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

Postgame thread: Nothing left in the tank.

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

  • #76
    Re: Postgame thread: Nothing left in the tank.

    Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
    That was in fun, btw. Sometimes verses can be taken the wrong way.

    I'll save the fire and brimstone for some real goofs.
    It was taken in fun. No worries.

    Although I'm not sure you're going to find realer goofs.
    PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Postgame thread: Nothing left in the tank.

      Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
      Thanks.

      Well, your example, arguably legit, is for a last play of the game situation. But Solo played, like, the last five minutes of the game the other night.

      I don't think JOB ever deliberately "jacks Roy around." I think he does it because he has bad judgment. He comes up with gimmicks and weird matchups at the expense of bigger issues like player confidence and proper reward systems.

      I also think that he has more freedom to do it with someone like Roy, who is so darn good-natured. It's hard to watch someone get taken advantage of, imo.
      Let me couch this with : I do not think we could have won this game but we could have competed, or at the
      least let our young guys take it like men. Now to the post....

      100% agree with this. You can tell this is true in the statement by TJ Ford the other day about learning to trust the coach. I've been watching hoops pretty regularly for thirty years and I've never seen some of the things he does. How many teams sit their two best players at the same times in the first quarter. How many coaches force feed minutes to the journeyman, i.e (Flip,Earl,James,Solo),at the expense of developing young talent that has shown promise. Many times I'm baffled. My heart sank as I watched our (what I consider) three most valuable players sit with the Jazz up 6. What were the three he substituted going to do??? Was it for defense? Offense? Dunleavy, Posey,Solo. Millsap,Ak, Jefferson. Either way the game was over there. If there was success with the coaching madness maybe there wouldn't be as much frustration around here, although it didn't work like that for Rick, Jim has far more supporters than he ever had. Uh oh post is getting away from me
      Last edited by HOOPFANATIC; 12-02-2010, 11:36 AM.
      Protect the Promise!!!!

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Postgame thread: Nothing left in the tank.

        Originally posted by MyFavMartin View Post
        Looked like Millsap and Tyler were going to throw off their gloves at the end of the game.

        The Jazz's starting 5 has got to one of the best in the NBA, along with LA Lakers and Boston, this season. Chicago will be there too once Boozer is back.

        I said last night in the game thread that Hans should have been playing against Milsap and Jefferson. I don't understand Jimmy's thinking of not using him when he saw the Pacers were getting beat terribly on the boards, especially giving up 19 "O" rebs. Where was the in game adjustment to this Jimmy??

        Sorry, but Posey ain't stretchen nothing shooting 3-16 from the 3 the last # of games. He's 2 FT last night, and they were only his 3rd & 4th FT of the year. Hans shoots that many in a game.

        Can someone give me a site where I can find player stats? I'd like to see just how many 2's Posey has shot this year and how many 3's. It seems he shots nothing but 3's.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Postgame thread: Nothing left in the tank.

          Originally posted by MyFavMartin View Post
          To be fair, DRose, DW, and Westbrook are going to eat a lot of guys up. I think John Wall will be there soon as well, if not already.

          See what Rush can do to help out and stick DC on the 2 guard and try to make them work on the defensive end of the court. With JOB's motion offense, one might be able to make the defense's PG work more, running around the court and through picks.

          I didn't see Rush doing much to stop Williams last night. He had 12 pts and 10 asts before Santa could twitch his nose to go back up the chimney.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Postgame thread: Nothing left in the tank.

            Originally posted by maragin View Post
            Boy, one loss and that word makes its way into the postgame thread.

            Utah is a very good team. We're just starting to be relevant. This is a loss that I can live with.

            I, for one, never really expected to win this game, but the way the Pacers played the game overall IS what's upsetting.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Postgame thread: Nothing left in the tank.

              Originally posted by HOOPFANATIC View Post


              Plain and Simple is the fact that he can get to the line, which costs the other player fouls and gets easy baskets, you gotta exploit that.

              Jimmy apparently didn't get that memo.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Postgame thread: Nothing left in the tank.

                Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                I can't believe i'm saying this, but that whole get Hayward a shot at the end of the game as time expired was pretty low brow by Coach Sloan, and the Jazz. I'm glad he made it though. But if I was defending him in that situation I would have knocked him on his rear end.

                I can't either!

                I really would liked to have seen both Hayward and George have gotten to play against each other.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Postgame thread: Nothing left in the tank.

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                  I think your second paragraph is just wrong, I disagree with the premise that we are in anyway jacking Roy around - Jim has shown great confidence in Roy this season. i don't see any evidence that suggest otherwise.
                  I agree with this statement. It is not Jim "jacking Roy around". Jim just thinks he is a match up guru, meaning he likes to create miss matches and have irregular substitution patterns.

                  He has made Roy the focal point of the offense. The reason all PG's assists numbers go down upon arival here is the PG initates the offense by throwing the ball in the high post to Roy who makes the pass to the intial cutters, or makes his move to the basket. The offense truly does go through Roy

                  I think the only complaint I really have with Jim is if Possey is not hitting his shot, give Tyler/PG or (God help us) Dahanty a shot
                  Sittin on top of the world!

