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

Tough loss, Postgame thread 2-ot Clips

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

  • #16
    Re: Tough loss, Postgame thread 2-ot Clips

    I really don't have a huge problem with him sitting Roy. Roy has not been terribly consistent. However, it is disappointing that Roy doesn't stay on the court when he's shooting 80% from the floor with 5 blocks, 16 points and only 2 fouls in 23 minutes. He was definitely playing better than Rasho tonight...but rookies sit for a reason. They are paid less and the coach looks foolish playing them over another arguably equal...but higher paid veteran. There is a ladder on the team just like in business...

    Edit: Just to clarify. These guys play 82 games a year or more. They see each other on a daily basis. There is a pecking order. There is a recognition that the owners are forking over millions of dollars for the vets. The owners probably don't want to see the bulk of their payroll play backup minutes. Yes, it is a business...and it's not always totally 100% about basketball. Sorry if any bubbles are bursting...
    Last edited by BlueNGold; 12-19-2008, 10:57 PM.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Tough loss, Postgame thread 2-ot Clips

      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
      I completely disagree with you - Josh was getting the job done defending Zack and Rasho was needed for the tean defense, becaue he was in help position to help on Zack - the Clips were going to Zack almost every play, so you had to defend him
      the thing is that having a big guy like Roy in the middle makes Zack job harder, you don't need Rasho to guard Marcus K, the other thing is when a guy is playing that well you don't take him out of the game period. plus you need to develop the rookies, we already know that some of this old guys are not coming back next season, so why play them when your rookie is doing a better job than the veteran?
      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Tough loss, Postgame thread 2-ot Clips

        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
        the thing is that having a big guy like Roy in the middle makes Zack job harder, you don't need Rasho to guard Marcus K, the other thing is when a guy is playing that well you don't take him out of the game period. plus you need to develop the rookies, we already know that some of this old guys are not coming back next season, so why play them when your rookie is doing a better job than the veteran?
        Roy was taken out after two mental mistakes in the team defense midway through the fourth quarter. And no you can't just disregard Camby becaue he woud have then gottlen layups and easy offensive rebounds - it takes a very experienced player to help on Zack and yet not completely leave Camby.

        Look, I have no problem with those that disagree with JOB in this decision, but to suggest that he needs to be fired -and to use this as an example why - is something I disagree with vehemently and I think it is a huge over-reaction
        Last edited by Unclebuck; 12-19-2008, 11:10 PM.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Tough loss, Postgame thread 2-ot Clips

          Rush practically hasn't had a shooting stroke all year. He got plenty of shots and couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. He also missed several FTs. I still like his aggressiveness and his upside.

          I think Rush needs to use the backboard on all those drives where he winds up with short shots (say 4-7 feet from an angle) off penetration, but even at times underneath. When you are moving it's difficult to have the touch to swish those types of shots.

          I can basically live with everything Jack did except the attempt to drive it on the break when we could have had the last shot. That said, we'd have been SOL without him.

          Rasho also make huge contributions with the mid-range J. I suspect he was in for that purpose, as well. Obviously, he couldn't make one in the fourth.

          Ford, like Jack, was generally good but there were mistakes. The last possession dribbling it off his leg being one.

          It's frustrating with the TOs and poor decisions, but both Jack and Rush really kept us in this game with a lot of good play, too. Plus, I think some see them as dominating the ball when JOB encourages and even instructs them to do it at times. Even more so in a game like this without most of our offensive options.

          But, what else is he going to do? Who do you want trying to initiate offense with no Granger or Daniels?

          I say great effort by our guys under the circumstances. Also, no complaints here about coaching.

          Tomorrow night could be tough. Who, if anyone, might be back? They don't have Brand though so that is a small silver lining.
          I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

          -Emiliano Zapata

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Tough loss, Postgame thread 2-ot Clips

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            Roy was taken out after two mental mistakes in the team defense midway through the fourth quarter. And no you can't just disregard Camby becaue he woud have then gottlen layups and easy offensive rebounds - it takes a very experienced player to help on Zack and yet not completely leave Camby.

            Look, I have no problem with those that disagree with JOB in this decision, but to suggest that he needs to be fired -and to use this as an example why - is something I disagree with vehemently and I think it is a huge over-reaction
            Sorry for not explaining my self to well, I am just saying that this is another reason to fire JOB, he always makes bad decisions at the end of games, by the way I think JMV today was talking about you, he said to say hi to unclebuck
            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Tough loss, Postgame thread 2-ot Clips

              80% from the field or not, if he was screwing up the team defense he needed to be yanked or we would have been in far worse shape.

