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

So... we don't do postgame threads any more? Pacers won, by the way.

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

  • #16
    Re: So... we don't do postgame threads any more? Pacers won, by the way.

    Originally posted by USF View Post
    I talked about that b/c I ripped him for playing like hell in NY.......I'm very aware of players having bad games, but this is the best game I've seen Jeff play in weeks so I made a point of it. It's not hard to understand.

    I know Jeff has always busted his *ss, but lately that spark hasn't been there probably due to injury. It was nice to see it back tonight.
    Really? He had his moments but I thought he was having trouble getting things synched up most of the night. He was visibly and audibly frustrated a good portion of the night.

    It was no "good azz defense", but I enjoyed his "he was grabbing my f****n arm" rant right after he hip checked whomever it was totally off the court. It's like "dude, um, save the complaining for something a little less blatent".

    I love Jeff and his effort is unquestionable, I just thought he never could get into the flow of the game. That blocked shot was a monster though, very impressive.


    Rush
    That is why i scratched my head when JOB pulled him for defensive problems
    Yep, me too. I think Quis is a better defender slightly, but I have Rush as #2. He's really a smart defender, he defends plays in a way that leaves him in good position to recover. He helps without having to sell out, he'll leave and disrupt the play when his man doesn't keep him honest. He looks to block out when a shot goes up, he constantly is looking (literally) for ways to impact plays at both ends. Some guys take plays off to rest away from the ball, Rush isn't comfortable with that. He hasn't always known what to do to help in this system, but you can see him trying to move into better spaces and things like that.
    Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 02-26-2009, 12:39 AM.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: So... we don't do postgame threads any more? Pacers won, by the way.

      Jeff did have a good game. He came through during a tough time.

      The game ball is up.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: So... we don't do postgame threads any more? Pacers won, by the way.

        Originally posted by iPACER View Post
        Actually I thought Ford's TOs late in the game were keeping Memphis in it.
        TJ wasn't the only one that committed the turnovers. Some of his may have been key to the Griz coming back, but during the whole game there were some costly mistakes.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: So... we don't do postgame threads any more? Pacers won, by the way.

          Liked Quis and Rush a lot. Foster had a few timely plays. Ford and Jack were solid on offense, nothing to get excited about on D, and had their usual cadre of turnovers that make one grimace as if in excruciating pain.

          I'll take the victory. So on the post game show Frank Vogel stated how underrated a defender TJ Ford is. He explained that TJ's speed and quickness really disrupted the opposition. (I'm obviously paraphrasing).

          Just curious if anyone else saw the interview and what reaction is. Personally, I'm not convinced. I think TJ might have the capacity to do that, but I don't see it regularly. That sounds more like the mental image I had of TJ's potential to impact our defense when I found out we got him. I just don't think he's lived up to that rep in any consistent way. Am I that far off?

          The more I see the team without its top guys, the more it reminds me how much I appreciate the consistent effort. Not that it wasn't there when DG and MDJ were playing. However, in a way it's good to get the rookies more minutes and put other guys in more primary production roles to see what they really have to evaluate their status moving forward.

          That said, the conclusion I'm coming to is it's a shame it appears Quis won't be retained. Guy's played really well on both ends. Will never have the long range shot, but other than that he's solid. Also if I had a priority for which players' contracts we could got out from underneath of in an ideal world it would be MDJ, TJ, Foster probably in that order.
          I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

          -Emiliano Zapata

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: So... we don't do postgame threads any more? Pacers won, by the way.

            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
            Really? He had his moments but I thought he was having trouble getting things synched up most of the night. He was visibly and audibly frustrated a good portion of the night.

            It was no "good azz defense", but I enjoyed his "he was grabbing my f****n arm" rant right after he hip checked whomever it was totally off the court. It's like "dude, um, save the complaining for something a little less blatent".

            I love Jeff and his effort is unquestionable, I just thought he never could get into the flow of the game. That blocked shot was a monster though, very impressive.

            I thought compared to the NY game he looked 50X better. I thought he looked in the flow of the game. The baseline "jumper" he hit, the block and then the offensive board save were all plays that I have grown used to from Jeff and really appreciate. Well, the "jumper" is a nice added bonus.

