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

12/14/2009 Game Thread #22: Pacers at Magic

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

  • Re: 12/14/2009 Game Thread #22: Pacers at Magic

    Originally posted by dcpacersfan View Post
    That is a symptom of relying on jump shooting to win games.
    And not playing Roy at crunch time.
    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

    Comment


    • Re: 12/14/2009 Game Thread #22: Pacers at Magic

      Roy should have come back in the game. Actually, JOB should have left him out there. He had just hit that nice hook on Howard and was in the position to make a difference. Dwight can't score on Roy at will like he can everyone else.

      I mean, it's 60/40 he'll score or get fouled against Roy and about 90 percent with everyone else.
      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

      Comment


      • Re: 12/14/2009 Game Thread #22: Pacers at Magic

        Originally posted by cdash View Post
        Did you see those travels? Not every pro makes those, sorry. I'm not acting like it's something terrible, just making an observation. People are really uptight about Tyler.
        The first one was obvious but the second was one where he shuffled his feet like EVERY pro does... Examples .. Granger and Murphy both do it and thats just off the top of my head.

        Heck LBJ takes 4 steps about 3 times a game but he is never called for it. That kind of traveling only happens when a kid doesnt know how to dribble.

        Comment


        • Re: 12/14/2009 Game Thread #22: Pacers at Magic

          I don't think Hansbrough was too bad. His shooting stunk again (.333) but he was solid everywhere else.

          His shooting was very streaky; 0-4 to start the game, followed by 4-4, and finished with another 0-4. Hopefully that type of streakiness wears off in due time.

          Comment


          • Re: 12/14/2009 Game Thread #22: Pacers at Magic

            brandon rush takes the worse player in my opinion
            poor free throw shooting
            came up short in the clutch late in the 4th
            very very disappointed in the man
            its looking like he is gonna be a decent bench player at most, man i had high hopes for him

            Comment


            • Re: 12/14/2009 Game Thread #22: Pacers at Magic

              Originally posted by plutarch View Post
              brandon rush takes the worse player in my opinion
              poor free throw shooting
              came up short in the clutch late in the 4th
              very very disappointed in the man
              its looking like he is gonna be a decent bench player at most, man i had high hopes for him
              Brandon missed those 2 clutch threes at the end. And then we saw with Vince and Rashard why they make the big bucks and Brandon never will. Clutchness. But besides that I am happy with Brandon, he just should not be expected to make the key baskets in crunch time and if we had Danny out there, he wouldn't have had that problem.

              He is not Vince Carter or Rashard Lewis on offense. He is what he is, a good role player. One thing I noticed is that he would run through all these screens and be moving quite well, only to catch the ball, not take the shot and end up passing it to the guy next to him on the wing. There was one time it worked out good as there was a mismatch with Jr after Brandon passed him the ball. I don't think that was by design though. But why have our SG run ragged through screens if he is not even going to try to take the shot? Not only not take the shot but completely halt the offense, they might as well have just dribbled up the ball and passed it to someone standing on the wing to go 1on1. Same result....

              Comment


              • Re: 12/14/2009 Game Thread #22: Pacers at Magic

                Originally posted by Trophy View Post
                Three Trophies of the Game

                Bronze: T.J. Ford
                He scored 13 points and handled the opposing PG fairly well. He also finished with 6 rebounds and 7 assists. He handled the ball pretty well, but he was getting a little sloppy in the second half. Despite the loss, this is the T.J. that played well and the one that we want in a PG.

                Silver: Troy Murphy
                In this first quarter he was playing like an all-star. He finished with 9 in the first quarter, but struggled scoring wise the rest of the game finishing with 14 points and no double-double. He pulled down just 6 rebounds. It certainly wasn't easy when trying to get rebounds with Howard in the paint in position for an offensive dunk. He defended Lewis very well the majority of the game. He's definitly coming around and we all will soon appreciate his work again.

                Gold: Mike Dunleavy
                He finished with another good scoring performance and it looks like he's just about back to his old self. IMO, he's probably still better to have coming off the bench when Danny returns, but for now, I don't see why he shouldn't start at SF with either Dahntay or Brandon at the starting SG spot. Mike finished with 26 points (season high) and was 10-19 field goal shooting. He was perfect at the free throw line (5-5). He pulled down 4 defensive rebounds and passed 2 assists. It's great to have him back healthy and playing well again and hopefully it continues.

                Tonight was a tough loss, but the Bobcats aren't much better than we are so it's a must win Wednesday night back at home.
                I do like your giving out awards, I think it is a cool thing to do each game, but I seldom agree with you! I suppose if you consider the first quarter as important as the last quarter it all makes sense. But TJ and Murph lose for crappy play at the end IMO... They lost us the game, along with Brandon missing some key shots.

                I hope you aren't just taking the text polls they do on the television as your awards!

                I do, however, agree with you about Jr. he definately played great.

                Really no awards should be giving for losing, but it is a fun thing to do.

