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

Olympic Basketball Thread

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

  • #16
    Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

    Originally posted by BorisD View Post
    That's all great, but the American team is already pretending as though they're the favourites, and the simple fact is they're not.
    Yes they are.

    But why Tayshaun is on this team instead of, say, Mike Miller, I will never know.
    Read my Pacers blog:
    8points9seconds.com

    Follow my twitter:

    @8pts9secs

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
      The Lithuanians were eaten alive by our pressure a week ago. I can also speak from first-hand observation that Sarunas struggles mightily with it.
      And they might struggle a second time with it, or they might not. While I do generally approve of the American "positive approach" (as John Wooden called it) of focusing on what you're doing and not so much what the other guy is doing, I think it has a severe drawback in this tournament.

      And really at this point I think Team USA needs to understand that there is a point at which superior athleticism must bow the knee to superior teamwork, so at the very least I want to see them challenged so much that they learn that they are not the be-all and end-all of basketball in the world (which they apparently haven't figured out yet), and that a collection of supremely talented one-on-one players interspersed with the odd point guard isn't necessarily a great team.

      That said, I want like hell for Spain to lose, too. Calderon's "six!" hand signal one a three point field goal is annoying beyond the telling of it.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

        Originally posted by BorisD View Post
        That's all great, but the American team is already pretending as though they're the favourites, and the simple fact is they're not. Both Bosh and LeBronze have already guaranteed that the US team is going to win gold, Krzyzewski can't even remember who the Greek team's point guard is (despite being a 2-time Euroleague MVP), calling him "#4", and I really doubt that the American organization is prepared at all for the challenge.

        The reality is, this is not a format that favours the favoured teams. 40 minutes of basketball to determine everything is not a long time and that limited time favours the underdog, especially when the favoured team doesn't know jack about its opponents. If this team thinks that the Greeks, Lithuanians, Argentinians, Spaniards and Russians are just going to roll over and take it, they're not: they've got the talent to compete and they're more prepared for international competition. The Spanish team have all been playing together since before they were teenagers, and the Americans are simply not prepared for that kind of team play. And the Greeks are just wildly aggressive, they'll bash and beat the Americans all over the place. Dwyane Wade will get bashed around so badly against them the Y will pop out of place and back to where it belongs. And I would argue that several teams have far better coaching staffs, the Russians in particular.

        I think the pressure and overplay strategy is probably the right one for that team, but a lot of these teams have very gifted ballhandlers (the Greeks have 3 excellent point guards in Diamantidis, Papaloukas and Spanoulis) and I believe they are ready for pressure releases. The Spaniards are no less capable of handling the basketball and the Russians will be well prepared. The Lithuanians have a lot of big guards who probably won't be phased as much by the pressure.

        Basically, I think the other teams are far more prepared for the US team than the US team is for them. And I just don't see them winning, especially with the dearth of players who can make plays for themselves without the basketball.
        I've been playing with some of my friends since I was in 6th grade. We would probably win if we laced up against Team USA because they couldn't handle that type of "team play." You act like the Americans just throw the ball out to Kobe or Lebron on the perimeter and isolate on every single play.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

          Originally posted by BorisD View Post
          That's all great, but the American team is already pretending as though they're the favourites, and the simple fact is they're not.


          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

            Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
            Yes they are.

            But why Tayshaun is on this team instead of, say, Mike Miller, I will never know.
            How can the USA be the favourite team in this tournament, when with largely the same team they have failed to even qualify for the gold medal game in the last Olympics or World Championships? Games are won on a basketball court, not on paper. The USA has almost no international success on its roster to speak of, and even in the NBA their entire roster has a grand total of 5 championship rings (3 of which belong to Kobe), and a bunch of lottery appearances between them. I think between the bunch of them they only have 2 NCAA titles, too. A bunch of winners this team is not.

            And why Tyson Chandler is not on this team and Carmelo Anthony is, I'll never know. The USA needs more ball-dominating scorers like we need another "CSI" franchise...

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

              Carmelo Anthony was this team's best player on the 2006 World Championship team. That team in 2006 had Cap'n Kirk starting at PG so I'm not sure how you can say it's the same team, but you clearly enjoy talking out your rear so I'm not going to stop you.

              No international success on the roster? Jason Kidd says hi and directs you to look at his undefeated record in international play. What is he like 54-0 now or something ridiculous like that? You simply don't know what you are talking about to say the least.


              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

                Originally posted by Moses View Post
                I've been playing with some of my friends since I was in 6th grade. We would probably win if we laced up against Team USA because they couldn't handle that type of "team play." You act like the Americans just throw the ball out to Kobe or Lebron on the perimeter and isolate on every single play.
                I'm not pretending that the Americans just play isolation ball (although when push comes to shove, that's what they will rely upon), and obviously there's a huge gap between you and your buds from 6th grade and the Spanish NT.