            Then again, you would definitely get more of a "flow of the game" feeling from courtside than I did up in the balcony.

            Either way, I thought he played much better than NY and I hope as he gets healthier he gets back to the Fiesty we all know and love.

            Oh, and I always enjoy a good Foster hip check.
            Last edited by BPump33; 02-26-2009, 08:48 AM.
            Passion. Pride. Patience. Pacers

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: So... we don't do postgame threads any more? Pacers won, by the way.

              I almost forgot, the left-handed "finger roll-ish" layup that Quis had in the fourth quarter was beautiful. I coudn't tell from the balcony whether it was a true finger roll or not, but it sure was pretty.
              Passion. Pride. Patience. Pacers

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: So... we don't do postgame threads any more? Pacers won, by the way.

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post



                Gnome was over in 15 with Hicks about 5 rows up (upgraded). He called me in the 2nd half and had me come over to let me hear his rant of the night (Hicks was burned out on listening to it by this point )...."we could have had Gasol with the Stanko pick, he was still on the board". Brutal.


                I pointed that out almost 2 months ago in one of my BIRD rants about Bird's lack of knowledge of talent when drafting players. IIRC, I said something to the effect that he missed drafting the wrong Euro, and should have drafted Gasol over Stanko.

                With Bird giving Foster a 2 year extension, it gives Stanko another 2 years to hone his skills before coming to the Pacers to take Foster's place!

                I still stand by my feeling Bird doesn't know talent when it comes to drafting. An example is in 06 the Pacers had the 15th pick in the 2nd round... #45. Bird picked Alex Johnson, now there is a common household name, and then traded him and 2-2nd round picks for James "Flight" White when he could have picked Paul Milsap or Leon Powe. Both were drafted after the Pacers pick at #45 with Milsap at #47 and Powe at #49. This is the same Milsap so many on this board want now at PF.

                That same 06 draft the Pacers needed a PG, and Bird drafted the infamous Shawne Williams at #17 passing on Rondo. I'm sure Rondo with his championship ring appreciates Bird's decision. JMOAA

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: So... we don't do postgame threads any more? Pacers won, by the way.

                  Ford is a score first PG. I have no problem with that. My problem is this. This is the second game (Minn) I have seen him miss key free throws with seconds left on the court.
                  Brandon Rush got hot and Murphy quit getting him the ball in the third quater. Marquis Daniels is becoming a go to guy.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: So... we don't do postgame threads any more? Pacers won, by the way.

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    postgame threads aren't too popular when the Pacers win.

                    Nice block by Jeff, although he was gased out there. probably shouldn't be playing.

                    Ford was huge tonight also - didn't they say the Pacers are 2-6 when TJ doesn't play??

                    Personally, I look forward to all post game threads... win or lose.


                    The Pacers record stands currently at 25-35 with 60 games having been played. That means Ford has not played in 1 out of every 6 losses by the Pacers or 29 losses when Ford has played. That shows me that the Pacers are 2-6 when Ford is out to be a very deceiving statement. It implys Ford's absence makes a real difference in the Pacers losses when it doesn't. The Pacers are losing anyway, 5 out of every 6 games he plays in when they lose.

                    Ford is a nice PG with speed and the ability to penetrate, but he so often penrtrates with no place to go or someone to pass. He creates turn overs b/c of this, and with his ball handling skills. IMO, as a PG Ford doesn't make other players better for the 8 mil salary he's paid. I'd much rather have Ramon Sessions, who will be a RFA, at 4-5 mil than Ford w/o having to worry about Ford's health issue.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: So... we don't do postgame threads any more? Pacers won, by the way.

                      Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post

                      The Pacers record stands currently at 25-35 with 60 games having been played. That means Ford has not played in 1 out of every 6 losses by the Pacers or 29 losses when Ford has played. That shows me that the Pacers are 2-6 when Ford is out to be a very deceiving statement. It implys Ford's absence makes a real difference in the Pacers losses when it doesn't. The Pacers are losing anyway, 5 out of every 6 games he plays in when they lose.

