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. Sixers Post-Game Thread: The Tank rolls on through Conseco...

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

  • #31
    Re: Pacers vs. Sixers Post-Game Thread: The Tank rolls on through Conseco...

    Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
    Or Mike Dukakis.
    Or LaSalle "Tank" Thompson ?

    Why Not Us ?

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Pacers vs. Sixers Post-Game Thread: The Tank rolls on through Conseco...

      Originally posted by bnd45 View Post
      (One final thought: I don't even care anymore that we'd be helping the Bulls get a lot better. This summer we need to trade JO for a package that includes Ben Gordon. We desperately need a big shot guard and I could see Paxson parting with BG if it got them JO.)
      To do a trade like that the Pacers would have to take back a large salary and the only player they have is Ben Wallace. Five million less per year but the same number of years. that would be the starting point.
      I seriosly doubt they would add BG to even out the trade. Maybe a cast off and a first round pick. Heck would they even want JO?
      {o,o}
      |)__)
      -"-"-

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Pacers vs. Sixers Post-Game Thread: The Tank rolls on through Conseco...

        Originally posted by Shade View Post
        But, once again, we just don't have the talent to get it done.
        Wow, Ive been a realist about the talent level of our current team, but JO or no JO I would have thought that we would have been able to beat Philly if we actually showed some effort. If we don't have the talent to match up against Philly (even without JO), its so much worse than I thought.

        Damn man.....just damn.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Pacers vs. Sixers Post-Game Thread: The Tank rolls on through Conseco...

          Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
          Knicks just won on a buzzer shot by Steve Francis, making them the 8th seed and rising!?
          Yep, that Zeke sure does suck, doesn't he?
          Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Pacers vs. Sixers Post-Game Thread: The Tank rolls on through Conseco...

            Originally posted by Mr.ThunderMakeR View Post
            Wow, Ive been a realist about the talent level of our current team, but JO or no JO I would have thought that we would have been able to beat Philly if we actually showed some effort. If we don't have the talent to match up against Philly (even without JO), its so much worse than I thought.

            Damn man.....just damn.
            Without JO AND Quis, we don't.

            At least, not developed talent.

            But it's close.

            At a preseason game this year, I actually asked Roaming Gnome "What if this team just isn't that good?" And then, shortly after the trade, I said "I could see us finishing below .500." I could kind of see this coming, though I didn't think we'd tank quite this badly.

            But there's still time to turn it around. We need JO and Quis back, though.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Pacers vs. Sixers Post-Game Thread: The Tank rolls on through Conseco...

              I really enjoyed watching this group, why, simple, they played hard, semi smart, and unselfish.

              A couple of observations.

              DG needs a go to move, something. I really hope he works on a drive pull up ala Jalen in the offseason. He has nothing right now and to go to that next level he needs something.

              Tying into DG go to move, the Pacers don't have a clutch guy. So weird watching Mr. Clutch sitting there with Tank Thompson. JO or not the Pacers don't have one. Closest guy who can create is Daniels and I fear he may one of these 3/5 a season guy for his career.

              Tying into Daniels is that the Pacers don't have a penetrator. I'm not counting Tinsley circus out of control crap. There is no one who can drive and kick. I liked McLeod tonight and he does seem fairly quick but he doesn't drive.

              Tying into being hard to drive, every play is called, everytime down. Have the Suns called a play besides an end of quarter or inbounds all year? I'm not going to beat a dead horse on this, though, but come on these guys have played basketball before.

              I liked Harrison imposing himself in a semi controlled way, he's a tough cover.

              Tying into a tough cover, IKE is really really good. I really think he should get 30 minutes a night, ya he turned it over, ya it would have to come at Fosters expense, but I tell you he is the only low post player on the team and excluding HULK cuz he doesn't play, whatever the reason and yes I'm included JO, cuz JO doesn't go down there anymore and can't take the punishment. JO at least doesn't get position like IKE and i tell you if IKE did get more burn he could be a guy like Elton Brand who gets to the line 8 times a game after the refs understand his game. I can't tell you how high I am on IKE.

              Maybe I"m being biased, but it really seems to me he scores a point per every 2 minutes on average regardless of how many minutes he plays. I don't think you can guard him one on one. He's also not a small guy, pretty thick and imposes his physical prescence. Lastly, I like that yelling when he finishes a dunk hard. It comes across as pumped us, not arrogant to me. Plus he almost never cries to the refs. I really think Carlise needs to play him for the future of the franchise.

              I guess overall I'm not to bleak about the future with Green who I think can be a good role player and will get better. Ike with the potential to be on of the best low post threats in the league, he still looks like he has alot of room to get better too. DG already a legit starter, but again with room to really take it to that next level. All three of these guys are 4 years away from their prime and I really like all three.

              I hate to jump on the bandwagon, but they just need a real point guard. How much better would this team be if Andre Miller were here instead of Tinsley. I really believe with that one move, they would be a top 3 seed in the week sister east and a legit chance to come out of the east.

              Now Dunleavy I love him coming off those picks for the 20 footer, I hate watching Phillies Greene lighting him up like a Christmas tree. Can we teach Dunleavy one post move so he can actually take advantage of his height, he might as well be 6'4".

              I'm so hot and cold on Murphy, I fear if the Pacers make the playoffs he'll be worthless. If a team really scouts him it's really pretty simple. Play him for the jump shot and don't let him drive left. I think of Austin and his jab step. Once teams got that all Austin could do was either shoot or drive all the way to the hoop w/o an in between Austin became unplayable almost. Murphy can shoot, but it's wasted, again because we have no one to drive and kick to him. With all of this said, I like him because he will stick his nose in there some and he plays hard every night, but he's an average defender, he's a below average passer.

