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

What I Liked Tonight 42.01

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

  • #16
    Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

    Honestly....I don't recall much from BRush on either end in the 2nd half....you guys will have to fill me in on how BRush did on both ends of the court in the 1st half....I was only able to catch the 2nd half of the game.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

      For the first game of the season, and of a new era, I am pleased. I liked the intensity and for the most part I thought the team tried to play the right way. These early losses are unfortunately to be expected BUT if the team can keep their focus even if the early record is dismal then the wins will come and we'll beat the teams we should beat and scare the teams that we shouldn't beat. As the season wears on maybe the list of teams that we should beat will start to grow.

      In other game news... Wow... fast work with the score graphic. Typically when I watch a game, especially a close one, immediately after a made basket I look at the score and do a quick bit of math (what that score adds to us, our deficit/lead, time remaining.... etc...). Tonight the score must've changed the moment the ball went thru the hoop because I couldn't look down at the score fast enough to see it switch at a made basket. I'd look down and the score was already recorded. It made for a couple of disappointing moments as I was expecting to see a basket added to what was showing and then I'd realize they'd already done it.



      -Bball
      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


      • #18
        Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

        Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
        Im all for trading for Marion, but if we have Murphy and Hibert starting in our front court, where would we start Marion? at SF? Does that mean Dunleavy would come off the bench? We would most likely have to trade Daniels + Tinsley + Rasho + 2 2nd rounder (from Dallas) for Marion and Banks. Miami isnt going to let Marion go without sending Banks. If that were to happen, our lineup would look like this:

        Ford/Jack/Banks/Diener
        Dunleavy/Rush
        Granger/Graham
        Marion/Foster
        Murphy/Hibbert

        We're not as deep, but a better team for sure
        I meant with Hibbert and Foster coming off the bench. I don't like any trade bringing back Banks because I feel he is a shooting guard and not a point guard, plus I still have hopes of seeing Diener for a few minutes each game to calm the game down and lower the turnovers that Jack and Ford create.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

          Originally posted by Bball View Post
          In other game news... Wow... fast work with the score graphic. Typically when I watch a game, especially a close one, immediately after a made basket I look at the score and do a quick bit of math (what that score adds to us, our deficit/lead, time remaining.... etc...). Tonight the score must've changed the moment the ball went thru the hoop because I couldn't look down at the score fast enough to see it switch at a made basket. I'd look down and the score was already recorded. It made for a couple of disappointing moments as I was expecting to see a basket added to what was showing and then I'd realize they'd already done it.



          -Bball
          I realized that too. That was nuts.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

            I liked that Brandon Rush kid.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
              Back to Rush. Anyone else pleased as punch that this kid can play that good defense from game 1 of his career? I was always happy to see him on the defensive side of the floor because aside from some mistakes, he looked great out there. Good position, used his length, kept good position, and contested shots. Very happy about this. Really all around I was pretty thrilled with our rookie wingman tonight. Just wait until he starts bombing some 3's, too.
              The MOST impressive trait of Rush's game, imo, is his ability to adjust mid-game. Every mistake he made on defense was only made once. He's such a quick study; it's amazing.

              Btw, he was so visibly nervous at the beginning of this game. I'm glad he was able to contribute. I expect him to have a better game on Saturday.


              Danny Granger. Holy cow. I often thought to myself that Danny is a guy who shows up most often when he views the situation to be a big one. That showed tonight with an very, very good effort. Would like to see some assists, but otherwise there was not much to complain about because he was doing a terrific job at attacking the hoop. This is HUGE for Danny. I'm talking "turning yet another corner" huge.
              We have until Friday to sign him to an extension. If we don't, we're going to lose about $10 million by resigning at season's end. He's improved his biggest offensive weaknesses. Now he looks like he can score 30 on any given night. 33 tonight without really exerting himself.


              I liked our new PGs and starting center. While I would have liked to have seen more good things from all of them, they all showed some positives tonight that contrast with our horrible situation last year at these spots. I liked the fact that when Jack was in the game, Chauncy didn't feel like he was on the verge of erupting offensively. He was pretty quiet tonight, but I thought Jack did a good job of staying with him, being physical, and not fouling.
              Ford's ability to stay in front of his man is refreshing. The PG defense tonight was pretty good. I think the Pistons, in general, offer the biggest mismatches of any Eastern Conference opponent, but we held our own (minus a few lapses).


