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

Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

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

  • #16
    Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

    Originally posted by Jon Theodore View Post
    The bulls are a much better team than us...end of story. We have played beyond our talent level this entire series. To me when a team plays beyond their talent level...that is the sign of a good coach.

    Not saying we are not talented...because we are. But we are NOT Bulls level talented.
    Vogel did a great job with what he had.

    He employed a bunch of strategies and personnel that Thibodeau simply didn't see coming. The Bulls almost looked unprepared. He took some chances and went deep into his bench, which is the opposite of what coaches normally do in the playoffs. Took guts to do that. Credit to him for that.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

      Originally posted by d_c View Post
      It's not as if Tom Thibodeau drew up some creative, unpredictable play for his team's game winning possession. He gave the ball to Rose and told everyone else to get out of the way.
      And he would of been out coached if Rose was guarded by George. No telling if Rose would of hit it over George, but you go with what has bothered Rose the most and that is George.

      I like Vogel as a coach, I'm just annoyed by that defensive play. Why would you put Jones on Rose? You can put Rush on Korver just as easily.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

        Originally posted by beast23 View Post
        Price is not the problem. For the most part, we played this game possession by possession and put a lot of emphasis on getting the most out of every single possession.

        There were a few possessions that did not seem to include a good play. I will admit that Price was involved in a couple of those. I simply do not like quarter-ending plays that a ruled by a guard pounding the ball to consume the rest of the clock, only to call his own number in attempting to get the last shot. I've seen our PGs guilty of this the entire season. If you want to fault Price for this, then so be it. But it's not just Price, all of our PGs do the same thing.
        Perhaps that's what Vogel wants at the end of the quarter. They do it so much (every time..) That you'd think, if he didn't want it, then he would have had them stop doing it. I hate ISOs.

        AJ needs to get back to a PG mentality. He was never this shot happy, and who knows why he's doing it now. (as in last two seasons. Granted, apparently you were yelled at and yanked out if you didn't shoot quickly with O'brien..) Perhaps that's what his role is, but he was always such a good floor general, that it would be a shame if it is what his role has become.

        That said, a backup point guard does not make or break you. And despite the missed shots, he certainly didn't hurt the team tonight in terms of "momentum" both times he was in our team went on a run.
        Last edited by Sookie; 04-21-2011, 10:13 PM.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

          Originally posted by Dr. Hibbert View Post
          Never said he did. But this has been a problem for the Pacers for a while. Not a first-time occurrence.
          And it's not an unusual occurrence for teams that don't have the go to difference maker down the stretch.

          Defenses clamp down on clutch possessions, no matter who you play against. The guys who can make the game winning plays in those situations are the true superstars.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

            I'm tired of this ****. DC builds up some momentum he goes to the bench, Price comes in and it takes him 20 seconds to set up the offense, no one is open = Price takes dumb shot. There is no way he is better than TJ.

            Everygame I get scared when I see DC checking out to go get some rest cause I know we are about to lose all momentum. We need a back up PG over the summer.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

              Who is gonna play instead of Price? Ford? Do you guys remember how TJ Ford plays? Dribble into the lane and turn it over. Has Price been good? Hell no. He is looking for his shot way too much. But TJ isn't the answer and DC can't play the whole game. Blame Price for Price's play, not Vogel.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                Originally posted by Powww View Post
                I'm tired of this ****. DC builds up some momentum he goes to the bench, Price comes in and it takes him 20 seconds to set up the offense, no one is open = Price takes dumb shot. There is no way he is better than TJ.

                Everygame I get scared when I see DC checking out to go get some rest cause I know we are about to lose all momentum. We need a back up PG over the summer.
                *sigh*

                it may feel like that, but it's just not the case.

                Price led the point guards in +/- by a significant margin this season. That isn't an indication of good or bad play.

                What it is an indication of, is what happens, score wise, in the game, when a certain player comes in. So whether you think Price single handedly "loses the momentum" or not, doesn't matter. +/- shows he doesn't.

                Now, what I think you are seeing..is that Dahntay Jones and AJ run an UGLY offense, it's as ugly as the Dun/Josh offense is pretty. But it's actually functioned pretty well this season.

                Did Price play good tonight. Heck no. He was out of control and forcing shots. But he certainly didn't lose momentum for the team. He was a +/- 0. We didn't gain or lose momentum with him in. (Actually, that's not true..we did both.)

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                  What do you expect?

                  Someone speaking out of their *** about something that isn't true.

                  Vogel is a damn good coach.

                  I don't feel a topic like this is worth going into much more detail.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                    What a stupid thread, Vogel has done a damn good job and I hope he is named the full time Head Coach.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                      Yes, AJ has not played well in the post season, but DC is not all full strength either. Would you rather see TJ or heaven forbid Lance out there? He has us being competitive against one of the best teams in basketball right now. I was hoping we would pull off one game in this series but I am happy we are competing and making the bulls work their butts off for every win. Our guys really played good defense tonight but in the end was taken by the better team with an MVP player. Hopefully this experience will fuel the fire for our young guys to bust their humps in the offseason and get better. I see Hibbert, PG, DC and even Lance (if he can get it together) making good improvement this offseason.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                        Originally posted by jeffg-body View Post
                        Yes, AJ has not played well in the post season, but DC is not all full strength either. Would you rather see TJ or heaven forbid Lance out there? He has us being competitive against one of the best teams in basketball right now. I was hoping we would pull off one game in this series but I am happy we are competing and making the bulls work their butts off for every win. Our guys really played good defense tonight but in the end was taken by the better team with an MVP player. Hopefully this experience will fuel the fire for our young guys to bust their humps in the offseason and get better. I see Hibbert, PG, DC and even Lance (if he can get it together) making good improvement this offseason.
                        Lance? No thanks.

                        TJ instead of AJ? Yes please.

                        AJ is a good point guard. I've seen him do it.

                        It's not his fault we're losing, but he's certainly been, IMO, one of the major reasons. I'd rather see TJ who at least runs the offense, as opposed to the AJ Price "Dribble for 20 seconds, get stuck behind the free throw line, and shoot a really bad 3 pointer" offense.
                        Stop quoting people I have on ignore!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                          The Pacers lost because they could not hit enough shots. George was 1 or 2 for 9.
                          I am not faulting him much because of his great defense and rebounding and goodness he is a young rookie. Others on the team did not step up either. Tyler has shot very poorly the past 2 games. These are young players really learning what the play-offs are all about. Vogel has done a superb job.
                          {o,o}
                          |)__)
                          -"-"-

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                            So uh...I have a feeling me and the board won't be getting along soon again.

                            Well, it was fun while it lasted.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                              For those who have not paid attention and it must be a lot of you.

                              TJ has played his way on the bench every season he has been here, he earned it.

                              I'm done with him, I'll be happy if he never plays another second as a Pacer.
                              "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                                I'm not upset with Vogel but I have to admit: I am not a big believer in AJ Price.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X