Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Pacers-Bucks Postgame: Pacers Shoot Fish in a Barrel

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

  • #61
    Re: Pacers-Bucks Postgame: Pacers Shoot Fish in a Barrell

    Originally posted by croz24 View Post
    i'll admit, i do miss one of my favorites elliott lydell davis. dale is my standard for a power forward, unless you have yourselves a malone, barkley, boozer, etc type of offensive threat at that position. i suppose one's opinion is dependent on how they view the role of a power forward or the system they prefer. still, even rik smits had better offensive rebounding numbers than murphy, and as well all know, smits was consistantly getting outrebounded by mark jackson.

    running a team inside/out is how you win championships. so imo, murphy should rarely be touching the 3 point line. jim o'brien's system is not conducive to winning.
    When life if boring, Troll a little.
    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Pacers-Bucks Postgame: Pacers Shoot Fish in a Barrell

      What about that post is trollish to you?

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Pacers-Bucks Postgame: Pacers Shoot Fish in a Barrell

        In this system Murphy will never get the ORPG you want. I agree I like crashing the boards, but the way this team plays half-court defense they have to slow down opposing transition. It is a quick fix that will be and has been exploited by teams.

        I agree that Murphy will never be an Orebound hawk. But to say that his Defensive rebounds are useless, and then saying the best Point Guard since Magic Johnson is an overrated player, is unfounded. Yes OReb are good. But there is a cost at crashing the boards.
        The leading team OREB per game are.
        Portland 13.2
        Philly 12.7
        Timberwolves 12.5
        GSW 12.3

        I have been trying to find Fast Break points per game but could not find them. If someone knows and can determine whether I am insane about this or not please divulge. Please.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Pacers-Bucks Postgame: Pacers Shoot Fish in a Barrell

          I think several posts complaining about Murphs rebounding is trollish, as is the idea that Murph should "rarely be touching the 3 point line."
          "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Pacers-Bucks Postgame: Pacers Shoot Fish in a Barrell

            I agree that is not trolling. He is at least preferences his beliefs and civil doing so. Even though there is disagreement.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Pacers-Bucks Postgame: Pacers Shoot Fish in a Barrell

              Originally posted by intridcold View Post
              I agree that is not trolling. He is at least preferences his beliefs and civil doing so. Even though there is disagreement.
              Using words like "despicable" does not promote civility.
              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Pacers-Bucks Postgame: Pacers Shoot Fish in a Barrell

                Are you saying that only a despicable troll would use despicable to describe a player's game? :smile:

                He just said that the way a player plays is despicable. He didn't say that Troy is a despicable person because he can't get "real" rebounds.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Pacers-Bucks Postgame: Pacers Shoot Fish in a Barrell

                  I do think that the Spurs philosophy of emphasizing defensive rebounds over offensive ones doesn't seem to hurt. Defensive rebounds not gotten by Murphy could potentially be offensive for the other team.

                  I don't understand why oReb would be such an issue in this case. Especially since if Murphy really wanted to oReb, he could just plant into the post there and then could get exploited on defense. =/

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Pacers-Bucks Postgame: Pacers Shoot Fish in a Barrell

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    How many times did he finish, how many times did he bail the Pacers out when they had nothing going.

                    I love the criticism of TJ after he played an excellent game and willed the Pacers to a victory
                    In TJ's defense, a lot of the times that he drives he's looking for someone to pass it to in the paint but most of the time, no one is there. He's good at drawing the double-team but no one cuts to the opposite side of the floor. He was pretty good at this with Toronto and Chris Bosh was the recipient of most of those passes.

                    I'll give you another example of what I'm talking about. Think about Chris Paul and how Tyson Chandler sets the screen and then heads to the hoop and CP3 hits him with a pass right at the basket. When TJ runs this play, the screener always seems to pop out for a jumper instead of heading to the bucket. It's more difficult to drive the lane and throw a pass back behind you and that's usually when TJ turns the ball over.

                    Every now and then, Rasho or Foster will screen and then roll to the basket and this usually leads to a dunk, a layup attempt, or foul shots. Murphy never rolls to the basket, he almost always pops out after a screen. So it's half TJ's fault and half the fault of the players around him, IMO.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Pacers-Bucks Postgame: Pacers Shoot Fish in a Barrell

                      When Pacers' shots go up, it is either Foster or Rasho who crashes the offensive glass- that is the team rebounding scheme. No one would accuse Rasho of being a better rebounder than Murphy, but he has more offensive rebounds per minute because of their roles in the team rebounding. Conversely, when opponents' shots go up, you see Rasho blocking out and Troy going for the defensive rebound.

