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

Agree or Disagree?

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

  • Agree or Disagree?

    "Rick Carlisle is very good at getting maximum effort out of his players, and winning as many regular season games as he can. But come playoffs, the weaknesses are exposed.

    Same thing happened in Detroit. That's what many people in the Piston organization and many Piston fans didn't like about him. Perhaps if he worked harder at making Tinsley a better point guard, like Brown has done with Billups, even if it meant losing more regular season games, things would be different.

    But he's not there to teach, or make his teams any better. He only coaches to hide the team's flaws the best he can, and win every single regular season game.

    As Brown and Dumars said - sometimes you have to take a step backwards, to take a step forward. Brown has tinkered with Okur and Billups, at the expense of losing regular season games. Now, the Pacers have the better regular season record, but who cares? Its the Pistons that have home court advantage."

  • #2
    Re: Agree or Disagree?

    BTW, this is from a piston fan, I just found it interesting.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Agree or Disagree?

      I don't think that is fair. I think and I could be wrong that when people point this out they mean it as a dig against Rick.

      The reason most people say Detroit is better the second half of the season is because of the Wallace deal rather than Brown's adjustments through out the season. Or else the arguement would be The Pacer's won the first 3 games BT (Before Tinkering) and Detroit is clearly a class above the Pacers AT (After Tinkering)

      Not to take anything away from Brown I think he is a great coach and does adjust well though out the season but I think it would be incorrect to attribute Detroit's second half of the season to Brown's coaching style.
      "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


      • #4
        Re: Agree or Disagree?

        Arcadian that's a great point: Larry Brown didn't have them this good before the Sheed trade, Rasheed did that himself (and James/Hunter) by adding a key component.

        The pre-Sheed Pistons with Larry Brown as coach were a hot cold team a notch below us.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Agree or Disagree?

          I think it's pretty fair to call Rick a "win-now" type of coach. [I'm basing this on what I've seen this year along with bits and pieces of his time in Detroit and as an assistant here] But I think that's the idea: Isiah's job was to teach and develop the core talent, and now it's Rick's job to make this refined talent win.

          And I wouldn't completely dismiss the idea of Rick being able to make players better. Who here doesn't think Jamaal, Ron and Jeff are better this year?
          Official Member of the Anti-Alliteration Association

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Agree or Disagree?

            Disagree with the original. Rick did "teach" with Tinsley. He sat him and let him watch. Notice a big difference between T-man now and T-man of years gone by? Whether sitting caused him to focus or sitting allowed him to watch and learn, it worked. I'm certain there are assistants that work with the "younger" guys on aspects of positioning and screening, etc. Rick wouldn't be doing that himself anyway. But he did recognize what it took to make Tinsley better and he did it.
            Now Rick's abiity to make in-game adjustments I wonder about. Bout the comments of being a good season coach and a lousy PO coach sound to me like a bunch of whiney players trying to blame a fall guy for their inability to produce during their previous two runs in the PO's.
            Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Agree or Disagree?

              This topic or very similar topics have been coming up all season long.


              I'll just say this, if the Pacers lose this series, it will not be because of poor coaching.

              Carlisle beat Brown last year, and we'll see how beats who this year.


              That post from the psaitons fans assumes that Rick did not and has not worked with Tinsley, that is simply not a true statement.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Agree or Disagree?

                See, I always had LB as the type of coach that demanded 110% out of each of his players, teaching them how to do so along the way. LB has always been a teacher, he loves teaching, especially younger players, HS, College etc...

                Rick was to come in and finish the job that Isiah had started. to get the team over the hump. The only thing that worries me is Rick plays the same style ball throughout the year when other teams are making adjustments and stepping it up a notch for the playoffs. We still try to get by on the same style. I just worry if that's going to be our downfall? Are we that good to maintain the same pace throughout the year only to come into the palyoffs playing the same way?

                I dunno.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Agree or Disagree?

                  Personally i think the references to Rick not making players better and only being able to win in regualr season is a load of crap. Rick has this year alone taken the same team from last MINUS an all star center and made it 10 times better.

                  JO - has learned to pass out of douoble teams better, is acting more as a leader

                  Artest - well just look at last year versus this year, techs down, points up, DPOY, team captain

                  Tins - started out as bench rider this year...and now is the glue of the team. How is this not sacfrificing regular season games to see what could happen later.

                  Foster - thrust into starters role and has been great this year

                  Fred Jones - has become teams second best defender, has improved his shooting and displays confidence now


                  Point being thats all a bunch of crap. it is fans of a team wanting so badly to be better that they fail to realize reality. Reality is Rick is one of three coaches to win 50+games his first 3 seasons and has now taken a team to the ECF twice in 3 years. How exactly is it that he cant win in playoffs. last time i checked you have to win two series to even get to ECF, which is 8 playoff wins. So what if rick controls the game, the team, etc...thats his job. It was IT's lack of this that hurt us last year.

