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

Post season wrap up...

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

  • #16
    Re: Post season wrap up...

    Nice work. I never knew DD demanded out. I pretty much agree with every word.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Post season wrap up...

      Originally posted by count55 View Post
      One T, dude
      That's hilariously embarrassing. I fixed it in my post, but it's too late now. I know how to spell it, really. I was just reading off his post instead of thinking for myself. Honest!

      See if I ever listen to Peck again.
      This space for rent.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Post season wrap up...

        Originally posted by Anthem View Post
        That's hilariously embarrassing. I fixed it in my post, but it's too late now. I know how to spell it, really. I was just reading off his post instead of thinking for myself. Honest!

        See if I ever listen to Peck again.
        ...Still "flying casual"
        @roaminggnome74

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Post season wrap up...

          Originally posted by intridcold View Post
          Who in the last 6 years was able to be led by any leader?

          This is an interesting point. I can certainly think of a few players within the
          last 6 years who didn't possess the prerequisite attention span to be led.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Post season wrap up...

            Well the original plan was to make Jasikevicius the leader ... too bad he wasn't accepted by the JO gang!
            Maceo Baston's #1 fan on Pacers Digest!

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Post season wrap up...

              I don't think that Lombardi or Gen. Patten would have been able to lead this team of jerks and punks, so I'm not sure this is a fair criteria to evaluate anyone.

              Did JO fail at leadership? Clearly.

              I'm looking forward to having Hibbert and Rush as the leam leaders in the next couple of seasons. They each seem to have more natural leadership traits.

              Let's not fool ourselves, Reggie wasn't much of a leader either. But we got away with it because Mark Jackson WAS a great leader.

              The Pacers have been bad at matching "best player" and "natural leader" for a long time.
              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
              And life itself, rushing over me
              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Post season wrap up...

                That comment by Bird is confusing. I always thought they only said JO was the leader because he was the max contract guy. It's interesting that he now echoes my sentiment from that era. Even after Reggie "handed over the reigns", JO was never the sole leader. Ron Artest, Stephen Jackson, Jamaal Tinsley, Austin Croshere, Jeff Foster, Mike Dunleavy & Darrell Armstrong were all part of a committee of leaders over that time ( which included JO just as sporadically as those mentioned).

                Look back at those I listed and think about this team over that time span and tell me those guys didn't led this team just as much as JO did (some even more). I'm not commenting on where they were leading or how they led just that they did. Jackson & Artest had no problem getting guys on board. Crosh, Foster, Dun, & DA led by example and used their experience in the league as credibility. I thought Tins (along w/ MDJ) was the leader of this team the first half of last season.
                I'm in these bands
                The Humans
                Dr. Goldfoot
                The Bar Brawlers
                ME

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Post season wrap up...

                  Originally posted by Alpolloloco View Post
                  Well the original plan was to make Jasikevicius the leader ... too bad he wasn't accepted by the JO gang!
                  If he had possessed more NBA talent it might have worked.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Post season wrap up...

                    Originally posted by Alpolloloco View Post
                    Well the original plan was to make Jasikevicius the leader ... too bad he wasn't accepted by the JO gang!

                    LOL! He has a hard enough time being accepted as the leader at home with his wife let alone being the accepted the leader of the Pacers. Come to think of it, he's not with either now... ex-Pacer, ex-husband.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Post season wrap up...

                      Cheap shot!

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Post season wrap up...

                        Peck, as much as I typically enjoy your posts and perspective, this whole series strikes me as a bit self indulgent.

                        Can't you exorcise your Pacer evil humors in some other way than this message board? It doesn't seem like many other people are still holding onto the past as you seem to be.

                        JMHO, no offense meant.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Post season wrap up...

                          I'm just glad JO's gone so we can finally move forward. I suppose you could argue I'm seeing what I want to see and reading what I want to read, but my take is that he's gone for the same reasons I wanted him gone.

                          Better still, Walsh is gone too. This team was stuck in a rut and going nowhere fast (except out of town) and Walsh was way past being what this team needed.

                          Either PR is doing a great job or else the 'two headed monster' of Morway and Bird is several times more in sync than the multi-headed monster we had before (and if it's not then at least we're still one step closer to getting that behind us too!). We couldn't get on with the next phase of the front office and it's vision and abilities until we cleared house of the old guard.

                          As for the thoughts we didn't get JO the help he needed... That's something that all parties should've considered before inking him to that albatross of a contract. When you sign a face of the franchise contract as a power forward is it too much to expect you actually have some 'power' in your game?

                          JO was never a leader but he stood in the way of leadership developing because his ego couldn't accept that he wasn't what his contract said he was. He got that contract on 'potential' and then promptly peaked. Had he been able to take a step back and just realized that an almost 20-10 player who needed the whole offense built around him to a point that it was a detriment to the rest of the team, while he shot somewhere around 45% as a 'go to' star 'power' forward, wasn't 'dominating', then maybe he could've salvaged his career and this team. He couldn't....

                          Prima Donna is the best descriptive term I can think of for my perception of JO.

                          As it is, he's ego is Toronto's problem now. He can take his 'dominance' and 'All Star' aspirations there and meanwhile maybe we can finally build a team. I certainly like our chances now.
                          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                          ------

                          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Post season wrap up...

                            Originally posted by rexnom View Post
                            For the record:
                            2003-2004 MVP ballot was
                            1. KG
                            2. TD
                            3. JO
                            4. Peja
                            I stand corrected. Still doesn't change my opinion all that much though.

                            BTW, love Madmen.


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

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Post season wrap up...

                              Originally posted by docpaul View Post
                              Peck, as much as I typically enjoy your posts and perspective, this whole series strikes me as a bit self indulgent.

                              Can't you exorcise your Pacer evil humors in some other way than this message board? It doesn't seem like many other people are still holding onto the past as you seem to be.

                              JMHO, no offense meant.
                              Self indulgent? Absolutely.

                              I'll be honest with you, I did not really feel it when I was typing this last night and you can tell. In fact I got up today and actually regretted even makeing this post. As Anthem said, we've been here before, many times.

                              Like I said the bitterness is all but gone, in truth I'm with Bill here and am ready to move forward. But this was, I guess, a last gasp at trying to fire at the person who I felt was the second biggest problem for the past 7 years.

                              However I have to ask you this, what better place than a message board filled with friends who talk about the team I love would I go to exorcise my Pacers evils?

                              Seems like this is the perfect place.

                              But I will admit, it is self indulgent.


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

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Post season wrap up...

                                Originally posted by docpaul View Post
                                Peck, as much as I typically enjoy your posts and perspective, this whole series strikes me as a bit self indulgent.

                                Can't you exorcise your Pacer evil humors in some other way than this message board? It doesn't seem like many other people are still holding onto the past as you seem to be.

                                JMHO, no offense meant.
                                While we all know Peck is more than capable of speaking for himself, I'll jump in anyway.

                                I view these posts kinda like when you take all of the stuff associated with your old girlfriend and burn them so you can move on.

                                In other words, we'll visit these topics once more, then it's behind 'us' and we can move on.





                                ps. Peck, that was NOT a trade! :-)
                                You're caught up in the Internet / you think it's such a great asset / but you're wrong, wrong, wrong
                                All that fiber optic gear / still cannot take away the fear / like an island song

                                - Jimmy Buffett

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X