                      Kevin Garnett gets only 1.5 offensive rebounds per game. I have never read anyone critical of him for that.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Pacers-Bucks Postgame: Pacers Shoot Fish in a Barrell

                        Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                        i'll admit, i do miss one of my favorites elliott lydell davis. dale is my standard for a power forward, unless you have yourselves a malone, barkley, boozer, etc type of offensive threat at that position. i suppose one's opinion is dependent on how they view the role of a power forward or the system they prefer. still, even rik smits had better offensive rebounding numbers than murphy, and as well all know, smits was consistantly getting outrebounded by mark jackson.

                        running a team inside/out is how you win championships. so imo, murphy should rarely be touching the 3 point line. jim o'brien's system is not conducive to winning.
                        see this is the problem. your main complaint isn't really murphy's poor offensive rebounding. your problem is that he's not your idea of a PF. that's fair. just because anthem loves having a PF camping out behind the arc doesn't mean everyone has to.

                        but complaining about murphy's offensive rebounding is like someone else complaining that dale davis' 3pt% was awful -- this simply is/was not a part of their respective games. rik smits was similarly a poor offensive rebounder but because he played closer to the rim than murphy, he tended to get a few more (being 7'4" didn't hurt). he isn't prolific and in the past i too thought many of his rebounds were more of the "fall into his hands" variety. watching murphy this year, it has changed a bit -- he has been more aggressive the defensive end when it comes to rebounding. they're not all cheap.

                        as for the touching the 3pt line... like it or not, murphy is a weapon from that distance and so he should be out there. it may not be your idea of championship basketball but it's what we've got right now and i challenge you to find anyone that believes jim o'brien (or for that matter, troy himself) will be around when the next time the pacers are being mentioned in championship talk.
                        Last edited by avoidingtheclowns; 01-29-2009, 11:34 AM.
                        This is the darkest timeline.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Pacers-Bucks Postgame: Pacers Shoot Fish in a Barrell

                          Complain all you want, but any win by a team in our position who's missing their best player is a good win.

                          Here's some things I learned last night:

                          - Jeff Foster is not the worst offensive player on this team. That honor goes to Maceo Baston.

                          - TJ is capable of taking over a game single-handedly. He made some bad decisions and did a lot of things that made me cringe, but he had the biggest mismatch on the court, he knew it, and he exploited it to the best of his ability. There's absolutely no way we'd have won that game without him.

                          - Quinn pointed out that Jack is a different player (much less aggressive) playing with Ford. I agree. Something's been wrong with Jack lately. I don't know if it's a lack of confidence in his offense or what, but it's not a good thing. At least before when he was turning the ball over he was doing it while scoring and being aggressive, now he's being tenative, not shooting the ball well, and still turning it over.

                          - Dunleavy has either reverted to his Golden State form or is playing at way less than 100%.

                          - Daniels needs to start playing better if we're going to get some offers for him.

                          - This team, without Granger and with the current rotations, is becoming very uninteresting to watch.
                          "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                          - Salman Rushdie

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Pacers-Bucks Postgame: Pacers Shoot Fish in a Barrell

                            Originally posted by tonythetiger View Post
                            When Pacers' shots go up, it is either Foster or Rasho who crashes the offensive glass- that is the team rebounding scheme. No one would accuse Rasho of being a better rebounder than Murphy, but he has more offensive rebounds per minute because of their roles in the team rebounding. Conversely, when opponents' shots go up, you see Rasho blocking out and Troy going for the defensive rebound.

                            Kevin Garnett gets only 1.5 offensive rebounds per game. I have never read anyone critical of him for that.

                            You basically said what I was thinking. Foster is the O rebounder and Murphy is the D rebounder.

                            Is it just me or do others notice Jack and Ford seem to get numerous rebounds during the game? I seem to notice it being more of the D rebounds vareity.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Pacers-Bucks Postgame: Pacers Shoot Fish in a Barrell

                              Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
                              JOB is TEERRRRIIBBBBLLLEEEEEE he can't coach ATTTT ALLLLLL
                              OUR DEEEEEEFENSE IS AWFUL!!! WE NEEEEED A DEEEEEEFENSIVE COACH LIKE SCOTT SKILES OR EDDIE JORDAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
                              Perhaps you should coach....
                              Go Pacers!

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Pacers-Bucks Postgame: Pacers Shoot Fish in a Barrell

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                                How many times did he finish, how many times did he bail the Pacers out when they had nothing going.
                                Quite a few. But most nights he's not going to hit those shots, and on those nights it's turnover turnover turnover.
                                This space for rent.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X