                Comment


                • Re: 12/14/2009 Game Thread #22: Pacers at Magic

                  As long as Rush is still underachieving and Danny is injured, MDJ can start until he just can't do it anymore.

                  Comment


                  • Re: 12/14/2009 Game Thread #22: Pacers at Magic

                    Originally posted by Psycho T View Post
                    The first one was obvious but the second was one where he shuffled his feet like EVERY pro does... Examples .. Granger and Murphy both do it and thats just off the top of my head.

                    Heck LBJ takes 4 steps about 3 times a game but he is never called for it. That kind of traveling only happens when a kid doesnt know how to dribble.
                    They were both obvious. They were both the same really. There's a difference between "shuffling your feet" (which every pro does do) and "taking steps". Tyler took steps. Regardless, it's not a big deal either way. A turnover is a turnover.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 12/14/2009 Game Thread #22: Pacers at Magic

                      All in all I thought it was a good game IMHO. It is too bad we lost the game, but we competed all the way to the end of the game even though we made some poor decisions. Boy it was nice to see MDJ out there playing significant minutes and doing so well. If you would have asked me at the start of the season if we would have had a chance at beating Orlando without Danny I would have said you were crazy.

                      I am not gonna hate on Brandon too much. I always step back and remember this kid is in only his second season and still has a lot to learn about being a professional basketball player. Some think he is an all star caliber player while others believe he will be no better than a small role player riding the pine most of the game. I linger in the middle thinking the future for Brandon will be a good 2 guard with good defense and scoring when the opportunity arises.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 12/14/2009 Game Thread #22: Pacers at Magic

                        Originally posted by Thingfish View Post
                        Brandon missed those 2 clutch threes at the end. And then we saw with Vince and Rashard why they make the big bucks and Brandon never will. Clutchness. But besides that I am happy with Brandon, he just should not be expected to make the key baskets in crunch time and if we had Danny out there, he wouldn't have had that problem.

                        He is not Vince Carter or Rashard Lewis on offense. He is what he is, a good role player. One thing I noticed is that he would run through all these screens and be moving quite well, only to catch the ball, not take the shot and end up passing it to the guy next to him on the wing. There was one time it worked out good as there was a mismatch with Jr after Brandon passed him the ball. I don't think that was by design though. But why have our SG run ragged through screens if he is not even going to try to take the shot? Not only not take the shot but completely halt the offense, they might as well have just dribbled up the ball and passed it to someone standing on the wing to go 1on1. Same result....
                        You're kidding me right? Did you not see his bad stroke bad release point which seemed to be due to be do with a rush of anxiety. He also blew the coverage on Lewis and let him hit the game changing 3. If we let him play through this we will develop a star. If you are a sticking a fork in Brandon ever being as good as Vince and Lewis are right now then you would have easily said the same about Granger at this point in his career.

                        Give the kid time, he will make you eat your crow one day. I'd bet the farm on it.

                        Anyways please, all I want for Christmas is to see a lineup of Hibbert Hansboro Dunleavy Rush Price to get a chance. All players we've drafted, with our new found farm system. Please, oh please. A lot of people underestimate every one of these guys.

                        Rush was so open he had to shoot those and coaches little mind game he's been playing with our young guys has hindered their growth process and confidence. Price would have probably been able to just lay in the ball in that situation or draw the foul because he seems almost as quick and a lot more stronger than Ford. Ford did play good tonight though.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 12/14/2009 Game Thread #22: Pacers at Magic

                          I think Rush is a prime candidate to be one of those players that play high or intoxicated. He's so talented but he never uses it and just does not seem to care one bit on the court.

                          Comment


                          • Re: 12/14/2009 Game Thread #22: Pacers at Magic

                            Originally posted by JGray View Post
                            I think Rush is a prime candidate to be one of those players that play high or intoxicated. He's so talented but he never uses it and just does not seem to care one bit on the court.
                            Haha, woah.

                            Comment


                            • Re: 12/14/2009 Game Thread #22: Pacers at Magic

                              I understand the frustration of losing a game we could have won, on the bright side, we were 5 minutes away from beating the 1st or 2nd best team in the East without Granger!

                              I personally wanted to see how the team responded and stacked up after the 2 wins, and I was pleasantly surprise. Of course I'm upset that we were so close, and a couple baskets here or there from weathering the storm, but I was proud of the effort, and I'm actually getting excited about the team again

                              Comment


                              • Re: 12/14/2009 Game Thread #22: Pacers at Magic

                                Originally posted by WetBob View Post
                                Haha, woah.
                                Well, a former NBA player says that there are players that are high or drunk playing every night, and Rush strikes me as one of those guys. Drugs/Alcohol lower your reaction time and make you "care" less. If you ever look at him on the court, his emotions are completely blank and he also seems to airball easy shots which also could point to drunkeness. I'm just throwing this thought out there, it doesn't seem too far-fetched.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X