              Foster, I haven't seen him. I hope this isn't the beginning of the end for his career.

              Overall, a good game, love to see the young guys. I really agree with the group, if Tinsley never takes that awkard set shot or dribbles really cool before throwing it to the other team or tries to reach around and knock the ball away as the player he's guarding blows by him... if he never does any of these things as a Pacer again, I would be estatic. I'd honestly rather have McLeod play the point, at least he plays hard.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Pacers vs. Sixers Post-Game Thread: The Tank rolls on through Conseco...

                This is the longest losing streak I have ever witnessed I believe.


                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Pacers vs. Sixers Post-Game Thread: The Tank rolls on through Conseco...

                  I missed the game but it seemed y'all like the bench . . which I have been saying all along, those guys play hard there, and people say I'm bull****ting
                  R.I.P. Bernic Mac & Isaac Hayes

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Pacers vs. Sixers Post-Game Thread: The Tank rolls on through Conseco...

                    Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
                    Really? I don't know - I don't think he's playing much differently, I just think his weaknesses are completely exposed when he plays with the second unit guys. I don't see a dramatic reduction in how he is playing the game, even if a statistical difference exists.

                    Danny seems fine to me. I'd like to hear what some lobo fans have to say about Danny the younger vs. Danny the elder.

                    He's reverted to camping on the three-point line, and when he doesn't he goes to the goal with no control, which is also un-Granger-like. And on defense, I can't even count how many times he's lost his man in the past few games, or got caught up in a rotation. And in the past two games he's had trouble just dribbling the ball, and I've seen a couple of plays where he made no effort to go after it (though he redeemed himself with a hustle block tonight).

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Pacers vs. Sixers Post-Game Thread: The Tank rolls on through Conseco...

                      Originally posted by Shade View Post
                      At a preseason game this year, I actually asked Roaming Gnome "What if this team just isn't that good?"

                      Pretty sure you said something similar about the Colts.

                      You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Pacers vs. Sixers Post-Game Thread: The Tank rolls on through Conseco...

                        Originally posted by Shade View Post
                        What is the longest losing streak for the Pacers?

                        I read somewhere that 8 is the most since 1989.
                        12 games.


                        http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthre...255#post554255

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Pacers vs. Sixers Post-Game Thread: The Tank rolls on through Conseco...

                          i honestly would be fine with keith starting the rest of the season. i've liked the little i've seen of him. he's not a star, certainly doesn't have tinsley's talent/potential. but he knows his limitations and doesn't force anything. not astounding numbers but 6pts and 6ast in 25min. he's got more control than orien, more legs than DA and more sense/consistency than tinsley. i'd like to see him and Quis (when/if he returns this season) play some minutes together to see how well that combo would work.

                          im sort of surprised maceo didn't see action. i've been really impressed with the minutes he has played this season. and with JO out... maybe we'll see more against cleveland.

                          as for the JO to Chicago trade...
                          my suspicion is that the only reason the Pau Gasol deal didn't go down is if the bulls felt relatively confident that they would get either KG or JO this summer and either of those players would be better than pau (because pau can't play defense and KG/JO are well rounded players in that regard) but i believe KG would be #1 on chicago's list. i think they'd part with gordon or deng AND duhon for JO because just having a lowpost scoring option would be great for their offense but to have two bigs that can play defense and are serious shot blocking threats? even if say they did a trade of...

                          DUHON, DENG, GORDON, DRAFT PICK for JO

                          they'd still have a starting lineup of:

                          HINRICH
                          GRIFFIN
                          NOCIONI (i'd assume they'd resign him)
                          O'NEAL
                          WALLACE

                          thats a crazy defensive team, hinrich and nocioni as your outside threats, JO down low and they ALL can play great defense. then they've got thomas, sefolosha off the bench and whatever other players they bring in they've got a couple of expring contracts (brown, allen, sweetney).

                          thats close to what memphis was asking for gasol and i think paxon would do it (or be less reluctant to do it) for o'neal or garnett BECAUSE you're getting offense BUT with the defense too. a better investment -- but it'd be hard to trade deng AND gordon to a division rival for only JO. i think they could live with gordon and duhon and a pick. ultimately to make that deal we'd need a third team involved. now i'd put a JO to Bulls deal at around a 25-30% chance of happening. but i believe the bulls will make a major trade for a big (Kevin Garnett 60-65%, 5-15% someone other than KG/JO) ... unless they win a championship this year... then i see them keeping their major players and adding a lesser big man (like maybe darko or drew gooden)
                          This is the darkest timeline.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Pacers vs. Sixers Post-Game Thread: The Tank rolls on through Conseco...

                            I'd love to get Duhon, Gordon, and a pick for JO. (making the $ match up could be a challenge) Deng is a future star so I can't see him being included.

                            This deal would instantly solve our backcourt problems, and only create a minor problem up front. (We'd need to make another move for a solid center. Murphy and Ike are solid 4s and Harrison could be a nice backup 5.)

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Pacers vs. Sixers Post-Game Thread: The Tank rolls on through Conseco...

                              Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post

                              im sort of surprised maceo didn't see action. i've been really impressed with the minutes he has played this season. and with JO out... maybe we'll see more against cleveland.
                              Either during the time I had the game on radio, or during the postgame on TV, someone said Maceo was unavailable due to illness or injury (I don't recall which).

                              -Bball
                              Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                              ------

                              "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                              -John Wooden

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Pacers vs. Sixers Post-Game Thread: The Tank rolls on through Conseco...

                                I'm curious as to why....with 3 major injuries to the starting lineup....Shawne didn't get any minutes.
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X