              Im so sick of this reactionary fire the coach crap, Hibbert played a great game, but he isn't ready for crunchtime where mental mistakes cost you twice as much. Hell our vets made mental mistakes out there. Rasho is steady and experienced and while not having hibberts potential talent, you know he isn't going to cause any major blunders out there.
              "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


              • #22
                Re: Tough loss, Postgame thread 2-ot Clips

                On another note, man I look at Brandon Rush and think he is "hitting shots" away from being an excellent player. We all know he can shoot, whenever he gets out of this funk he is going to look great out there.
                "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


                • #23
                  Re: Tough loss, Postgame thread 2-ot Clips

                  I thought it was a good game overall especially since we were missing so many of our pieces. The rooks played like they were rooks and we really missed Danny's aggressiveness and leadership. This is a game that may pay dividends later on in the season where the rooks can use the lessons they learned tonight and come through consistently.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Tough loss, Postgame thread 2-ot Clips

                    Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
                    80% from the field or not, if he was screwing up the team defense he needed to be yanked or we would have been in far worse shape.

                    Im so sick of this reactionary fire the coach crap, Hibbert played a great game, but he isn't ready for crunchtime where mental mistakes cost you twice as much. Hell our vets made mental mistakes out there. Rasho is steady and experienced and while not having hibberts potential talent, you know he isn't going to cause any major blunders out there.
                    Rasho shoots way too many long jumpers. Late in the game, on the play by play, I constantly saw "R. Nesterovic misses 17-20 foot jumper". That was like, three occasions. He can make those occasionally, but he needs to stop shooting them so much especially late.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Tough loss, Postgame thread 2-ot Clips

                      I'm not saying JOb made a big mistake by benching Roy, but Hibbert's +/- was -1 and Rasho's was -7....so I would not overplay some of the mistakes he may have made. That ignores some of the good things he was doing. The fact is, he probably outplayed Rasho in the minutes he had tonight.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Tough loss, Postgame thread 2-ot Clips

                        The thing that I think is annoying is looking at his stats he played a damn good game for the time he was out there. 5 blocks is nothing to sneeze at either from a defensive standpoint. I just keep hearing "Roy isn't ready, Roy needs to learn". It just seems like we have the mindset "don't put roy in he'll get scored on." I just think he'd learn more from being out on the floor, I suppose I shouldn't get too worked up over it I don't get paid to make those kinds of decisions.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Tough loss, Postgame thread 2-ot Clips

                          Originally posted by JGray View Post
                          Rasho shoots way too many long jumpers. Late in the game, on the play by play, I constantly saw "R. Nesterovic misses 17-20 foot jumper". That was like, three occasions. He can make those occasionally, but he needs to stop shooting them so much especially late.
                          He hits those all the time, its one of the most consistent shots of anyone on the team. He happened to miss two late but I have no problem with him taking that shot when open.
                          "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


                          • #28
                            Re: Tough loss, Postgame thread 2-ot Clips

                            Someone made a good point that Rasho may be gone after this year. If that really is likely, I would like to see Hibbert get more minutes, particularly in close games like this, because he may be the mainstay next year. He will need to earn that of course...

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Tough loss, Postgame thread 2-ot Clips

                              Originally posted by TheDon View Post
                              The thing that I think is annoying is looking at his stats he played a damn good game for the time he was out there. 5 blocks is nothing to sneeze at either from a defensive standpoint. I just keep hearing "Roy isn't ready, Roy needs to learn". It just seems like we have the mindset "don't put roy in he'll get scored on." I just think he'd learn more from being out on the floor, I suppose I shouldn't get too worked up over it I don't get paid to make those kinds of decisions.
                              I think inserting Hibbert into the starting lineup was a really good decision by JOB and hopefully he can build some confidence off this performance. I can understand the decision to go with the veteran down the stretch, but Hibbert is finally starting to make some strides out there. He looked confident tonight.
                              "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


                              • #30
                                Re: Tough loss, Postgame thread 2-ot Clips

                                On a light hearted note... My wife's seat won the "FedEx Truck race/Lucky Seat" (race on the jumbotron) tonight and got the autographed Roy Hibbert jersey.
                                ...Still "flying casual"
                                @roaminggnome74

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X