              Finally, I liked that we looked like a team that had a legitimate shot to win tonight against a good team. We played hard, we played (kinda) smart, we showed some real positives tonight. Some of the mistakes were head-scratchers, but others looked clearly to be the result of not having team chemistry on the floor yet.

              Frankly, I feel encouraged. I think this team has a chance.
              This team is much further along than I thought. Much further. The worst teams to start a season against are veteran teams as they are well accustomed to their gameplan, and no team in the NBA has as much experience as these Pistons (the main 4 in their starting lineup have started more games together than every other combo since 1991, with the exception of Jackson/Miller/D. Davis/Smits-fun fact). I was expecting a blowout tonight, and it could've easily gone that way with several double digit leads. But we kept fighting back and chipping away.

              We will be better than the majority expects. We're much tougher mentally than we were last year.

              The biggest negative tonight (aside from turnovers) is Murphy. He flat-out does not understand our pick-and-roll strategy, and his man-to-man is close to non-existent.\. Detroit is the best team in the NBA at exploiting weakness, and they really took advantage of Troy tonight.

              I'm hoping his injury is slowing him. Otherwise, we need a very proficient offensive night from Troy just to break even on what he gives up on defense.
              Last edited by imawhat; 10-30-2008, 12:36 AM.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                About Danny...yeah...let's get that extension.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                  Im gonna second the idea of extending granger now, we will regret it if we don't.

                  Without our second leading scorer, with Granger known as our top scorer and probably focus of the other teams defense, against an EXCELLENT defensive team... dude puts up 33 (63% from the field)... Going to the hoop, getting to the line, and hitting his jumpshots. Impressive.
                  "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                  - ilive4sports

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                    One other interesting thing of note: Who led our pre-game huddle festivities on opening night?

                    Roy Hibbert.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                      I don't think Rush looks miles ahead of Granger, if anything, they look sort of comparable to me, which I think is a good thing.


                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                        Good read, Hicks.

                        Glad to hear about Danny (and the whole team for that matter) aggressively attacking the basket, and having found control in doing so. Too bad Roy only got 6 minutes. I don't really care for the argument that it was against the Pistons. Unless he played extremely bad in the first half (which to my impression he didn't), there's no reason to not put him on the floor in the 2nd half.

                        Lots of things to work on it seems (TO's!), but also lots of positives
                        Word on the street is he doesn't want your money, he only wants to please your ears...
                        Bum in Berlin on Myspace

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                          If 33 points in the box score doesn't say enough about Granger's performance, consider this:

                          Granger's +/- for the game was +8. The Pacers lost by 6, but during the 38.5 minutes Granger was on the floor, the Pacers actually outscored the Pistons.
                          And I won't be here to see the day
                          It all dries up and blows away
                          I'd hang around just to see
                          But they never had much use for me
                          In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                            We have the pieces for a very good team in the coming years. All we're missing is a power forward. A little cap room and a smart free agent signing could solve that problem.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                              Some observations...


                              1--This a fun team to watch
                              It was a joy to watch guards who did not do a big "ole" as their man went past them.
                              There was very little driving down the middle of the lane for layups. The perimeter
                              defenders did a good job. I saw some excellent passes from Ford on several occasions.

                              2--This team will score points on most any team.
                              Detroit is a very good defensive team but that did not stop the Pacers. If not for
                              5-6 foolish turnovers the Pacers would have scored a 100 points.

                              3--Danny Granger will be an all-star this year. His commitment to driving to the basket
                              will pay big dividends for his scoring average. And he shoots FT with a great percentage

                              4--Roy Hibbert and Rush are going to contribute a rookies and that is hard to do in this
                              league. Roy's spin move on the baseline was short of amazing for a man of his size.
                              {o,o}
                              |)__)
                              -"-"-

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                                This year Danny has to show if he's going to be able to a franchise guy. 33 pts against a Pistons defense and Tayshaun Prince keyed in on you is a great start.I think this is why they hesitate to lock him down. We can't pay Danny first banana money if he's a second or third banana guy.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X