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

USA Today has the Pacers ranked 8th

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

  • USA Today has the Pacers ranked 8th

    David Dupree has the Pacers at number 8.

    And I can't wait to watch the Rockets play the mavs tonight and the Spurs tomorrow night

    http://usatoday.printthis.clickabili...partnerID=1662

    USA TODAY TOP 10

    (Through Saturday's games; preseason ranking in parentheses)

    1. San Antonio (1): Manu Ginobili is averaging 18.7 points and 6.0 assists off the bench as the defending champion Spurs roared to a 3-0 start.

    2. Houston (2): Mike James, Luis Scola and Bonzi Wells give the Rockets a talented bench that has made a difference in their 3-0 start.

    3. Boston (6): Celtics unveiled a painted Red Auerbach autograph on their court before the season-opening win against Washington on Friday and renamed the floor "The Red Auerbach Parquet."

    4. Denver (14): Allen Iverson, splitting time between point guard and shooting guard, averaged 24.5 points and 11.0 assists for the 2-0 Nuggets.

    5. Detroit (7): Tayshaun Prince picked up the scoring slack with Richard Hamilton out, averaging 25.5 points and shooting as the Pistons started 2-0.

    6. Toronto (10): Raptors set a franchise record for margin of victory in a road game with a 106-69 win against division rival New Jersey.

    7. New Orleans (17): Hornets are healthy and clicking with Peja Stojakovic going 8-for-17 from three-point range through the first two games, both wins.

    8. Indiana (25): New coach Jim O'Brien is letting them run, and they are off to a 3-0 start, averaging 109 points a game.

    9. Dallas (3): In his first NBA start, in place of Devin Harris (bruised thigh), point guard Jose Berea had 25 points on 9-for-11 shooting in Saturday's win against Sacramento.

    10. Utah (9): Jazz eliminated Golden State from the playoffs last season and has already beaten the Warriors twice this season -- and are averaging 125 points vs. Golden State in those two games.


    Court Coverage: Hawks start off season flying high



    Digg
    del.icio.us
    Newsvine
    Reddit
    Facebook
    What's this?
    By David DuPree, USA TODAY
    Team of the week
    Atlanta Hawks — After ending the preseason with a league-best 7-1 record, the Hawks showed that success might carry over to the regular season. With a sellout crowd greeting them — only the 39th time they have sold out Phillips Arena since they moved into it in 1999 — the Hawks defeated the Dallas Mavericks on Friday, 101-94. It also marked the first time they opened the season with a win since the 1998-99 campaign which is, coincidently, the last time they made the playoffs.

    "A lot of teams didn't take the preseason seriously, but we did," said guard Joe Johnson, who had 28 points, seven rebounds and four assists. "We won as a team then, and we won (Friday) as a team against one of the best teams in the league."

    Stepping up

    Tracy McGrady, Houston: Averaged 32.3 points a game in leading the Rockets (3-0) to wins against the Los Angeles Lakers and Utah Jazz on the road and the Portland Trail Blazers at home.

    Danny Granger, Indiana: Scored at least 20 points in each of his first three games, averaging 22.7 points and 8.7 rebounds as Pacers roared to a 3-0 start.

    Thrills, spills and chills

    Sonics serve notice: Seattle SuperSonics owner Clay Bennett on Friday filed paperwork to relocate the team to Oklahoma City, possibly as early as next season. The Sonics, stymied in an attempt to get public financing for a new arena, are embroiled in a federal court case to try to get out of its occupancy agreement at Key Arena which doesn't expire until September 2010. An NBA spokesman confirmed that the matter has been referred to the NBA owners' relocation committee. "Today we notified Commissioner (David) Stern that we intend to relocate the Sonics to Oklahoma City if we succeed in the pending litigation with the city, or are able to negotiate an early lease termination, or at the end of the lease term," Bennett said in a statement. He also owns the Seattle Storm of the WNBA, but said a decision hasn't been made regarding that team's future location.

    Kidd's play: Jason Kidd of the New Jersey Nets recorded the first triple-double of the season Saturday with 16 points, 14 rebounds and 10 assists in a 93-88 win against the Philadelphia 76ers. Kidd now has 88 career triple-doubles, third most in NBA history behind Oscar Robertson's 181 and Magic Johnson's 138.

    Texas showdown: The Houston Rockets, winners of their first three games, all against out of state rivals, face the Mavericks tonight at Dallas, and then host the San Antonio Spurs at home Tuesday.

    Bucks end streak: The Milwaukee Bucks ended a 15-game losing streak to Central Division opponents dating back to last season with a 78-72 win against Chicago on Saturday, handing the winless Bulls their third consecutive loss in the first week of the season.

    Wade watch: Miami's Dwyane Wade has been cleared by doctors to resume full workouts and to begin playing with the Heat as soon as he feels ready. Wade, however, isn't sure when that will be. He has spent the last six months recovering from shoulder and knee surgeries.

    One-liner

    Boston's Kevin Garnett, in his first game as a Celtic, became the first Boston player to have a 20-20 game since Sidney Wicks had 21 points and 22 rebounds in 1976 against Indiana. Garnett's line Friday in the 103-83 victory against the Washington Wizards:



    Min FG M-A 3FG M-A FT M-A Reb Ast Stl Blk Pts.

