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

  • #16
    Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

    Hey Seth,

    Rick's not comming back, so why do you want to keep pissing on everyone's parade? Look, most of us know that this team is not better then in the recent past, and I'm willing to bet most here reallize that the GSW trade isn't comming up all roses, but are willing to move on with any positives we can get from what we have.


    Seth, my question to you is...what do you suggest to fix what ills this team? Whineing about who is not here isn't going to fix anything.
    ...Still "flying casual"
    @roaminggnome74

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

      Good riddance to both Rick Carlisle and Stephen Jackson, IMO. I don't miss either of them in the least, and I'm willing to bet that if they were both still here we'd be no better than we currently are; quite possibly worse.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

        I think the Pacers can be a very good team in a few years if they can address their PG situation. Tins is downright awful, not the kind of guy you want running your offense. Also, if you can get an athletic PF that can run up and down to replace JO you'd be set. Your very deep at the C position with Harrison, Murphy, etc. in a conference that doesn't require big centers.

        Comment


        • #19
          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.
          Tinsley for Shannon Brown and Ira Newble would make me a happy boy.
          Read my Pacers blog:
          8points9seconds.com

          Follow my twitter:

          @8pts9secs

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

            For me, there is a big difference right now between Rick and JOB.

            JOB is TALKING about the problems and pointing them out. I never heard Rick say that guys are just standing on the perimeter and need to cut.

            I never heard Rick call guys out and talk about guys missing defensive assignments, like JOB did after this game (likely Tinsley failing to reverse rotate).

            I never heard Rick publicly say he wasn't going to put up with Harrison's antics.

            Now, JOB hasn't yet turned all his talk into action. But we can certainly already guess that JOB isn't deferring to players in the same way Rick seemed to. And we can assume that JOB is talking directly to these players, confronting and challenging them.

            We haven't see the changes yet, at least not completely. But the ingredients for change seem to be on the table. Let's hope it eventually happens.
            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

              Originally posted by Roaming Gnome View Post
              Hey Seth,

              Rick's not comming back, so why do you want to keep pissing on everyone's parade? Look, most of us know that this team is not better then in the recent past, and I'm willing to bet most here reallize that the GSW trade isn't comming up all roses, but are willing to move on with any positives we can get from what we have.


              Seth, my question to you is...what do you suggest to fix what ills this team? Whineing about who is not here isn't going to fix anything.

              Gnome, that is what I have been telling him to no avail. You play the games with the players you have not the ones that are loooooong goooone.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

                Originally posted by Elgin56 View Post
                Gnome, that is what I have been telling him to no avail. You play the games with the players you have not the ones that are loooooong goooone.
                This is true. But most people go to a Pacers discussion forum to talk about wouldas, couldas, shouldas and might-bes.

                I, on the other hand, just come to make bad jokes.
                Read my Pacers blog:
                8points9seconds.com

                Follow my twitter:

                @8pts9secs

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

                  Originally posted by Roaming Gnome View Post
                  Hey Seth,

                  Rick's not comming back, so why do you want to keep pissing on everyone's parade? Look, most of us know that this team is not better then in the recent past, and I'm willing to bet most here reallize that the GSW trade isn't comming up all roses, but are willing to move on with any positives we can get from what we have.


                  Seth, my question to you is...what do you suggest to fix what ills this team? Whineing about who is not here isn't going to fix anything.
                  The pissing is still being done on the Rick parade, that's my issue. Every day is another chance to say "see, with Rick and Jack gone...".

                  What's the point of saying that? Why do people say stuff like that? Because it's an ongoing debate about how to fix the team from last year that still hasn't been resolved. That's how these things work. Just like we won't stop debating draft picks for years to come, you want to see the results of a choice pan out to back one POV or the other.

                  Right now a lot of posters have serious emotions invested in JOB being better than Rick and in that GS trade working out for Indy. My biggest problem is exactly that, they've invested emotion into it and aren't comfortable with results that either don't validate the point or counter it.

                  I wasn't emotional about Rick or Jack until after an onslaught of just outright unreasoned emotional opinions on the issue. I get that sports is emotional, but at the end of the day my attitude is that you still want to remove that part and be reasonable, at least after giving it some time. I don't think keeping Rick or Jack would have worked 100%, both had some faults. But neither was the perfect scapegoat that many posters made them out to be.

                  And so what happens next? New scapegoat is picked. That attitude would have gotten Reggie traded after a few bad games. Maybe the loss to Boston in the playoffs would have meant that Reggie just "couldn't lead them over the hump", just like JO now. So when I bring the "JOB is the greatest" or "see the GS trade is a big hit" posts back to reality it's really simply me putting this outrageous scapegoating attitude in some perspective.



                  Now I do think that JOB has had some positive impacts and I also think Rick had some problems (discipline primarily). I just don't think that any fundamental issues were resolved at all. And things like Lebron and Gilbert blowing smoke up my rear don't change that.

                  The team is "better" than last year when they beat Cleveland, despite only being 6-8 right now? Really? With a 20th rated offense (point per pos)?

                  You repainted the used car and tried to sell it to me again, but I'm not buying. When this team is REALLY better you'll know it by the results, and I assure all of you I'll be leading the charge to champion that point of view. See my post Utah postings for that proof.

                  In the meantime stop comforting yourself in the trashing of Rick, Jack, et al. It's too easy for something like this to counter that point:
                  Originally posted by Schuhman at NBA.com
                  How important is Stephen Jackson to the Warriors? Without him, their defensive rating was an atrocious 119.1. With him, it's a solid 104.4. And the result is an impressive 4-1 road trip.
                  The ongoing debate about the 2 most recent major moves rages on, just like people are still debating the non-existing JO to LA trade and if it was smart or not to pass on it.

