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

Pacers/Knicks Post-Game 50: Knicks lose, and so do the Pacers

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

  • #16
    Re: Pacers/Knicks Post-Game 50: Knicks lose, and so do the Pacers

    Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
    I didn't see the game since I'm not paying attention to the Knicks until Isiah's fired but I do have one thing to say:

    DO WE SUCK OR WHAT???
    The Knicks are the team the Pacers circle on their calendar when they need to snap a losing streak.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Pacers/Knicks Post-Game 50: Knicks lose, and so do the Pacers

      Originally posted by Shade View Post
      The Knicks are the team the Pacers circle on their calendar when they need to snap a losing streak.
      When any team needs to snap some type of streak.......the Pacers are teams want to play.

      Does your team need to lose a game to drop further into the lottery? Play the Pacers.

      Does your team need to snap a 15 game losing streak? Play the Pacers.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Pacers/Knicks Post-Game 50: Knicks lose, and so do the Pacers

        Originally posted by TheDoddage View Post
        (20-30)





        1
        2
        3
        4
        Total


        Indiana 29 26 20 28 103 Final




        New York 26 29 22 23 100

        (14-35)


        Indiana
        Name
        Min FG 3Pt FT +/- Off Reb Ast TO Stl BS BA PF Pts
        D. Granger G 40:19 6-12 1-4 3-3 +3 1 5 1 1 0 0 1 2 16
        T. Diener G 21:37 1-7 0-3 0-0 -9 0 1 4 0 0 0 1 0 2
        J. Foster C 32:05 5-7 0-0 0-0 +5 2 3 3 0 1 0 0 3 10
        M. Dunleavy F 39:30 5-19 1-8 6-8 0 1 8 9 0 1 0 0 2 17
        T. Murphy F 30:33 5-14 2-5 3-4 -8 3 7 3 1 2 0 1 4 15
        K. Rush
        28:19 10-13 3-5 1-3 +8 1 7 1 0 0 1 0 2 24
        M. Daniels
        26:23 4-8 2-5 3-4 +12 0 1 3 1 3 0 0 1 13
        D. Harrison
        10:45 0-0 0-0 0-0 +4 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 4 0
        I. Diogu
        5:43 2-2 0-0 2-2 +2 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 6
        S. Williams
        4:46 0-2 0-1 0-0 -2 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 0
        S. Graham
        DNP - Coach's Decision
        A. Owens
        DNP - Coach's Decision

        Totals

        38-84 9-31 18-24
        10 35 25 5 8 4 4 20 103
        Percentages:
        .452 .290 .750
        Team Rebounds: 8

        New York
        Name
        Min FG 3Pt FT +/- Off Reb Ast TO Stl BS BA PF Pts
        J. Crawford G 42:53 5-17 3-8 8-9 -7 0 2 7 2 0 0 0 2 21
        F. Jones G 38:02 2-4 2-3 6-6 -3 0 4 5 2 0 0 1 1 12
        E. Curry C 31:56 8-10 0-0 4-6 +4 3 8 2 3 0 0 1 4 20
        Z. Randolph F 35:37 11-20 3-4 1-1 0 0 9 3 3 0 0 1 1 26
        R. Balkman
        34:06 3-7 0-1 1-3 -5 6 12 2 2 1 3 0 3 7
        D. Lee
        27:13 3-6 0-0 2-2 -4 4 11 1 4 0 0 0 2 8
        N. Robinson
        9:07 1-5 0-2 2-2 +1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4
        M. Collins
        5:58 0-2 0-0 0-0 +3 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0
        W. Chandler
        DNP - Coach's Decision
        J. James
        DNP - Coach's Decision
        J. Jeffries DNP - Coach's Decision
        M. Rose
        DNP - Coach's Decision

        Totals

        34-75 8-19 24-30
        15 49 22 16 1 4 4 19 100
        Percentages:
        .453 .421 .800
        Team Rebounds: 7

        Game Info
        Technical Fouls: None
        so JJ started, scored AND got a DNP-CC??

        Beastmode!
        STARBURY

        08 and Beyond

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Pacers/Knicks Post-Game 50: Knicks lose, and so do the Pacers

          lol@being unhappy after a win. Eric gordon is not the answer...a trade and a healthy JO is.
          Caught the final 5 mins of the game after i got home from working the UCF game. And all i can say is what heart! we were down 7 and i slammed my remote down. How can we lose to the damn knicks? granger and kareem came up big. Danny has to learn to draw that contact at the end though. I like the shot attempt even tho it got blocked. Nice win and with NJ losing we arent that far out of a playoff spot...LOL
          "GIMMIE DAT!"-DANGER

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Pacers/Knicks Post-Game 50: Knicks lose, and so do the Pacers

            oh and yes 1 turnover in the 2nd half...if we can get that every night i like our chances against any team. LOL@ZBo hitting a bank shot 3...
            "GIMMIE DAT!"-DANGER

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Pacers/Knicks Post-Game 50: Knicks lose, and so do the Pacers

              Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
              One more win and we're back in the playoffs...baby!
              exactly....PLAY TO WIN DAMNIT!
              "GIMMIE DAT!"-DANGER

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Pacers/Knicks Post-Game 50: Knicks lose, and so do the Pacers

                I guess I've underestimated James Dolan's brilliance for keeping Isiah on board.

