Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

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

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

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

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

Rule #1

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

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

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

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

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

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rule #2

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

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

The right places to do so are:

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

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

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

Rule #3

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

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

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

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

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

Rule #4

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

Rule #5

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

An example:

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

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

Rule #6

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

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

Rule #7

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

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

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

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

Rule #8

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

Rule #9

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

Rule #10

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

Rule #11

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

Post Game thread - Pacers lose to Blazers

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

  • #61
    Re: Post Game thread - Pacers lose to Blazers

    Originally posted by pizza guy View Post
    Everytime Foster touches the ball, God kills a kitten.



    But seriously, nothing good came of it at all tonight. And he was embarrassingly slow on defense.
    Granted it was late and I was getting a little sleepy, but I counted 3 or 4 times in the 4th quarter where Jeff stripped the ball as the guy he was defending was about to shoot. Jeff's defense was outstanding as usual. He missed a couple of layups that he should have made - But I saw nothing to be concerned as far as his defense. Confused. I have the whole game on DVR, if I have tome tonight, I'll go back and re-watch parts of it

    Overall, it was one of the more enjoyable games of the season. Great playoff type atmosphere and the Pacers effort, intensity, energy were all outstanding. If they can play like this, they will win a good portion of the remaining games.

    Yeah Roy is that good. The thing about him is he almost has to be forced to be aggressive - usually until the 4th quarter - he is setting up his teammates - so he could average more points if he wanted too easily.

    Defensively I like when Roy Hibbert and Jeff are in the game at the same time - (hurts our offense though)

    Good to see TJ healthy and playing like he's capable, Daniels, Jack continue to play great.

    I thought the foul on Ford was a bad call (and don't buy what O'brien said after the game, I don't believe he thinks it was a foul) but I admit we didn't see the best replay angle which would be from where the ref was standing who made the call. The worst call I saw was when Violet Palmer missed the play when Jack knocked the ball off of the Blazers player in a break-way layup - Palmer was out of position to make the correct call.
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 03-05-2009, 09:18 AM.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Post Game thread - Pacers lose to Blazers

      Anybody commented on the fact that Roy had the highest +/- last night (+13), and the only other player with a positive was Quis at +5?

      Yes, my anecdotal viewing of the game made me think Hibbert should have been put back in at the end, but that stat helps back it up.

      Once again, we did not lose this game in the last minute. We lost it a few minutes before, particularly when they hit three treys in a row to make a big run on our lead.

      To JOB's credit, he did call a timeout. He's gotten much better about that, IMO. But he didn't make a personnel change, and I think it was obvious one was needed.
      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Post Game thread - Pacers lose to Blazers

        We couldn't have played better last night. I wouldn't call it a wasted effort, but a win sure would've been nice considering the crowd they had.

        Enough with these game-determining phantom calls, though!
        Last edited by duke dynamite; 03-05-2009, 09:31 AM.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Post Game thread - Pacers lose to Blazers

          Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
          Once again, we did not lose this game in the last minute. We lost it a few minutes before, particularly when they hit three treys in a row to make a big run on our lead.

          To JOB's credit, he did call a timeout. He's gotten much better about that, IMO. But he didn't make a personnel change, and I think it was obvious one was needed.
          OK< what personnel change would you have liked. The reason they hit those threes was because Brandon Roy was beating Daniels or Jack -(mainly Marquis) And Roy was their whole offense - whether he scored or assisted. So who could have defended Roy any better?

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Post Game thread - Pacers lose to Blazers

            Originally posted by Lord Helmet View Post
            A great effort, and a great game, it just sucks the game was decided by the refs.
            Welcome to todays NBA.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Post Game thread - Pacers lose to Blazers

              I'm feeling really deflated after this loss. I'm tired of losing games where we hold the lead almost all the way throughout. Our playoff hopes took a serious blow last night.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Post Game thread - Pacers lose to Blazers

                The refs sucked all games and made plenty of bad calls on both teams. My top three were a no call on Hibbert when he hits Steve Blake mid-bicep on a driving layup, the blocking call on Hibbert when his jersey brushed up against Rudy Fernandez's as Fernandez threw up an ugly finger-roll that missed everything, and the call at the end.

                This was a game where we really felt Danny's absence. They were playing Outlaw at the 4 and we didn't have any answer. Even if Danny had only played the last 6 minutes of the game, we still probably win. We don't have any other 3/4 players on the roster.

                We lost this game for 2 reasons: 1. Marquis Daniels inability to guard Brandon Roy, 2. Our bigs' (Murphy, Foster, Nesterovic) inability to get rebounds. I don't blame 'Quis for his inability to guard Roy, but it was obvious to me that he's not the defensive stopper we all want him to be. 'Quis getting beat was also a big part of our rebounding woes. Our bigs were getting pulled away from the basket to help on Roy's penetration. Still, there's plenty of blame to get passed onto our bigs for not rebounding.

                Murphy had the exact kind of game that makes many people feel like he's not the right PF for this team. They guarded him with a smaller guy and created mismatches on both ends of the floor. Then "the best defensive rebounder in the NBA" can't get a tough defensive board in the 4th quarter to save his life. He got worked over by Joel Pryzbilla and LaMarcus Aldridge, neither of whom are fantastic rebounders.

