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

OT: Arenas Sounds off on his critics and questions Kobe (SI.com)

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

  • #16
    Re: OT: Arenas Sounds off on his critics and questions Kobe (SI.com)

    Originally posted by intridcold View Post
    what an ego
    I don't think it's ego at all. I think Agent Zero makes some very valid points, and it you really pay attention to the game given the examples he's provided, you see exactly what he sees.

    Let's use the Pacers for example. Under RC, I really paid attention to individual player stats and could rather easily guestimate who had more FGAs. It was rather easy to judge because of the half-court system RC used. But after watching the Pacers under JOB, it's not that easy to determine because the team mixes it up so much now. On the one hand you know the ball is going to get in any, if not all, of the starter's hands particularly Tinsley and MDjr, and eventually JO when he returns to the lineup (hopefully tonight 11/02 against the Heat), but because of the uptempo style the team now plays I've noticed that players like Tinsley or even David Harrison, for example, are now getting their "quiet" 10...12...15...18...20 pts. And it's all based on the quickness and unselfishness of the players around them.

    Think it through...

    Before you bash the man (Gilbert Arenas) you have to consider the truth of which he speaks, and the only way to do that is to take the blinders off and look beyond the stat sheets. Watch the way PGs on uptemp teams play, i.e., the Suns, Mavs, Warriors, Wizards and now the Pacers, and then you'll see what Gilbert sees.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: OT: Arenas Sounds off on his critics and questions Kobe (SI.com)

      At the least, it's braggadocios.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: OT: Arenas Sounds off on his critics and questions Kobe (SI.com)

        He might make a good point about Kobe and he might be a refreshing NBA guy. (Partly because he does seem to actually follow other teams.)

        But he got knocked on his *** by Boston fans tonight and his team is off to an 0-2 start. As the Celtics were busy kicking the living crap out of the Wiz, Arenas sat on the bench for the last three or four minutes and listened to the ENTIRE crowd chant "Gilbert, Gilbert" and mock the absolute hell out of him. He looked like a fool, and its something he is making a habit out of. (Did I mention his spectacular 5-20 shooting night? Including 0-5 behind the arc?)
        I liked him a lot better when he was humble and had the me against the world attitude now it just seems like he has an opinion on everyone else and isn't doing anything to make HIS team better. I'm not buying him anymore, I'm selling my Arenas stock. The guy is quickly becoming a clown in my eyes. Someone needs to tell him to stop blogging about what all the other teams need to do, and start thinking about what the Wizards need to do.

        EDIT: And currently Kobe Bryant is running the Suns off the court with the rest of his Laker team.
        Last edited by Trader Joe; 11-02-2007, 11:42 PM.


        Comment


        • #19
          Re: OT: Arenas Sounds off on his critics and questions Kobe (SI.com)

          Originally posted by Indy View Post
          He might make a good point about Kobe and he might be a refreshing NBA guy. (Partly because he does seem to actually follow other teams.)

          But he got knocked on his *** by Boston fans tonight and his team is off to an 0-2 start. As the Celtics were busy kicking the living crap out of the Wiz, Arenas sat on the bench for the last three or four minutes and listened to the ENTIRE crowd chant "Gilbert, Gilbert" and mock the absolute hell out of him. He looked like a fool, and its something he is making a habit out of. (Did I mention his spectacular 5-20 shooting night? Including 0-5 behind the arc?)
          I liked him a lot better when he was humble and had the me against the world attitude now it just seems like he has an opinion on everyone else and isn't doing anything to make HIS team better. I'm not buying him anymore, I'm selling my Arenas stock. The guy is quickly becoming a clown in my eyes. Someone needs to tell him to stop blogging about what all the other teams need to do, and start thinking about what the Wizards need to do.

          EDIT: And currently Kobe Bryant is running the Suns off the court with the rest of his Laker team.
          0-2, we're doooooooooooooomed
          STARBURY

          08 and Beyond

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: OT: Arenas Sounds off on his critics and questions Kobe (SI.com)

            Originally posted by Robertmto View Post
            0-2, we're doooooooooooooomed
            You can make jokes all you want, but unlike Kstat and the Pistons you guys haven't won a damn thing.