                They've been shooting for our draft pick all along.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Pacers/Knicks Post-Game 50: Knicks lose, and so do the Pacers

                  Originally posted by RamBo_Lamar View Post
                  I guess I've underestimated James Dolan's brilliance for keeping Isiah on board.

                  They've been shooting for our draft pick all along.
                  We've already GOT your draft pick - we're shooting for Miami's.

                  Don't worry though - I'm sure Isiah will show his brilliance by trading it and David Lee away for The Next Savior - someone like Kwame Brown.

                  The last 11 TNS's just haven't worked out so well but I'm sure Isiah thinks that if he keeps dealing lottery picks one of them will take us to The Promised Land (I think that means the NBDL).
                  The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Pacers/Knicks Post-Game 50: Knicks lose, and so do the Pacers

                    Very disappointed with the win. We're gonna end up blowing our chances at a franchise guard (Mayo, Gordon, Rose) and end up with some mid-round scrub a la Rodney Stuckey and Nick Young from this past draft.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Pacers/Knicks Post-Game 50: Knicks lose, and so do the Pacers

                      Originally posted by tora tora View Post
                      I haven't been watching the games lately, but how the hell did Jeff get held to 3 rebounds in 32 minutes?
                      It was because both teams shot the heck out of the ball in the first half. At one point I think both teams were like 10 of 16.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Pacers/Knicks Post-Game 50: Knicks lose, and so do the Pacers

                        ...are we really rooting for the pacers to lose in early February...that's ridiculous.

                        The sonics got the guaranteed rookie of the year stud in kevin durant, who dominated college ball like no freshman in this year's class.

                        The Blazers won't get a single minute out of their draft pick this season.

                        How are both of these teams doing this year, anyway?

                        Something to think about for you who think a high draft pick is a cure-all....
                        Last edited by Kstat; 02-07-2008, 07:27 AM.

                        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


                        • #27
                          Re: Pacers/Knicks Post-Game 50: Knicks lose, and so do the Pacers

                          Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                          ...are we really rooting for the pacers to lose in early February...that's ridiculous.

                          The sonics got the guaranteed rookie of the year stud in kevin durant, who dominated college ball like no freshman in this year's class.

                          The Blazers won't get a single minute out of their draft pick this season.

                          How are both of these teams doing this year, anyway?

                          Something to think about for you who think a high draft pick is a cure-all....
                          There not cure alls. But, 2-3 years down the road they give you something to build around if you don't have the resources to go out and buy or trade for a primer ball player.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Pacers/Knicks Post-Game 50: Knicks lose, and so do the Pacers

                            Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                            ...are we really rooting for the pacers to lose in early February...that's ridiculous.

                            The sonics got the guaranteed rookie of the year stud in kevin durant, who dominated college ball like no freshman in this year's class.

                            The Blazers won't get a single minute out of their draft pick this season.

                            How are both of these teams doing this year, anyway?

                            Something to think about for you who think a high draft pick is a cure-all....
                            Sure are. The team lacks talent, Bird can't trade for talent, our cap situation isn't "friendly" thus the draft is our only hope. Anyone who actually wants these scrubs to make the playoffs and get swept is both selfish and short-sighted. Draft picks aren't cure-all's, they're building blocks for the future. Acquire enough building blocks, and soon enough you have something to work with. We have Granger who's legit, Shawne who looks legit, and Diogu who's very iffy. We have a couple of solid vets in Dunleavy and Foster. And we've got an injury prone, overpaid "franchise player" who's career is sinking like the Titanic. That's not enough to get anywhere in this league where the top teams are stacked with talent. Not even close. And while the good teams remain better than us, the bad teams are getting better draft picks than us. As of now we're stuck in NBA purgatory, only the Knicks can match our crappy situation, and they at least have a top-5 pick on the way.

                            And using Seattle and Portland as examples is quite flawed. Portland's doing well because they've been in rebuilding mode for a few years now and have two talented top-6 draft picks leading the way; Roy and Aldridge, as well as a solid supporting cast.

                            Seattle just started their rebuilding process, anyone expecting instant success from a team who's most talented player is 19 needs smacked over the head repeatedly with a sock full of batteries. Durant is the Sonics first top-9 pick since Gary Payton back in 1990. Geez, how did that one work out for them? They would've been much better off winning 5-10 more games and drafting Bo Kimble or Willie Burton.
                            Last edited by Kofi; 02-07-2008, 07:54 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Pacers/Knicks Post-Game 50: Knicks lose, and so do the Pacers

                              I don't want to make a big deal about it, but are some of you going to be *****ing every time the Pacers win a game.

                              If you watched the game and saw how happy most of the players were after they won, you might have a different attitude.

                              Maybe we should have two post game threads, the one where fans are happy when they lose and another thread for those who are happy when they win.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Pacers/Knicks Post-Game 50: Knicks lose, and so do the Pacers

                                We had low (high??) draft picks year after year and still couldn't improve as a team. We had the #2 pick at least twice...there are no sure things.
                                Clark Kellogg, Chuck Person, Scot Hastings, Steve Stipanovich, George McCloud, on and on....oh yeah, Jonathan Bender was picked at #5 in more recent history. These guys are so young and inexperienced there is no telling how they will handle the rigors of pro ball.

                                Besides, how do you know you'll even be around to enjoy the fruits of all this losing? I'd rather enjoy some wins now than to cheer my team on to a glorious defeat.
                                Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X