                TJ did some great things, but I don't think we'll ever be a serious contender with him as our starting PG. Think about it, when was the last time a finals team had a PG that you knew he was going to do something stupid about 5-10% of the time he had the ball.

                It was nice to see how much the Portland fans and players love Jack. I'm glad he's on our team now.

                The Portland announcers need to do their homework. One idiot says, "Hibbert's not going to post up." What? Have you watched any film or read anything about the kid?
                "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                - Salman Rushdie

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Post Game thread - Pacers lose to Blazers

                  melli, I understand where you are coming from, but also you need to realize a few things:

                  Danny was missed. Even if he didn't score outside if he played, there would've been a little more court-awareness out there and a lot less scrambling. During that last run the Blazers had we looked like there was no clue on what was going on.

                  Brandon Roy is tough to guard, period. We aren't the only team to let him explode like that.

                  Troy got busted in the face and had to get some stitches. I'm sure he was in a great deal of pain in the second half and probably had a hard time seeing well. There was a time he went to the line and missed the first of two free-throws...badly. I think that had to do with his vision. It could've affected his depth perception.

                  One positive...I do agree that I think the fans in Portland love and miss Jack. I saw it all over last night.
                  Last edited by duke dynamite; 03-05-2009, 10:06 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Post Game thread - Pacers lose to Blazers

                    Originally posted by Shade View Post
                    I'm feeling really deflated after this loss. I'm tired of losing games where we hold the lead almost all the way throughout. Our playoff hopes took a serious blow last night.
                    I agree that is was a deflating loss, however we weren't supposed to win this game. Should we have won considering we were up the whole game? Yes. Going into this game we were 10 pt underdogs playing on the road in a very tough environment. I think the only way this is a serious blow to our playoff chances is if our guys let it carry over into the game Saturday night. If we lose to the Clips, then our playoffs hope are more than likely over. However, if we win and finish this road trip 2-1 I think that's about what was expected.

                    As frustrating as it was to be up the entire game and then lose the way we did, it's not as bad as losing to Minnesota/New York in back to back home games. I just hope the guys can put it behind them and continue the ball they played through 3 and half quarters last night.
                    Passion. Pride. Patience. Pacers

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Post Game thread - Pacers lose to Blazers

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      OK< what personnel change would you have liked. The reason they hit those threes was because Brandon Roy was beating Daniels or Jack -(mainly Marquis) And Roy was their whole offense - whether he scored or assisted. So who could have defended Roy any better?
                      Shotblocker?
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Post Game thread - Pacers lose to Blazers

                        Here is my take on the last call.

                        This was a PHYSICAL ball game. All night long there was hand checking and tough play with NO calls. Honestly the blazers should of shot 50 ft's instead of 32. But with the style of play the refs were allowing it really shocks me they called the LAST one. If it was honestly a foul it was very minute one. TJ had his hands up the entire time and in the game replay it shows roy throwing his elbow into ford to get the contact. If you are allowing physical basketball you do not call that foul.

                        I was hoping they would switch daniels with rush to guard roy at the end. I really wanted to see what type of defender he is. Roy was just blowing by daniels and everytime it was to the lane. You think after a while he would start to cheat a little that way but he never did.

                        And about foster being in at the end. Like UB said he had I think 3 steals at the end and not to mention the offensive rebounds that led to daniels getting to the free throw line. We had 4 players in the game. 3 jump shooters and a slasher. We were fine for our last shot.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Post Game thread - Pacers lose to Blazers

                          In defense of Daniels, if he could score, rebound, assist, and shut down the premier offensive personnel of the NBA, he wouldn't be a Pacer right now. There are some people he just can't guard -- go watch him on Ray Allen.

                          Also, I don't like Daniels playing PG or guarding the PG.

                          I'm not sure how fast Roy is, but that dribble and his subsequent decision making makes him very very tough to guard.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Post Game thread - Pacers lose to Blazers

                            One thing I learn again everytime I watch Brandon Roy play is just how bad of a GM Michael Jordan is. He picked Adam Morrison instead of Roy. Say what you will about Bird's talent evaluation skills, but at least he's never done anything that stupid.
                            "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                            - Salman Rushdie

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Post Game thread - Pacers lose to Blazers

                              Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
                              One thing I learn again everytime I watch Brandon Roy play is just how bad of a GM Michael Jordan is. He picked Adam Morrison instead of Roy. Say what you will about Bird's talent evaluation skills, but at least he's never done anything that stupid.




                              Kidding.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Post Game thread - Pacers lose to Blazers

                                Very entertaining game but I'm not certain it should have come down to that last call. On a back-to-back, guys getting 39 minutes and the bench bringing in 14 or 15 minutes a piece is a recipe for disaster. And we got it.
                                The Pacers had this game and, once again, the coach couldn't figure out how to distribute minutes to have some fresh legs in the end.
                                As someone else mentioned (for a different reason), I can never figure out this coach's rotations other than he relies far too much on veterans at the expense of confidence and won-loss record.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X