            Comment


            • #21
              Re: OT: Arenas Sounds off on his critics and questions Kobe (SI.com)

              Originally posted by Anthem View Post
              Agree. This was a good point:


              I don't know about the "ever" comment... people have been playing basketball for a long time. But that's pretty unique over the past 10 years, unless you count Kobe / Shaq.
              I think this is more true of Shaq's game than of Kobe's. You look at those Orlando teams, and Shaq created players like Dennis Scott. Look at the Lakers, and guys like Rick Fox...The Heat, and players like Damon Jones. Those guys had big seasons playing off Shaq. Plus Shaq allowed for players to have huge years (Penny, Nick Anderson, Kobe, D-Wade) while being dominant. When Kobe dominates, it usually doesn't allow for much from anyone else.
              Last edited by NapTonius Monk; 11-03-2007, 12:02 PM.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: OT: Arenas Sounds off on his critics and questions Kobe (SI.com)

                Originally posted by Robertmto View Post
                0-2, we're doooooooooooooomed
                This is a very big year for the Wizards. They can't play like previous years and expect to be a force in the east. Arenas also needs to decide if he wants to stay in Washington this season.

                All that said, it's a whopping 2 games out of 82, but eventually the wizards are going to have to start playing winning basketball.

                It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: OT: Arenas Sounds off on his critics and questions Kobe (SI.com)

                  With Gilbert missing the last two months of the year and still feeling out his knee, and Caron missing time late last year, it's to be expected for them to have a little bit of re-adjustment time.

                  I mean, they still won't be able to stop anyone (although Haywoode is looking inproved/motivated) but the offense will soon be rolling same as it ever was.
                  Read my Pacers blog:
                  8points9seconds.com

                  Follow my twitter:

                  @8pts9secs

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: OT: Arenas Sounds off on his critics and questions Kobe (SI.com)

                    I'm not sure that offense is going to be enough this year, though. The east has improved a great deal offensively. They have to play SOME kind of defense, they aren't the only team in the conference that can score anymore.

                    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: OT: Arenas Sounds off on his critics and questions Kobe (SI.com)

                      Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                      I'm not sure that offense is going to be enough this year, though. The east has improved a great deal offensively. They have to play SOME kind of defense, they aren't the only team in the conference that can score anymore.
                      Yeah...they're not going to the ECF or anything. I'm just saying we shouldn't expect any real drop-off, even with an improved East. With three guys capable of dropping 30 on any given night, they're still good for a 6-seed.
                      Read my Pacers blog:
                      8points9seconds.com

                      Follow my twitter:

                      @8pts9secs

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: OT: Arenas Sounds off on his critics and questions Kobe (SI.com)

                        Originally posted by Shade View Post
                        Gilbert's head is swelling to NBA Jam-like proportions.
                        Agreed. He's quickly moving past likable status.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: OT: Arenas Sounds off on his critics and questions Kobe (SI.com)

                          Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                          Yeah...they're not going to the ECF or anything. I'm just saying we shouldn't expect any real drop-off, even with an improved East. With three guys capable of dropping 30 on any given night, they're still good for a 6-seed.
                          A 6 seed would be a drop-off. They had the best record in the east last year before jamison went down.

                          It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                          Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                          Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                          NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: OT: Arenas Sounds off on his critics and questions Kobe (SI.com)

                            Well, I think they were playing over their heads a little in the 1st Half of the season...But regardless, I personally expect them to win the Southeast and get a top 4 seed. I'm shoulda said a "6-seed at worse" and that would be assuming a big leap by teams like Orlando, New York or some other wild card squad in addition to the obvious mega-leap Boston will make.

                            Still aside from Boston, Chicago, Detroit, there are no other Eastern teams that are certainly better than the Wiz...even with their ho-hum, status quo defense. They've been the highest-scoring team in the East for two straight years (and 3rd the year before that), and they managed to put up 104.3 ppg last year despite major, major injury problems, so they still have plenty to hang their hat on.

                            And even with the new influx of talent to the East, having something to hang their hat on is still a lot more than most teams this side of the Mississippi can boast.
                            Read my Pacers blog:
                            8points9seconds.com

                            Follow my twitter:

                            @8pts9secs

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: OT: Arenas Sounds off on his critics and questions Kobe (SI.com)

                              Their game against the Magic should say a lot about the state of the southeast division early on.

                              Atlanta is no joke, either. Al Horford makes them a playoff contender.

                              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: OT: Arenas Sounds off on his critics and questions Kobe (SI.com)

                                Is it wrong of me to dream of Agent 0 leaving the Wiz and coming to the Pacers?
                                This space for rent.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X