99

              With the game 94-99 you have Granger miss, Murph rebound and miss, Foster rebound and miss (boy, that sounds oddly familiar).

              Ray hits a jumper.

              Tins scores 1 of 2 after drawing a foul.

              Watson layup (off Ray play)

              Murphy charges in an awkward drive. Then at the other end his guy scores and he fouls him for the 3pt play.

              Tins makes the layup for the final lead.

              Ray misses, offensive board and score for final points.


              So to recap, Ray Allen was the focus of basically every trip and when he missed a shot or dished it, other guys rebounded for scores or made inside shots. When Tins missed the Pacers couldn't put it back in, let alone get fouled doing so. I wasn't even that happy with Tins in the 2nd half, but he did score on 2 of the 3 trips his number was called. That's better than Murph, Granger and Foster were able to do.


              But it was the gameplan and not the execution. Knowing that Ray was taking that final shot didn't seem to keep the Sonics from winning. I'd love an explanation on why that is since it's so obvious that the final play call being obvious ruins games, whereas rebounding aces getting beat on the boards late or missing putbacks is standard for winning efforts.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Pacers Vs. Sonics Postgame thread

                I never said that the other players weren't expected to move, I said they didn't move on that last play.

                Let's be honest, their entire defense was focused on Tins, and not one of our other players can get out to help Tins and get open for an easy shot?

                Of course there are ways out of a play, second and 3rd options, but none of them were available in this play because everyone of his team members was looking at how Tins and Foster were "solving" the problem.

                Then the tip by Foster (miss, what else is new) and the DG "prayer" (he had more then enough time to "gather&collect") and finally while already falling away Tins heaves a prayre on a ball falling to him.

                If either of the wingplayers had come out to "receive" the ball when Tins was looking for a way to get in (and around Jeff) they would most likely have had an easy shot, it didn't happen.

                We lost, it's not nice, but it happens, and yes it happens to many times, but still we are improving.

                Is Quis the secret answer? no way, but with JO out, I had hoped to see more of Maceo, who did well earlier in the season, or perhaps more of David, I mean 4 minutes why? he was not in foul trouble so...

                No Shawn, (who has perhaps the best shot of all our players) those are the things I don't understand.

                Ike has proven he can not pass out of a double team (yet) so that part of his game needs hard work. (and till then something that could help is getting someone come to him to "release" him?)
                So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Pacers Vs. Sonics Postgame thread

                  Rawle Marshall is terrible. I can't believe how overrated he's become here. I wish Carlisle would stop playing him and instead play the kid with some legit upside, Shawne Williams.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Pacers Vs. Sonics Postgame thread

                    Thoughts on last nights game:

                    - Tinsley played well, and the team was obviously better with him on the floor than with DA. The 10-26 included probably 6 terrible shots, so if you look at it, he made 50% of the decent shots that he took. 26 shots for Tinsley is still high, but w/o JO it's more acceptable.

                    - This team is awful defensively without JO. There is no one else (that played last night) who could block the average high schooler's shot. Even if JO only played defense last night and never shot, we'd have won. He'd have blocked at least 3 or 4 shots and altered who knows how many more.

                    - I am a Carlisle supporter, but last night he made some strange decisions. His end of the quarter plays - which amount to DA or Tins dribbling for 10 seconds and then shooting a 3 - are juvenile. I would have loved to see Shawne Williams play a bit more against a team that likes to play small ball. I don't know why Dunleavy was ever assigned to guard Ray Allen. He tried, but he just couldn't do it. Granger and Marshall did a better job.

                    - I hate the Tins-DA backcourt. I pray that this goes away once Daniels gets back, but I don't think it's going to. Nothing good comes from this. We played these two almost the whole 4th quarter and lost a 9 point lead and the game.

                    - This is the first time I've really seen Diogu play. Is he really as bad at finishing as he was last night? Someone who knows more, please answer. He'd be great if he could make a lay-up and knew how to pass. His potential is obvious.

