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

LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

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

  • LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

    http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/recap?gameId=271125011

    James, who did more than his share of trash talking, gained respect for the Pacers as the game progressed.

    "They're more up-and-down," he said. "I think [Pacers coach Jim] O'Brien has definitely put them in a position to win ball games because they run up-and-down. They have the athletes to do that, and they have the point guard that's going to lead them. I like what I'm seeing."
    Sounds like he likes Tins as well.

  • #2
    Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

    I wonder if Cleveland would like to trade for him. JO and Tins for anything that can wear a uniform would be OK by me.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

      Originally posted by hoopsforlife View Post
      I wonder if Cleveland would like to trade for him. JO and Tins for anything that can wear a uniform would be OK by me.
      I don't want anything the CAVs have except Lebron and maybe Z. I would say all of our starters are better than any of theirs, except for those 2. Hughes is a question mark, but he is injury prone and shoots a low percentage.
      Pacers!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

        We play a fun style of basketball, that the players enjoy. People would enjoy playing in a system like this...that's why you have guys like Gilbert & Lebron complimenting.

        It's just such a big change. Players must have, at times, seen the way we played last year and said to themselves "God, that looks horrible."

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

          Originally posted by rcarey View Post
          We play a fun style of basketball, that the players enjoy. People would enjoy playing in a system like this...that's why you have guys like Gilbert & Lebron complimenting.

          It's just such a big change. Players must have, at times, seen the way we played last year and said to themselves "God, that looks horrible."
          However in fairness to Rick Carlisle I must make one small observation based on the two names you have just mentioned.

          What else was differant when we played vs. the Wizards the first time and vs. the Cavs. today?

          I think if you look you will see that a certain player is missing from both of those games.

          Rick ran a motion offense in the 90's, Rick ran a non-isolation dominated offense in Detroit, Rick ran an uptempo quicker moving offense during the year of suspensions.

          There really is about only one time that I know of that Rick ran the complete totall slow down one man in three men out and one half way offense.


          Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

            Originally posted by Peck View Post
            However in fairness to Rick Carlisle I must make one small observation based on the two names you have just mentioned.

            What else was differant when we played vs. the Wizards the first time and vs. the Cavs. today?

            I think if you look you will see that a certain player is missing from both of those games.

            Rick ran a motion offense in the 90's, Rick ran a non-isolation dominated offense in Detroit, Rick ran an uptempo quicker moving offense during the year of suspensions.

            There really is about only one time that I know of that Rick ran the complete totall slow down one man in three men out and one half way offense.
            I hate, I hate, I hate that your posts not only make sense to me but also as I read them I'm nodding along thinking of how we can salvage JO's trade value. I also hate that I was happy to see Jeff Foster starting along Troy Murphy today. JO has served this city well, he deserves better than that. Unfortunately, this season has been tough for those of us who still try to defend him.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

              Originally posted by Peck View Post
              However in fairness to Rick Carlisle I must make one small observation based on the two names you have just mentioned.

              What else was differant when we played vs. the Wizards the first time and vs. the Cavs. today?

              I think if you look you will see that a certain player is missing from both of those games.

              Rick ran a motion offense in the 90's, Rick ran a non-isolation dominated offense in Detroit, Rick ran an uptempo quicker moving offense during the year of suspensions.

              There really is about only one time that I know of that Rick ran the complete totall slow down one man in three men out and one half way offense.
              Great points. I remember Chauncey Billups was a lot of fun to watch under Carlisle.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

                Originally posted by rcarey View Post
                We play a fun style of basketball, that the players enjoy. People would enjoy playing in a system like this...that's why you have guys like Gilbert & Lebron complimenting.

                It's just such a big change. Players must have, at times, seen the way we played last year and said to themselves "God, that looks horrible."
                Neither player would swap spots with JO right now. Both players have now beaten this "fun" team.

                I'm betting that Lebron hated getting beat up on by Artest for Thanksgiving, probably thought that system was annoying and dull despite the 22 point drubbing it handed to him. Personally I loved it. I'll take the Pacers making me happy over the Pacers making Lebron happy any day.


