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

Post game thread - Kings vs Pacers - well that was much better

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

  • #31
    Re: Post game thread - Kings vs Pacers - well that was much better

    Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
    It's weird, b/c I saw that play differently. To me it looked like Dunleavy flashed, waited there a few seconds, realized Foster wasn't passing him the ball (for whatever reason) so instead of being stagnant, he decided to cut and THEN Jeff decided to throw him the ball. I remember the play well b/c I was yelling at the tv for Jeff to give him the ball, then when the turnover happened I couldn't believe Jeff was upset at Dunleavy, when he clearly held the ball too long. I like Jeff Foster, but he needs to take the blame for some of his mistakes more often.
    Yeah thats what I saw.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Post game thread - Kings vs Pacers - well that was much better

      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
      I agree. I've said some of my thoughts in other threads, but I guess game specific stuff belongs here most of all.

      1) Greene - great on defense, really impressive and I liked that Rick went that way (not like he's got tons of choices). HOWEVER, Greene on offense is a disaster waiting to happen. By PG standards he's a terrible ball handler and can't be trusted to run the show.

      So you can use him as long as you don't remove offense from the other positions. Rick did that at least once and quickly saw it wasn't working (and subbed). He had Greene, Foster and DA out there and it was just too many offensive breakpoints to keep SAC honest and keep the offense flowing.

      4 on 5 you can make work, 2 on 5 isn't going to score a lot of points.



      2) Dunleavy - inside the arc he's been money. Not just good, but great. He runs the transition better than anyone on the team, which is specifically why I bumped my "no more running" thread to give him credit. I like when I see running with Dun and Murph on the floor.

      They aren't good on defense (Troy is awful in fact), but they can create and convert breaks far better than anyone could on this team back in DEC.

      I think Dun is still lost in the system. He is making wrong cuts or bad spacing choices at times, and I think he's a step behind on some plays. I noticed the first play of the LAC game that he left the FT line flash just as Jeff was passing it too him and that Jeff was clearly frustrated by Dun's choice. To me that looked like Dun just didn't know exactly what the play was trying to accomplish.

      At another point he brought the double to JO by setting up in the same corner as JO's post when JO was pushed off the block already (meaning closer to the corner than normal). This is a TEAM play because Jeff did the same thing last night but went baseline off a JO pass behind the double (for that pretty layup). I just think Dun didn't read it right when he tried to do it because he's not comfortable with it yet.



      If they can stabalize a little I think a strategy better suited to them could be sorted out. Right now I feel like we don't even know what the roster is going to look like from night to night, let alone be able to have some amount of expectations for them (in terms of details of what each of them can do on the court).





      Probably when Bird trades JO and Granger for a #14 pick, Peja and David West. You know, because the team needs a shooter and need to get back in this deep draft. And right now the team's overall talent level is still running a bit too high for Larry's taste.

      It's weird, b/c I saw that play differently. To me it looked like Dunleavy flashed, waited there a few seconds, realized Foster wasn't passing him the ball (for whatever reason) so instead of being stagnant, he decided to cut and THEN Jeff decided to throw him the ball. I remember the play well b/c I was yelling at the tv for Jeff to give him the ball, then when the turnover happened I couldn't believe Jeff was upset at Dunleavy, when he clearly held the ball too long. I like Jeff Foster, but he needs to take the blame for some of his mistakes more often.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Post game thread - Kings vs Pacers - well that was much better

        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
        Thanks MR.

        1983 season, Yes ending the season 9-52 is incredible. After January 1st the Pacers had losing streaks of 6, then 5, then 12, then 5, then 7.

        Pacers never won more than 2 straight and they only did that twice. Once in November and once in December. That was it. So in those losing streaks I referrenced above at no time were they separated by anything more than a "1 game winning streak"

        Wow that is worse than even I remember

        ___________

        OK, now for the 1985 season.