                  For the record, when was the last time Larry brown won a championship in the NBA. NEVER. Does thsi mean he cant win in the playoffs. Giev me a break, i am so tired of this dribble.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Agree or Disagree?

                    It's just a plain wrong theory. The team and the individual players have all had better seasons than last year. Who this year has played worse than last year? I can't name one Pacer who is worse this year than last year.

                    It also gets tiresome hearing from armchair coaches how they feel that Carlisle doesn't adjust. He adjusts. The line-ups he had on the floor last game were anything but his normal rotation.

                    The only complaint I have about Rick right now is his decision to sit Kenny Anderson. I think in this series being able to penetrate and get the ball up the floor is vital, and Tinsley and Anderson are our two best players at doing that. Why he insists on AJ over Anderson in this series just baffles me. But he's the coach and he knows something I don't.

                    I'm sorry, if you know how to win in the regular seaon in the NBA, you know how to win PERIOD. That theory just doesn't fly or make any sense. All this "Carlisle is a regular-season coach, not a playoff coach" is just nonsense. What the hell does that mean? You mean to tell me that in the regular season you don't have to make adjustments???

                    It's just not correct. Carlisle isn't the most perfect coach ever, but he's a damn good one. What I don't get is how people claim he's not a playoff coach, yet he got his team to the ECF 3 straight seasons!!!! Get a life, people! Think about what you're saying! You sound retarded!
                    There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Agree or Disagree?

                      It's just a plain wrong theory. The team and the individual players have all had better seasons than last year. Who this year has played worse than last year? I can't name one Pacer who is worse this year than last year.

                      It also gets tiresome hearing from armchair coaches how they feel that Carlisle doesn't adjust. He adjusts a TON. The line-ups he had on the floor last game were anything but his normal rotation.

                      The only complaint I have about Rick right now is his decision to sit Kenny Anderson. I think in this series being able to penetrate and get the ball up the floor is vital, and Tinsley and Anderson are our two best players at doing that. Why he insists on AJ over Anderson in this series just baffles me. But he's the coach and he knows something I don't.

                      I'm sorry, if you know how to win in the regular seaon in the NBA, you know how to win PERIOD. That theory just doesn't fly or make any sense. All this "Carlisle is a regular-season coach, not a playoff coach" is just nonsense. What the hell does that mean? You mean to tell me that in the regular season you don't have to make adjustments???

                      It's just not correct. Carlisle isn't the most perfect coach ever, but he's a damn good one. What I don't get is how people claim he's not a playoff coach, yet he got his team to the ECF 3 straight seasons!!!! Get a life, people! Think about what you're saying! You sound retarded!
                      I agree with you - he sure doesn't get the respect of a "playoff coach" when he's been to the ECF 3 straight times .

                      As for why he takes AJ over Kenny - it is for defense and size. In Game 1, Anthony proved that he can defend Chauncey a lot better than Tinsley (or Kenny for that matter). Chauncey likes to post up on Tinsley - I'm sure he'd have fun with Kenny too. But AJ is a bigger guy and makes Chauncey think twice before doing that to him.

                      However, if Tinsley is hurt and won't be able to give his complete effort out there, I think Kenny will need to make an appearance.

                      You are also completely right about all the players getting better this year. Who would have thought we'd have a season like this after losing guys (namely an all-star centre)?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Agree or Disagree?

                        Rick was to come in and finish the job that Isiah had started. to get the team over the hump. The only thing that worries me is Rick plays the same style ball throughout the year when other teams are making adjustments and stepping it up a notch for the playoffs. We still try to get by on the same style. I just worry if that's going to be our downfall? Are we that good to maintain the same pace throughout the year only to come into the palyoffs playing the same way?

                        I dunno.
                        I think that's true. There were very few times during the regular season where the Pacers were playing better than anyone else, yet they ended up with the best record by virtue of being the most consistent. But consistency doesn't count for much in the playoffs, especially when playing against a team on a tear. I think it's true in this series and in the WCF. The Lakers and Pistons had inferior overall records over the course of, what, five months? But they're playing better than their opponents right now, and that's what matters.

                        IndyToad
                        You can do it

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Agree or Disagree?

                          Why he insists on AJ over Anderson in this series just baffles me.
                          He's doing it because of defense. He's decide it's more important that AJ can guard their PGs than it is that Anderson can run the offense better.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Agree or Disagree?

                            Why he insists on AJ over Anderson in this series just baffles me.
                            He's doing it because of defense. He's decide it's more important that AJ can guard their PGs than it is that Anderson can run the offense better.
                            Conrad can help... .
                            http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/question_040525.html

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X