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Postgame thread: Nothing left in the tank.

                    Originally posted by RWB View Post
                    Totally disagree and here is why. This was not low brow by Sloan and in fact I believe his intentions were the very opposite.

                    First, Sloan has family that still live in southern Indiana and southern Illinois. Sloan grew up in the midwest and went to Evansville and played for the Purple Aces. Actually Sloan still owns a home across the border near Evansville.

                    Simply, the man (Sloan) knew Gordon has/had a pretty good following in the state and wanted to give the Indiana folks a shot at seeing one of their own.


                    Sloan came from the metropolis of McLeansboro to be exact.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Postgame thread: Nothing left in the tank.

                      Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                      I said last night in the game thread that Hans should have been playing against Milsap and Jefferson. I don't understand Jimmy's thinking of not using him when he saw the Pacers were getting beat terribly on the boards, especially giving up 19 "O" rebs. Where was the in game adjustment to this Jimmy??

                      Sorry, but Posey ain't stretchen nothing shooting 3-16 from the 3 the last # of games. He's 2 FT last night, and they were only his 3rd & 4th FT of the year. Hans shoots that many in a game.

                      Can someone give me a site where I can find player stats? I'd like to see just how many 2's Posey has shot this year and how many 3's. It seems he shots nothing but 3's.
                      Career Season Totals
                      Year Team G GS MIN FGM-A 3PM-A FTM-A OFF DEF REB AST STL BLK TO PF PTS
                      99-00 DEN 81 77 2,052 230-536 82-220 120-150 85 232 317 146 98 33 95 207 662
                      00-01 DEN 82 82 2,256 243-590 65-217 115-141 125 306 431 163 93 40 102 226 666
                      01-02 DEN 73 63 2,242 277-736 67-237 161-203 109 320 429 180 114 39 127 224 782
                      02-03 HOU 58 47 1,646 188-428 46-141 119-144 52 229 281 106 77 9 78 134 541
                      02-03 DEN 25 24 871 121-324 24-88 86-102 38 107 145 78 29 6 66 63 352
                      03-04 MEM 82 82 2,448 368-770 112-290 278-335 92 311 403 122 137 40 112 248 1,126
                      04-05 MEM 50 18 1,382 127-356 55-178 96-111 45 174 219 88 48 23 69 134 405
                      05-06 MIA 67 63 1,913 159-395 117-290 48-61 33 286 319 89 54 20 58 196 483
                      06-07 MIA 71 19 1,918 186-432 97-259 81-98 66 291 357 94 71 23 55 193 550
                      07-08 BOS 74 2 1,821 173-414 106-279 93-115 30 292 322 114 72 19 65 182 545
                      08-09 NOH 75 0 2,140 216-524 116-314 120-146 38 324 362 82 58 21 79 216 668
                      09-10 NOH 77 2 1,731 126-345 81-242 66-80 32 297 329 117 42 19 51 204 399
                      10-11 IND 16 0 306 30-91 26-81 4-4 3 43 46 13 12 1 9 37 90
                      Career -- 831 479 22,732 2,444-5,941 994-2,836 1,387-1,690 748 3,212 3,960 1,392 905 293 966 2,264 7,269


                      81 out of his 91 field goal attempts have been three point shots.


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

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Postgame thread: Nothing left in the tank.

                        Originally posted by RWB View Post
                        Totally disagree and here is why. This was not low brow by Sloan and in fact I believe his intentions were the very opposite.

                        First, Sloan has family that still live in southern Indiana and southern Illinois. Sloan grew up in the midwest and went to Evansville and played for the Purple Aces. Actually Sloan still owns a home across the border near Evansville.

                        Simply, the man (Sloan) knew Gordon has/had a pretty good following in the state and wanted to give the Indiana folks a shot at seeing one of their own.
                        So what your saying is he did the exact opposite of O'Brien who decided that the one home trip of the year for Paul George was going to be the one time that he decided to leave him in street clothes?


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

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Postgame thread: Nothing left in the tank.

                          Originally posted by Peck View Post
                          So what your saying is he did the exact opposite of O'Brien who decided that the one home trip of the year for Paul George was going to be the one time that he decided to leave him in street clothes?
                          That pissed me off at least dress the guy.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Postgame thread: Nothing left in the tank.

                            There's still the Clipper game. Which, if I recall correctly, is the team Paul grew up rooting for, by the way.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Postgame thread: Nothing left in the tank.

                              Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                              That pissed me off at least dress the guy.
                              But do we win in Cali if we don't dress Foster? Did you think about that? The value of dressing Foster with no intent of playing him is obviously immeasurable.
                              Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                              ------

                              "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                              -John Wooden

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Postgame thread: Nothing left in the tank.

                                Why are uyou assuming that they had no intention of playing Foster. Why would they dress him otherwise. if Solo hadn't played well, I'm sure Foster would have played

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X