        Well ending the season 3-21, was very unpleasant. Pacers actually had a 3 game winning streak at the end of December. That must have been when I was guaranteeing the playoffs and thinking we had finally "turned the corner. Wayman was going to lead us to the promise land.
        We've really been spoiled for a long time now as fans. I was in a position at that time where sporting event tickets were a perk. You honestly couldn't give away Pacer tickets. I went to a lot games, but I don't think I ever went to a sell out at MSA. I moved out of state in the fall of 91 just in time to miss the birth of the our first decent team. I wouldn't count the Chuck Person led playoff birth team as a decent team. I never want to see this team get that bad again. I'm all for a few more changes in the offseason, but in no way do I want to see us dump J.O. to rebuild. Even if J.O. wants that I don't think there's any chance for that to happen.
        Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Post game thread - Kings vs Pacers - well that was much better

          Are we spoiled? I think part of the problem is the fanbase as a majority doesn't demand a championship. They merely expect above average. Don't misunderstand: Everyone WANTS a championship, but being an above average team in the playoffs is all the the fans as a majority demand (that and not having "thugs").

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Post game thread - Kings vs Pacers - well that was much better

            Hicks, I hear this theory tossed around but when has a fan base ever turned a franchise around? On the my list of things that makes a fanchise champions the demands of the fans isn't on the list.
            "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

            "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Post game thread - Kings vs Pacers - well that was much better

              Originally posted by Arcadian View Post
              Hicks, I hear this theory tossed around but when has a fan base ever turned a franchise around? On the my list of things that makes a fanchise champions the demands of the fans isn't on the list.
              It's not that. Fans don't turn a franchise around. But I think it would be beneficial if the attitude/spirit surrounding the franchise was "championships or bust" (so to speak). I think it has to be not just the fans, but the fans and the management, the coaches, and the players. I only sense it from some of the players (not so much right now, but previously JO would make that clear), but not anyone else in the franchise. I think if we as fans start to carry that attitude around more that it might start to have an effect on the mindset of everyone involved with the team, if even a little.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Post game thread - Kings vs Pacers - well that was much better

                Originally posted by TheDon View Post
                At this point I'll take any kind of victory we can get, if David Harrison came out and got a victory in a halftime pie eating contest against Brad Miller..I would take it. Any kind of victory at this point would be nice.
                Harrison couldn't do it, not enough court time.

                I do wonder if Harrison could ever get close to these numbers put up by Mehmet Okur?

                Year Team MPG PPG RPG
                2002-03 DET 19.0 6.9 4.7
                2003-04 DET 22.3 9.6 5.9
                2004-05 UTA 28.1 12.9 7.5
                2005-06 UTA 35.9 18.0 9.1
                2006-07 UTA 33.9 18.2 7.4

                Harrison's stats
                Year Team MPG PPG RPG
                04-05 IND 17.7 6.1 3.1
                05-06 IND 15.4 5.7 3.8
                06-07 IND 7.1 2.6 1.8
                You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Post game thread - Kings vs Pacers - well that was much better

                  Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                  It's not that. Fans don't turn a franchise around. But I think it would be beneficial if the attitude/spirit surrounding the franchise was "championships or bust" (so to speak). I think it has to be not just the fans, but the fans and the management, the coaches, and the players. I only sense it from some of the players (not so much right now, but previously JO would make that clear), but not anyone else in the franchise. I think if we as fans start to carry that attitude around more that it might start to have an effect on the mindset of everyone involved with the team, if even a little.
                  That's a fair point.

                  There's obviously a different mentality with the Colts. For the Colts since 2003, the mentality amongst the fanbase has been "Championship or Bust". But the Pacers fanbase as a whole over the past few years has accepted upper mediocrity, the Colts has been held to an extremely high standard, and finally that standard was rewarded.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Post game thread - Kings vs Pacers - well that was much better

                    That's not true. When the Pacers went to finals Bird said there wouldn't be a parade because they didn't win it all.
                    "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

                    "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Post game thread - Kings vs Pacers - well that was much better