                    - My wife was watching the game with me and commented in the 1st quarter that neither team seemed to be playing with any energy. She was right.

                    - DA took some terrible shots, and played way too much. It's obvious that he's starting to wear down.

                    - All in all this was a bad game that we should have easily won.

                    - Ray Allen, if no one else noticed, is really good.
                    "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                    - Salman Rushdie

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Pacers Vs. Sonics Postgame thread

                      Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                      Someone can correct me if I am wrong.....but we outrebounded them 53 to 35...and we still lost.....I'm guessing cuz we played cr@plike defense.....they shot 55% from the field.

                      Yes sir, that is the reason we lost and it makes me sick, how could that be, how? 53 to 35! Play some freakin D!
                      Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Pacers Vs. Sonics Postgame thread

                        Originally posted by odeez View Post
                        Yes sir, that is the reason we lost and it makes me sick, how could that be, how? 53 to 35! Play some freakin D!
                        If anything it shows how much a defensive presence JO is.

                        And how important to the team D he is.

                        (nobody there to do his talking in the paint to tell the people where to be)
                        So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                        If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                        Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Pacers Vs. Sonics Postgame thread

                          Originally posted by able View Post
                          Let's be honest, their entire defense was focused on Tins, and not one of our other players can get out to help Tins and get open for an easy shot?
                          At least someone knows what i'm talking about

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Pacers Vs. Sonics Postgame thread

                            I guess I missed something about last nights game, why was JO out? And we did miss him last night for sure, we would have won that game I believe.

                            Oh I see it was his knee, darn!
                            Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Pacers Vs. Sonics Postgame thread

                              Let's be honest, their entire defense was focused on Tins, and not one of our other players can get out to help Tins and get open for an easy shot?


                              And what makes you think that Tinverson would have passed it to them? Let's be honest, Tins is not the "answer" to the Pacer's problems, he is the problem. Trade him or the Pacers won't have enough fans left to fill the local high school gym.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Pacers Vs. Sonics Postgame thread

                                Originally posted by able View Post
                                I never said that the other players weren't expected to move, I said they didn't move on that last play.

                                Let's be honest, their entire defense was focused on Tins, and not one of our other players can get out to help Tins and get open for an easy shot?

                                Of course there are ways out of a play, second and 3rd options, but none of them were available in this play because everyone of his team members was looking at how Tins and Foster were "solving" the problem.

                                Then the tip by Foster (miss, what else is new) and the DG "prayer" (he had more then enough time to "gather&collect") and finally while already falling away Tins heaves a prayre on a ball falling to him.

                                If either of the wingplayers had come out to "receive" the ball when Tins was looking for a way to get in (and around Jeff) they would most likely have had an easy shot, it didn't happen.

                                We lost, it's not nice, but it happens, and yes it happens to many times, but still we are improving.

                                Is Quis the secret answer? no way, but with JO out, I had hoped to see more of Maceo, who did well earlier in the season, or perhaps more of David, I mean 4 minutes why? he was not in foul trouble so...

                                No Shawn, (who has perhaps the best shot of all our players) those are the things I don't understand.

                                Ike has proven he can not pass out of a double team (yet) so that part of his game needs hard work. (and till then something that could help is getting someone come to him to "release" him?)
                                That's the thing about our offense. Every time someone goes inside, Granger and whatever 2-guard is playing with him just sits at the 3 point line and waits and watches. It happened with Tinsley, it happened a few times with Diogu -- though I admit the offense moves better with Diogu than it does with O'Neal, probably because Diogu doesn't take long to figure out what he's going to do with the ball once he has it.

                                Lack of movement on the offensive end in those situations are something I blame on lack of coaching in this department. That said, I am going to admit that I'm ready for a new coach here, and I actually have a logical explanation for why. I'll post a thread on that, and the state of the Pacers later on.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X