                  You don't say "it's in the past, nothing you can do now, let's not debate whether they made the right choice or not". At least I don't see anyone taking that stance. Especially not after the LAL game.
                  Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 11-27-2007, 02:46 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

                    GIVE UP ON THE DAMN GS TRADE!

                    second line.
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

                      McKey fan, I agree with you somewhat, but I do recall Rick calling out Artest a few years ago, and Ron responding with a great game the next night out. Admittedly that is still rare for Rick, he's nice guy to a fault. We all note it when he comments on his time at Detroit and Indy, as well as how he was let go each time. Even the Zeke situation where he was left dangling was handled with class from his side of it.

                      That's his thing, non-emotional positivism. Clearly that doesn't work with plenty of athletes. I think post-brawl it was a great attitude, but at other times the team needed fire and brimstone.


                      But on the point of having favorites have you seen Tinsley's touches/shots lately? Has he not been handed the keys, while Shawne is called out specifically for his defense after a brilliant outing (the only guy to show up that night), followed by Shawne losing a ton of PT out of nowhere?

                      You tell me who is the better defender and the better shooter, Tins or Shawne? It's the same with Harrison. JOB has cut his PT at times and no one said a word. But when Rick did it people said he wasn't giving him the chance.

                      Those kinds of silly double standards make me nuts. The fact is that both Rick and JOB are quality coaches and both have had to deal with serious roster challenges in Indy. I'm not really sold that JOB has handled things all that much better. Trade in one pet (JO) for another (Tins). Show an apparent double standard between a vet and a young player.


                      The only guy I feel like JOB might be reaching is Harrison, and even that is clouded with the contract issue, as in David might now realize that he could be totally out of the NBA and has decided to work on his attitude more. And he could just be getting old enough that he's moving past some of these issues.

                      But I'm willing to give JOB some of that credit regardless, just due to his feistier attitude.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

                        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                        GIVE UP ON THE DAMN GS TRADE!

                        second line.
                        Right after you (general PD populace) give up on all "should have traded JO for..." postings and variations with other players.

                        Should have works both ways, not just for done deals you like. As is always pointed out in these debates Peck is still not at peace with the JO for Dale trade, and it carries on even now in his view of JO on this team. I actually understand that, I just don't think the results back his POV totally.

                        I mean it still hasn't even been one freaking year. You guys act like it's ancient history and the effects are long removed. Bird is still here, right? So we definitely still are evaluating his moves, and that includes trades and firings. And before you say Walsh, he's still here too.

                        Let's say next year we debate if Bird should stay or go, the "data" on that debate is the GS deal, the draft picks, the Saras signing, etc. Saras will be long gone, but the guy who went and got him isn't. Plus moving for him might have eliminated other options at the time that cascaded into the present.

                        Is the lesson of Bender/AC contract eliminating Brad Miller already forgotten?


                        We see what players like Fred, Saras, Harrington, Dale, and even Jackson do away from Indy and use that to decide what their real impact here was. Unfortunately in the case of Jack it appears that he is an impact defensive player and does put a spark in teams. So we know that was traded away and might have impacted the team.

                        The other players have shown very little so you suspect that moving them was less detrimental. Or with Al you even suspect that giving up a pick to get him, and his contract (small as it was) may have been a mistake.

                        It's not as simple as "it's in the past". Past decisions that impact the present aren't over with.

                        I'm certain that if JO was traded for Bynum and JO was struggling in LA while Bynum flourished here, not one single person would be "letting it go". Every day that deal "in the past" would be celebrated. And if Bynum flopped while JO won MVP, you think it would be forgotten? Only the JO-haters would want that.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

                          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                          GIVE UP ON THE DAMN GS TRADE!

                          second line.
                          This attitude is the exact opposite of GSW fans. They talk about the trade very often, with no negative reactions. Pacers fans don't like talking about it (even though it's the most recent impact transaction directly affecting on-floor performance...) because there's not as much satisfaction over the Pacers side of the deal.

                          It's simple. You and the majority of PD loathe those who bring the GSW trade into discussions, but it's still very relevant and apparently very painful.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

                            The only thing that's painful is reading every freaking thread and something is relevant about it. Who cares if GSW fans talk about the trade? Good for them. If they start talking about Ellis, should we? What they think is what they think, not what we think.

                            It may be hard for you to understand, but some of us actually like the trade. We like how it turned out, we don't care about GS and how they beat Dallas last year in the playoffs, whoop-de-freaking-do!

                            I'm tired of reading the same bull**** over and over in other thread. If Stephen Jackson won the MVP award this year it still wouldn't change my mind, and I doubt many others. It didn't work out here, it never was going to work out. It's done, over with. GET OVER IT!
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: LeBron: "I like what I'm seeing [from the Pacers]."

                              Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                              Right after you (general PD populace) give up on all "should have traded JO for..." postings and variations with other players.
                              JO is a relevant discussion. Why? *GASP* He's still here!!!!!!

                              We're not rehashing things that happened months ago because they're still on going events. No matter how much you ***** about it the trade is done, and it will never reverse itself, thank God for that one.

                              If you said we keep bringing up Bender, then I would say you have a point, but not JO, not while he's still a Pacer.

                              Jackson=Not a Pacer, no reason to bring him up every other thread.
                              JO=Still a Pacer and is relevant to discussions about the Pacers.

                              Get it?
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                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.
                                so what are you saying? You want Atest, Jackson, harrington and the old coach back? Everyone would like reggie back, I just don't get what your point is. What would Mr. notecard do with the current players on this team?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X