                      Ford is a nice PG with speed and the ability to penetrate, but he so often penrtrates with no place to go or someone to pass. He creates turn overs b/c of this, and with his ball handling skills. IMO, as a PG Ford doesn't make other players better for the 8 mil salary he's paid. I'd much rather have Ramon Sessions, who will be a RFA, at 4-5 mil than Ford w/o having to worry about Ford's health issue.


                      I think Ford makes a huge difference especially late in games when it is tough to score and he is pretty good at creating a shot.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: So... we don't do postgame threads any more? Pacers won, by the way.

                        Originally posted by USF View Post
                        I thought compared to the NY game he looked 50X better. I thought he looked in the flow of the game. The baseline "jumper" he hit, the block and then the offensive board save were all plays that I have grown used to from Jeff and really appreciate. Well, the "jumper" is a nice added bonus.

                        Then again, you would definitely get more of a "flow of the game" feeling from courtside than I did up in the balcony.

                        Either way, I thought he played much better than NY and I hope as he gets healthier he gets back to the Fiesty we all know and love.

                        Oh, and I always enjoy a good Foster hip check.

                        Compared to the NY game he could have sat at center court picking his nose the whole game and been about 30x better.

                        He made a couple of nice plays. The Rudy Gay block was a very smart play. He hit a jumper which surprised the hell out of me. But overall, I was less than impressed.

                        He's been laboring up and down the court since he came back. He just looks injured to me. He can't move like he used to and most of his game is based on movement and the ability to be in the right place at the right time. He probably ought to shut it down until he's healthy. If he's healthy now, then we're in a lot of trouble for the next 3 years.
                        "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                        -Lance Stephenson

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: So... we don't do postgame threads any more? Pacers won, by the way.

                          To me "a lot of trouble" is having your players punching fans.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: So... we don't do postgame threads any more? Pacers won, by the way.

                            My problem with Ford is that from the point he puts his head down and starts forward he locks into what he is going to do and can't change it. Late in the game, Memphis was bringing guys into his path and making him lose his rhythm, then putting arms into his "emergency" passing lanes.

                            Jack may not have the speed but I am beginning to appreciate that he at least can change his mind.

                            Given that, I think all of them need to go to a remedial ball-handling camp. Yes, Memphis was very active in the hands department but there were far too many times the ball was being handled off-balance, away from the body, or onto the legs. And passing, good Lord, is there a worse passing team than us - not just the pick-offs but the complete inability to get the ball to someone when they are in a position to do something with it rather than having to take a second to get control?

                            On a positive note I agree with everyone that Rush had very valuable playing time last night. He started getting some confidence in his shot and best of all the confidence JOB showed in his defense has got to be a major boost.
                            BillS

                            A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                            Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: So... we don't do postgame threads any more? Pacers won, by the way.

                              Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                              He's been laboring up and down the court since he came back. He just looks injured to me. He can't move like he used to and most of his game is based on movement and the ability to be in the right place at the right time. He probably ought to shut it down until he's healthy. If he's healthy now, then we're in a lot of trouble for the next 3 years.
                              I didn't think he was laboring as bad last night, but as a whole I pretty much agree with you. I could be wrong about the laboring, I just coudn't really tell. I would like to see him shut it down to get completely healthy.
                              Passion. Pride. Patience. Pacers

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: So... we don't do postgame threads any more? Pacers won, by the way.

                                Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post

                                we're in a lot of trouble for the next 3 years.

                                NO next 3 years.
                                Foster only signed a 2 year extension, so his contract is only through 2010-2011. Still it was a poor decision on Bird's part not to wait until the end of the season to see how he had played this season, plus I don't see any team giving him 6 mil per year that Bird gave him. IMO, Bird cost the Simons 2-3 mil by signing Foster when he did. Not to mention losing Foster's expiring as a tool that could have been used in many other ways.

                                The money could have allowed the Pacers to pick up Daniels team option, used to sign Jack, used to have made a trade at the trade deadline, or go after a FA like Sessions, Charlie V, etc. Bottom line it was a POOR decision by Bird!!
                                Last edited by Justin Tyme; 02-26-2009, 02:27 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X