                I'm not so anti JOB really, but I just can't believe people rushing to fawn over 6-8 because Arenas and Lebron said things look better. I don't need Kobe or someone to tell me if I'm watching a .500 or worse team or not, and I'm really sick of people telling me how much nicer a non-playoff team is compared to team that can get to the 2nd round or more.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

                  Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                  Neither player would swap spots with JO right now. Both players have now beaten this "fun" team.

                  I'm betting that Lebron hated getting beat up on by Artest for Thanksgiving, probably thought that system was annoying and dull despite the 22 point drubbing it handed to him. Personally I loved it. I'll take the Pacers making me happy over the Pacers making Lebron happy any day.


                  I'm not so anti JOB really, but I just can't believe people rushing to fawn over 6-8 because Arenas and Lebron said things look better. I don't need Kobe or someone to tell me if I'm watching a .500 or worse team or not, and I'm really sick of people telling me how much nicer a non-playoff team is compared to team that can get to the 2nd round or more.
                  I don't think anybody is comparing this team to the 03-04 or 04-05 teams...rather the 05-06 (post-Artest) and 06-07 teams.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

                    Originally posted by rexnom View Post
                    I don't think anybody is comparing this team to the 03-04 or 04-05 teams...rather the 05-06 (post-Artest) and 06-07 teams.
                    No, I assure you that some are. I could name names even but I won't get into that silly bickering at this point. Suffice to say that there has been a general attitude of Rick ball = boring, JOB = a day at the happy fun-time circus.

                    All the rants and debates about Rick you see me in (and Jackson/GS deal, JO's value, etc) are specifically because of what we see now. This losing team gets labeled fun, and therefore is exonerated from lackluster results, while Rick was literally fired for losing at roughly the same rate after 3 playoff seasons and 2 top 5 coach of the year votes while in Indy (following 2 in DET, including a win).


                    I'm not oblivious to the concept of uptempo play and the excitement it brings, but I watch PHX and GS and DAL play besides when they face Indy and there is simply no comparison. What I see JOB getting out of this group on offense is no more aesthetically pleasing than what Rick finagled out of a constantly depleted roster for years on end.

                    There are sparks and signs from guys, Harrison has apparently started to see the light, but there is no way this is dramatically better than the 7-7 Pacers of last season, and that featured Jackson mired in I think his worst month of 3pt shooting in his entire career (ie it was at it's ugliest).


                    Discount the T-day game from 2 seasons ago, fine. Last year Lebron saw his team lose to the Pacers by 10 on Nov 24th, basically the exact same game they just played yesterday (home, time of year). JO was 8-15 for 29 points, 4 blocks, 5 assists. Only his 6 rebounds were a sub-par number. Again, if I'm voting then I vote for that game vs Sunday's game, regardless of how they appealed to Lebron's taste.
                    Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 11-26-2007, 03:06 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

                      I hate to break it to you, Seth, but fun has something to do with this all. It's kind of important that the players actually enjoy the system, whether you want to believe it or not.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

                        They took away some of Rick's core players in a midseason trade. If they had let him coach the style of ball he is best at coaching (an initiative they are pushing with Obie), I would have liked to see the results. They valued style over substance. "I'm sorry, but you're winning games in a boring way."

                        Game 8 tirade. Side with JO. Clean up the image. Paint Rick as a fall guy.

                        He coached a team with mediocre talent admirably. I wish him luck in future endeavors. With any luck, he'll be next in line after Doc Rivers' next screw up.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

                          i think the only way rick would still be here is if the team would have improved in some way every year (remember bird has a 3 yr. coach rule or something). many other problems caused this team to fail. some players were traded away, some couldn't be traded for a "fair" deal. there were alot of things wrong here, not just his coaching style. he wasn't the victim, just a victim that probably knew it was coming and wanted it to happen so his resume wouldn't be stained any further.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

                            If you were Lebron James, what would you "like" to see from a team in your division? I'd like to see them losing to me too.
                            "Danny Granger is one of the top players in the league. To move Danny, you better get a lot back." - Larry Bird

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

                              Strip it down all you like, but I see positive changes in this team from last year. If it doesn't bottom out, I see them being better for it. Not just from improvement by the young guys, either.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X