                      Hicks, I think that you are wrong here. That attitude leads to a lot of disappointment. I think that you only think this because one of your teams won this year. Most of my main teams (Bills, Sabres and Pacers) have never won, and if I took that all or nothing attitude I would just stop watching sports. It probably seems to you that the team and fans willed the Colts to victory, but the Colts were partially lucky to win it this year. There were so many things that could have gone the other way in the Baltimore and New England game, and to have them all go the Colts way is part skill and part luck. So if they don't catch some of those bounces, then the year would have been a failure? Just getting to watch Payton Manning play on your team is reason enough to consider the year a success IMO (I tried to become a Colts fan, but I felt like a bandwagon fan and a traitor to my birth city and gave it up).

                      But my main point is that having that attitude leads to disappointment. I am a Yankee fan, and let me tell you that I derive little or no pleasure for watching baseball. If they win, there were expected to, and if they lose they failed. Laker fans have an all or nothing attitude towards the game and they seem to not enjoy the beauty of the sport. I can appreciate basketball and hockey on the level of individual plays, and this can get you through some bad years.
                      Slug 'em Sabres!!!!!
                      http://youtube.com/watch?v=cj1SUF4wzu0

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Post game thread - Kings vs Pacers - well that was much better

                        I admit I've become less and less enthusiastic each year because of my mindset. I think what I want from my sports life is 1 championship and from there I'll just do my best to enjoy anything there is to enjoy. But I wanta to be able to says "NBA Champion Indiana Pacers" before I die.

                        I have that with the Colts, and that's great. Unfortunately, they're easily my 2nd favorite.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Post game thread - Kings vs Pacers - well that was much better

                          Last night's game boiled down to two things: Adjustments and EFFORT! Obviously, more of the later is needed than the later.

                          I watched the game, but to my dismay I paid closer attetion to what the Pacers did on the floor rather than who the five players were on the floor at any given time. So, could someone tell me if Williams, Granger and JO were ever out there at the same time? If so, it makes me wonder why RC didn't also go w/Harrison at Center? I'm convinced that had we gone with a bigger, more defensive oriented front court we might have won this game going away.

                          I did notice that we were able to slow the new K-Mart down (I guess Kenyon Martin is now known as "Big-K" ) by putting a bigger body on him, i.e., Williams. Martin couldn't shoot over him nor Granger, but he ate both Tinsley and Army's lunch! The biggest problem there was our Guards simply giving too much ground. Again, they were more concerned w/dribble penetration than their man shooting from the field. Hence, Bibby got off 2-3 shots he shouldn't have/wouldn't have dared if he were guarded alittle tighter.

                          Good 2nd-half by my boyz...just wish they'd have given that same effort from the 2nd qtr on...

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Post game thread - Kings vs Pacers - well that was much better

                            Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                            It's not that. Fans don't turn a franchise around. But I think it would be beneficial if the attitude/spirit surrounding the franchise was "championships or bust" (so to speak). I think it has to be not just the fans, but the fans and the management, the coaches, and the players. I only sense it from some of the players (not so much right now, but previously JO would make that clear), but not anyone else in the franchise. I think if we as fans start to carry that attitude around more that it might start to have an effect on the mindset of everyone involved with the team, if even a little.
                            I'd agree w/you except fans will only cheer for their team if they honestly believe there is something to cheer about. And right now, the Pacers aren't giving me a reason to jump up and go, "Rah-Rah, 6 Boom-Bah!"

                            Winning cures alot of things, but even a losing team will still get fan support if the team shows effort and a winning attitude most nights. What I've seen from this team lately is a team playing not to lose rather than a team playing to win! It's like once they get down by +10 (at the half), they all but cave instead of turning up the pressure and doing whatever it takes to chip away at that lead and steal the win.

                            Granted, it's very difficult to come from a double-digit deficit, but teams have done it before including this one! As long as time remains on the clock and you have the desire to win, anything is possible. The Pacers (and coach) need to play smarter basketball, not harder (and here I'm referring to falling so far behind and having to claw their way back, not overall effort; that should be there every time they step onto the floor!).

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X