    38 9-17 0-0 4-4 20 5 3 3 22




    This week's big game

    Dallas at Golden State: The eighth-seeded Warriors stunned the top-seeded Mavericks in the first round of the playoffs last season after beating them in all three regular season meetings, as well. Dallas is looking to break that hex Thursday at Oakland (10:30 ET, TNT).

    This week's best matchups

    Carmelo Anthony vs. Paul Pierce: Two of the league's most prolific scorers square off Wednesday at Boston when the Celtics host Anthony and the Denver Nugget.

    Amare Stoudemire vs. Dwight Howard: The battle will be in the middle as these two young centers and USA Basketball teammates, go at each other Saturday at Orlando.

    Share this story:
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 11-05-2007, 10:50 AM.

  • #2
    Re: USA Today has the Pacers ranked 8th

    can't really argue with 3-0. There are only 8 unbeatens left in the NBA and Indy is one of them. They kinda have to be in the top 10 somewhere...

    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


    • #3
      Re: USA Today has the Pacers ranked 8th

      Kind of lame that we're not ranked higher than detroit or new orleans but I have a feeling the winning record of our opponents was considered. Although if anyone would have told me we'd be ranked higher than the mavericks in a power ranking system (even this early) I would have had myself a good laugh, this team is really making a lot of people look dumb and eat their words. I just hope they keep it up, did we win 3 in a row at all last year? I think our trouble last year was we'd do somethin like take 3 steps forward and 2 steps back was our MO. I'm glad the pacers are getting rested up after the back to back but between now and wednesday is going to seem like forever.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: USA Today has the Pacers ranked 8th

        Originally posted by TheDon View Post
        Kind of lame that we're not ranked higher than detroit or new orleans
        ...huh? Last I checked, neither of them had lost a game either.

        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


        • #5
          Re: USA Today has the Pacers ranked 8th

          Originally posted by Kstat View Post
          ...huh? Last I checked, neither of them had lost a game either.
          That's pretty much my point and pacers are averaging a lot more points.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: USA Today has the Pacers ranked 8th

            Doesn't mean anything, but it is nice to be getting some respect.

            More positive media attention like this will only help us win back the fans.
            The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
            http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
            RSS Feed
            Subscribe via iTunes

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: USA Today has the Pacers ranked 8th

              That didn't take long.

              Personally I think it's way too high. Our opponents in those three games are all winless, and the games were fairly close. every game was won, but every game was losable. Is that a word?

              I would prefer to stay off of everyone's radar for as long as possible. A #8 rank is nearly as off as a #27. We're a #15 team, thereabouts and we haven't been to Texas.

              But hey, all these rankings are silly anyway. This is why you play 82 games and then have a playoff.
              “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

              “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: USA Today has the Pacers ranked 8th

                Originally posted by TheDon View Post
                That's pretty much my point and pacers are averaging a lot more points.
                ...they're also allowing a lot more...

                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


                • #9
                  Re: USA Today has the Pacers ranked 8th

                  Based on your definition of power rankings, 8 is not too high.

                  I think Marc Stein does them the best - where it's a combination of current "power," past "power" and expected "power." Our rank there would be in the teens. If USA decides to go by just current "power" then 8 isn't that off. (Makes us the worst of the unbeatens).

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: USA Today has the Pacers ranked 8th

                    Pacers are going to be a HUGE suprise for people this season

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: USA Today has the Pacers ranked 8th

                      Originally posted by TheDon View Post
                      That's pretty much my point and pacers are averaging a lot more points.
                      Detroit has been demonstrably better than us for a couple of seasons. We have no right to be ranked higher than the Pistons unless we actually beat them, just like the Pats shouldn't have ever been ranked above the Colts until yesterday.

                      The be the man, you have to beat the man.

                      From 25th to 8th though? Just shows how fickle the media is.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: USA Today has the Pacers ranked 8th

                        what do you know, the media is jumping on the bandwagon...what? I thought the media had us pretty low....near dead last.

                        pshh FU media.
                        If you havin' depth problems, I feel bad for you son; I got 99 problems but a bench ain't one! - Hicks
                        [/center]
                        @thatguyjoe84

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: USA Today has the Pacers ranked 8th

                          Wow from #25 to #8. I bet ESPN will have around us in the middle to lower teens or so.
                          Last edited by pwee31; 11-05-2007, 02:49 PM. Reason: meant teens not teams

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: USA Today has the Pacers ranked 8th

                            Originally posted by TheDon View Post
                            That's pretty much my point and pacers are averaging a lot more points.
                            3-0 vs teams that are 0-8

                            Big fish, little pond

                            IMO ANY TEAM, Hawks, Bobcats, Celtics included, should earn a top 10 spot by beating other top 10 teams at home, top 20 teams on the road. The Pacers haven't failed to do this yet, but they also haven't done it either. Is it so wrong to say "hold on" prior to games vs at least the Clips, let alone Denver or Boston?

                            What if Boston wins 110-80 following the Pacers losing to the Nuggets 105-92, that top 10 is going to look pretty stupid. And if the Pacers win those games instead it would be easy enough to move them up from 17-18 to top 10 and with plenty of justification behind it.

                            Oh no, we didn't get moved up 20 spots instantly...

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: USA Today has the Pacers ranked 8th

                              Wizards might be winless, but if their big 3 stay healthy I think they will win 45 games. And I thought they played pretty well the other night against the Pacers.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X