                What I am saying is that there is a point where even supremely athletic and talented individual play is going to have to bow the knee to team play. There's only one ball per game, and the Americans have a dearth of guys who can work without the ball. Obviously on paper they have the best bunch of players in this tournament by a huge margin, but that doesn't mean they have the best team. And their coaching is going to get worked over by better coaches, esp. David Blatt.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

                  Originally posted by Indy View Post
                  Carmelo Anthony was this team's best player on the 2006 World Championship team. That team in 2006 had Cap'n Kirk starting at PG so I'm not sure how you can say it's the same team, but you clearly enjoy talking out your rear so I'm not going to stop you.
                  Yes, Carmelo Anthony was their best player on an unsuccessful team: exactly my point. And I didn't say it was "the same team", I said it was "largely" the same team, which it is.
                  No international success on the roster? Jason Kidd says hi and directs you to look at his undefeated record in international play. What is he like 54-0 now or something ridiculous like that? You simply don't know what you are talking about to say the least.
                  English giving you troubles today? I said, "almost no international success", I'm obviously aware of Kidd's record (which was mostly accumulated when the USA was the unchallenged ruler of the world in basketball, in ancient history) and I'm sorry, but Grandpa Kidd is going to spend more time on the bench and possibly beating women than he will on the court in this tournament.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

                    Originally posted by BorisD View Post
                    Yes, Carmelo Anthony was their best player on an unsuccessful team: exactly my point. And I didn't say it was "the same team", I said it was "largely" the same team, which it is.

                    English giving you troubles today? I said, "almost no international success", I'm obviously aware of Kidd's record (which was mostly accumulated when the USA was the unchallenged ruler of the world in basketball, in ancient history) and I'm sorry, but Grandpa Kidd is going to spend more time on the bench and possibly beating women than he will on the court in this tournament.
                    Ok, we're done here.

                    A.) It's clear you really don't understand basketball.

                    B.) It's clear you really aren't interested in a sane discussion.


                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

                      Originally posted by Indy View Post
                      Ok, we're done here.

                      A.) It's clear you really don't understand basketball.

                      B.) It's clear you really aren't interested in a sane discussion.
                      Whatever. It's clear that you, along with the PTB at Basketball USA are still in la-la land where individual talent means more than team play at the high-end international level. I wouldn't mind seeing the USA win, but I'll expect an apology if LeBronze and company are busy congratulating somebody else on their gold medal win.

                      What arrogance - even a team with a proven track record of failure internationally over the past 6 years imagines itself as a favourite without knowing jack about the teams around them.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

                        It's why they have to play the games, gentlemen. We shall all see.


                        [~]) ... Cheers! Go Pacers!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

                          Let's compare those two teams that are "largely" the same team.

                          2006 World Championship
                          Joe Johnson
                          Kirk Hinrich
                          Lebron James (21 years old)
                          Antawn Jamison
                          Shane Battier
                          Dwyane Wade
                          Chris Paul (21 years old)
                          Chris Bosh
                          Dwight Howard (20 years old)
                          Brad Miller
                          Elton Brand
                          Carmelo Anthony (22 years old)

                          2008 Olympic Team (Bold denotes an addition)
                          Carlos Boozer
                          Jason Kidd
                          Lebron James
                          Deron Williams
                          Michael Redd
                          Dwyane Wade
                          Kobe Bryant
                          Dwight Howard
                          Chris Bosh
                          Chris Paul
                          Tayshaun Prince
                          Carmelo Anthony

                          So let's see SIX new additions to this team including TWO starters, but it's basically the same right? Oh yeah let's overlook the additions of a dead eye shooter (Redd) and another great PG (Williams) plus let's completely ignore the growth of guys like Paul, Lebron, Carmelo, Dwight etc.

                          Yep, largely the same team though. Only if you can't count. Then you would find out that six returning players, and six new additions. Plus comparing Paul of 2006 to Paul of 2008 is pretty much insanity.
                          Last edited by Trader Joe; 08-10-2008, 02:46 PM.


                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

                            Originally posted by BorisD View Post
                            Whatever. It's clear that you, along with the PTB at Basketball USA are still in la-la land where individual talent means more than team play at the high-end international level. I wouldn't mind seeing the USA win, but I'll expect an apology if LeBronze and company are busy congratulating somebody else on their gold medal win.

                            What arrogance - even a team with a proven track record of failure internationally over the past 6 years imagines itself as a favourite without knowing jack about the teams around them.
                            So you're telling me these other countries AREN'T taking the 12 best players from their country? Or pretty close to it? Cause I'm gonna have to call bull**** if that's the case.

                            EDIT: Also "failure", interesting, only a country with a proven track record of dominance like the USA would have that term thrown around with two straight third place finishes at the international level.
                            Last edited by Trader Joe; 08-10-2008, 02:43 PM.


                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

                              IF you, the US itself, guarantees itself gold before even one minute of the games ahead are even played and get silver or bronze I would say that qualifies as a failure, absolutely. On top of that in my book that also qualifies as arrogance.

                              For the record I have no problem seeying the US win, nor would I have a problem seeying anyother team win. I just like to see some good games and I think we are all going to get some of those .

                              Regards,

                              Mourning
                              Last edited by Mourning; 08-10-2008, 03:03 PM.
                              2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                              2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                              2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

                                How's that Canadian team fairing in the Olympics?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X