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

3/21/07 Pacers @ Spurs Post Game Thread

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

  • #16
    Re: 3/21/07 Pacers @ Spurs Post Game Thread

    I for one am not happy how things are going game wise but I am glad the
    Jackson trade was made. Some more trades are needed to rid the team
    of all traces of knuckleheaddom. Yes things are bleak but brighter days are
    ahead. It may take 3 more years but it will get better. The fans are spoiled.
    {o,o}
    |)__)
    -"-"-

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: 3/21/07 Pacers @ Spurs Post Game Thread

      Originally posted by Seed View Post
      So far it looks like GS came on top of this trade.

      Jax > Dun (not to mention the contract)
      Al > Murph (not to mention the contract)
      Saras > Keith
      Powell = Ike (at this point at least)

      Of course a lot depends on Ik's future development Vs Powell's, but I wonder if we would have made the trade again, had we the option to decide it now. Probably not.

      I believe with all my heart that this was the best trade we could have gotten for Jackson. No other team would have taken him. So yes I think it was a trade they would have done again.

      One thing that I found interesting. During the Rockets game, if you listened to Doug Collins carefully. What he didn't say I think speaks volumes. First he said he had lunch with Rick Carlisle (they must be friends of some sort) and all Doug kept saying during the telecast is how the Pacers were forced to make the trade that they had to make it. He never once even hinted at "well maybe they could have waited for a better trade". So I took that to mean that Rick made it clear to him that Pacers knew this was the best deal they could get. And also Doug is pretty close to Mike Dunleavy - both Mike Dunleavy's

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: 3/21/07 Pacers @ Spurs Post Game Thread

        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
        I believe with all my heart that this was the best trade we could have gotten for Jackson. No other team would have taken him. So yes I think it was a trade they would have done again.

        One thing that I found interesting. During the Rockets game, if you listened to Doug Collins carefully. What he didn't say I think speaks volumes. First he said he had lunch with Rick Carlisle (they must be friends of some sort) and all Doug kept saying during the telecast is how the Pacers were forced to make the trade that they had to make it. He never once even hinted at "well maybe they could have waited for a better trade". So I took that to mean that Rick made it clear to him that Pacers knew this was the best deal they could get. And also Doug is pretty close to Mike Dunleavy - both Mike Dunleavy's
        I agree with this. Jack needed to go. Al they probably could have kept but things were still not working out. We can't complain about the trade. Just be glad we got any talent back and some young talent as well.

        What makes me mad is how what forced Jack to be traded is the way the infamous "common fan" turned on him. He was our best perimeter defender, most intense competitor, and had been playing well since that early season injury (that he fought through, like all his injuries). Horrible that we were forced to trade Jack...but we were.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: 3/21/07 Pacers @ Spurs Post Game Thread

          At least Tinsley just chucked the ball instead of threating to ****ing kill the ref......
          Narf!

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: 3/21/07 Pacers @ Spurs Post Game Thread

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            I believe with all my heart that this was the best trade we could have gotten for Jackson. No other team would have taken him. So yes I think it was a trade they would have done again.

            One thing that I found interesting. During the Rockets game, if you listened to Doug Collins carefully. What he didn't say I think speaks volumes. First he said he had lunch with Rick Carlisle (they must be friends of some sort) and all Doug kept saying during the telecast is how the Pacers were forced to make the trade that they had to make it. He never once even hinted at "well maybe they could have waited for a better trade". So I took that to mean that Rick made it clear to him that Pacers knew this was the best deal they could get. And also Doug is pretty close to Mike Dunleavy - both Mike Dunleavy's
            Yeah, and I agree with how he put it: (paraphrased) "They knew they were getting change on the dollar, but they had to make those trades" referring to Ron and Jack. Ultimately, I agree. It just sucks talent-wise.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: 3/21/07 Pacers @ Spurs Post Game Thread

              I'm used to this losing . .. I mean I live in Toronto, just think of how bad the Raptors were until this year. . Especially with the GMs not knowing what the hell they are doing!!!
              R.I.P. Bernic Mac & Isaac Hayes

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: 3/21/07 Pacers @ Spurs Post Game Thread

                Originally posted by rexnom View Post
                What makes me mad is how what forced Jack to be traded is the way the infamous "common fan" turned on him.
                Sometimes the "Birds" can't see the forest for the trees and only the "common man" retains any common sense.
                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: 3/21/07 Pacers @ Spurs Post Game Thread

                  It's starting to look like Tinsley is trying to force a trade. He's becoming increasingly aggressive and putting up pretty good numbers, which makes him look like he's a good player. He's also bringing out his bag of tricks which was clearly why Carlisle benched him that first year. He's forcing these between the legs, around the back etc...and he's knows there's nothing Carlisle can do about it. He got kicked out of the game last night and he'll start in the next game.

                  Those of you complaining about his "And1" style have to at least admit it's exciting. At this point it looks like another one bites the dust, due to having to play for Rick Carlisle.......Ron Artest, Stephen Jackson, Al Harrington, Jamaal Tinsley "da da dunt dunt dunt da dunt dunt dunt da dunt". I wonder who'll be next it looks like Granger is having a blast out there.
                  I'm in these bands
                  The Humans
                  Dr. Goldfoot
                  The Bar Brawlers
                  ME

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: 3/21/07 Pacers @ Spurs Post Game Thread

                    Originally posted by Lord Helmet View Post
                    Yeah, I agree, UB, we can be in a game, and the game will look like it will be close, but then bam, we're down 24 points. Sucks.

