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

JOb is firmly with the vets

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

  • #16
    Re: JOb is firmly with the vets

    insanity - repeating the same action and expecting different results.


    Obviously playing the vets has worked SO well before, that continuing to do so is the right move.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: JOb is firmly with the vets

      Originally posted by Sookie View Post
      insanity - repeating the same action and expecting different results.


      Obviously playing the vets has worked SO well before, that continuing to do so is the right move.
      Our developing players had quite the outing tonight. I don't see anything wrong in their share of playing time.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: JOb is firmly with the vets

        The sad truth here guys is that we are simply going to have to wait and wait some more. Not much is going to change till we are able to unload Murph, Dun, & TJ's contracts (plus the remainder of Tin's deal). That's about 37 million right there for this year. So yes, JOB is playing Murph and others because they are PAID players. The truth is Murph's not a bad player, he is just having a bad year, but at 11 million, it's something we can't really afford to have happening. It's too early to judge Dun this year, after coming off the injury. TJ, just makes me crazy with the way he plays, would rather see Watson or Price in there. It looks like we will just have to wait to see if we can move some of these deals at the trade deadline. If not then, maybe this summer or the 2010 trade deadline.
        Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: JOb is firmly with the vets

          That's disheartening to hear that on a night where, with warts certainly included, Tyler had a pretty damn nice night for a rookie, and the only thing Jim can do is NOT praise him at all, and in fact go on to focus on what's wrong with him. That's bull****, man. How about you build up your players a little bit in the press. Especially when you're completely soft on Troy Murphy's crap. Damn that does **** me off a little bit.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: JOb is firmly with the vets

            As for TJ and Murphy down the stretch, it's usually begging for failure, but whatever. I'll just pretend he's tanking, even though I suspect he thinks he's helping our chances of winning.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: JOb is firmly with the vets

              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
              That's disheartening to hear that on a night where, with warts certainly included, Tyler had a pretty damn nice night for a rookie, and the only thing Jim can do is NOT praise him at all, and in fact go on to focus on what's wrong with him. That's bull****, man. How about you build up your players a little bit in the press. Especially when you're completely soft on Troy Murphy's crap. Damn that does **** me off a little bit.
              A little bit? I think that's the angriest post I've ever seen from you. LOL

              -- Steve --

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: JOb is firmly with the vets

                Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
                Our developing players had quite the outing tonight. I don't see anything wrong in their share of playing time.
                I don't see anything wrong in the developing players playing time.

                My point was, he's gone with troy and murphy for our entire loss streak..so when the game is tied because of the rookies..let's go back to troy and murphy.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: JOb is firmly with the vets

                  Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                  I don't see anything wrong in the developing players playing time.

                  My point was, he's gone with troy and murphy for our entire loss streak..so when the game is tied because of the rookies..let's go back to troy and murphy.
                  I want to make sure you just mean tonight because Price started playing again, after a loooong absence due to injury.

                  Remember, Tyler was and probably still is on a pitch count, and tonight we saw that limit get lifted a little.

                  That and I don't think our rookie(s) have really alone impacted any of the tempo of any particular game, with the exception of maybe a certain lineup to where everyone meshes and we dig ourselves out of a big hole.
                  Last edited by duke dynamite; 12-10-2009, 12:24 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: JOb is firmly with the vets

                    Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
                    I want to make sure you just mean tonight because Price started playing again, after a loooong absence due to injury.

                    Remember, Tyler was and probably still is on a pitch count, and tonight we saw that limit get lifted a little.
                    Price was inactive due to Dunleavy being healthy, not because he was injured.

                    In previous games, JOB didn't have to go with Murphy and Ford, but chose to..but that'sbesides the point.

                    In this game, when things were so clearly going better with Price and Hans in the game, JOB went right back to Ford and Murphy. It doesn't make sense..and it's clearly a losing formula. So JOB stating that he's going to continue to do that fits into my definition of insanity.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: JOb is firmly with the vets

                      Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                      Price was inactive due to Dunleavy being healthy, not because he was injured.
                      AJ has actually been in a couple of games the past week or so with Dunleavy healthy, so I don't think that was it, plus I meant before that.
                      From what I remember hearing from the broadcasts was that AJ had been out due to some form of injury. Plus Watson hasn't been that bad. I don't see the harm in playing a backup.
                      Last edited by duke dynamite; 12-10-2009, 12:35 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: JOb is firmly with the vets

                        I was going to type up my thoughts about O'Brien & Bird tonight because I was going to issue sympathy and actually compliment O'Brien to a point.