                    Is it wrong I still hope we make the playoffs just because I love the playoffs and the Pacers and no playoffs isn't right?
                    thought you didn't care anymore????


                    Pacers make playoffs...end of story
                    "GIMMIE DAT!"-DANGER

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: 3/21/07 Pacers @ Spurs Post Game Thread

                      Originally posted by Dr. Goldfoot
                      It's starting to look like Tinsley is trying to force a trade. He's becoming increasingly aggressive and putting up pretty good numbers, which makes him look like he's a good player. He's also bringing out his bag of tricks which was clearly why Carlisle benched him that first year. He's forcing these between the legs, around the back etc...and he's knows there's nothing Carlisle can do about it. He got kicked out of the game last night and he'll start in the next game.

                      Those of you complaining about his "And1" style have to at least admit it's exciting. At this point it looks like another one bites the dust, due to having to play for Rick Carlisle.......Ron Artest, Stephen Jackson, Al Harrington, Jamaal Tinsley "da da dunt dunt dunt da dunt dunt dunt da dunt". I wonder who'll be next it looks like Granger is having a blast out there.
                      Mark Jackson threw a lot of those behind the back, between the legs, sometimes between the defender's legs passes too...the difference was, they ended up in our players' hands for a score, rather than in the other team's hands for a fast break going the other direction.
                      Sometimes a player's greatest challenge is coming to grips with his role on the team. -- Scottie Pippen

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: 3/21/07 Pacers @ Spurs Post Game Thread

                        What can I say that hasn't already been said. Not even my Pacers Adidas can help this team. We all know that big changes are coming this Summer. There is no doubt TINS will be somewhere else and possibly JO (hoping we keep JO). Where they will go and who we will get for them is still a mystery. RC must be fired, no excuses, and I don't even care if this whole 1 - 13 clip isn't his fault, we have to start fresh.
                        Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: 3/21/07 Pacers @ Spurs Post Game Thread

                          Originally posted by Dr. Goldfoot
                          It's starting to look like Tinsley is trying to force a trade. He's becoming increasingly aggressive and putting up pretty good numbers, which makes him look like he's a good player. He's also bringing out his bag of tricks which was clearly why Carlisle benched him that first year. He's forcing these between the legs, around the back etc...and he's knows there's nothing Carlisle can do about it. He got kicked out of the game last night and he'll start in the next game.

                          Those of you complaining about his "And1" style have to at least admit it's exciting. At this point it looks like another one bites the dust, due to having to play for Rick Carlisle.......Ron Artest, Stephen Jackson, Al Harrington, Jamaal Tinsley "da da dunt dunt dunt da dunt dunt dunt da dunt". I wonder who'll be next it looks like Granger is having a blast out there.
                          That was a nice rendition of the Queen classic.

                          Agree with you about Carlisle not doing anything to challenge Jamaal-his quote in the Star was something about how tough it is when you lose "one of your best players" or something like that. I'm not sure I understand why he sees coaching as giving your players a free pass to act like knuckleheads. Whatever you do, don't upset the apple cart.

                          Disagree with you that we are somehow losing good players BECAUSE they play for Carlisle, though. Artest, Jackson, and now JT-they are good at being knuckleheads on their own, thank you very much. It's not his fault they act like this; they're grown men who aren't approaching their jobs with professionalism.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: 3/21/07 Pacers @ Spurs Post Game Thread

                            When we first made that trade it was easy to look at it in a way that seemed to benifit us, but really we should have seen this coming.

                            When we did that deal we acquired a team that fields a starting lineup with a complete lack of a second option, and 3 very poor defensive players. How did we ever expect to win many ballgames with this club?

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: 3/21/07 Pacers @ Spurs Post Game Thread

                              Everyone keeps calling these guys knuckleheads. The fact is this league is full of 'em and some coaches know how to deal with them and some don't. Some key players on championship contenders are/have been knuckleheads. Kobe Bryant, Jason Williams, Antoine Walker, Raheed Wallace, Dennis Rodman, Chauncey Billups, Chris Webber. It's the coaches responsibility to get these guys on the same page and buying into winning is key. That's why they have coaches. This Pacers team was a contender with a slew of knucklehead just in the past few seasons. I know Tinsley can be an ***, so can JO. It's Rick Carlisle's job to get these guys playing together. He has not done that while in Indiana. In fact, he's pushed players apart and in some cases to other teams.
                              I'm in these bands
                              The Humans
                              Dr. Goldfoot
                              The Bar Brawlers
                              ME

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: 3/21/07 Pacers @ Spurs Post Game Thread

                                Originally posted by jcouts View Post
                                Mark Jackson threw a lot of those behind the back, between the legs, sometimes between the defender's legs passes too...the difference was, they ended up in our players' hands for a score, rather than in the other team's hands for a fast break going the other direction.
                                No joke.

                                I've sat down on the endline adjacent to the Pacer bench twice.

                                The first time, I rode Jalen Rose's butt for not getting back on defense and giving up layups on three consecutive possessions while he was jacking his jaw at an official.

                                The second time it happened was when Tinsley attempted a behind the back bounce pass on the other end of the court that resulted in a layup for the opponent. I more or less yelled "Nice assist Tinsley! Got anything else you wanna pull out of your playground repertoire?"

                                On both occassions I looked over at Walsh after I yelled what I had to say. Walsh never shows any expression, and hardly ever looks away from the floor, but on both occassions he nodded his head as if in agreement as he continued watching the game.

                                As for Tinsley playing his way off the team, one can only hope.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X