                        I was going to issue sympathy because I was under the impression that Tyler had hit his min. limit and he could not bring him back.

                        I was going to compliment him for resisting the urge to play Rush at the center spot.

                        However now that I am seeing that he actually made the conscious choice to bench Tyler and play Turd Murphy (this is my new nickname for him because typing **** head on here will get blocked) I will refrain.

                        Murphy has to have photo's of him wearing a French Maid outfit feather dusting the Pacers locker room after a practice.

                        I don't even know what to say but I think this probably has caused me from being on the edge to taking a face first dive into the "Fire his @ss" end of the pool.


                        Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: JOb is firmly with the vets

                          Originally posted by Peck View Post

                          Murphy has to have photo's of him wearing a French Maid outfit feather dusting the Pacers locker room after a practice.
                          This has been my theory for awhile now. I actually think it might be more serious than that. I'm thinking maybe Murph has a video of Obie doing his best Buffalo Bill impersonation...

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: JOb is firmly with the vets

                            Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
                            AJ has actually been in a couple of games the past week or so with Dunleavy healthy, so I don't think that was it, plus I meant before that.
                            From what I remember hearing from the broadcasts was that AJ had been out due to some form of injury. Plus Watson hasn't been that bad. I don't see the harm in playing a backup.
                            According to the tv broadcast this is Price's first game in the past 11 games.


                            Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: JOb is firmly with the vets

                              Originally posted by Peck View Post
                              According to the tv broadcast this is Price's first game in the past 11 games.
                              And none of them were because of injury. None.
                              "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                              -Lance Stephenson

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: JOb is firmly with the vets

                                Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                                In the post-game show, Jim basically said the vets would be playing down the stretch. The way he said it left little doubt in my mind that this would not change all year. He was firm. He complained about Tyler's PnR defense...but didn't say nary a word about Aldridge lighting Murphy up like a Cuban cigar....and not a word about how well Tyler defended the post...and honestly didn't brag much at all about his nice game...dude said Tyler has a lot to learn. Hmmmm.

                                Why does he love Murphy so much? He also brags about Foster's great Plus-Minus last year...but says nary a word about Murphy's plus-minus...which is the absolute worst one on the team this year.

                                Honestly, some of you are probably confused by all of this. I have concluded that no one can possibly be this stupid. JOb is not a stupid man and I believe he is capable of being a good coach. Yes, you heard it correctly. I'll tell you what the problem really is. Actually, it has to be one of two things.

                                1) JOb thinks the 3 point shot is the most important thing in basketball...by a wide margin

                                OR

                                2) Murphy, TJ and Foster are playing big minutes because they have very big contracts. IOW, they are being played because of financial reasons.

                                Neither of these reasons will help you win games...which is why we have lost every game this season with Murphy except one.
                                To expand on the post game comments by JOB. A reporter commented on how Tyler played well and then asked why he did not come back in the game late. JOB said Tyler has a lot to learn and "I will only be playing veterans down the stretch of games". The tone was rather rude, defensive and condescending IMO, it was like I'll play whom I want to play regardless of how they are playing.


                                My question is and has been for a while, how do these young guys get experience down the stretch of games if they are not allowed or trusted to play in them. Price, Hans, Rush and Hibbert are final four tested players, I don't think they are going to crumble over the pressure of a regular season game in December.

                                The only reason Price got to play was Watson being out, unfortunately I'm not seeing this as new trend. I wouldn't care if we only win a few games the rest of the season if the young guys got to play a lot. Price, Tyler, McBob, Hibbert, Rush, Solo. I still consider Head a young guy, same age as Danny. I'm OK with Dun and D.Jones playing, they seem to play the right way and can provide leadership.

                                I like Watson but he's not part of the future, it would be hard to keep him off the court though, he just seems to get things done. Murphy, Foster and TJ I'd like to see have a seat. Even though Foster has done nothing wrong I'd like to see limited minutes from him.

                                Play the youth please, it might take us back a step, but in the long run we'll be 2 steps father along. Be damn the big contracts. Oklahoma City took there lumps last year playing mostly youth, and it's starting to pay off already.
                                "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X