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

Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

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

  • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

    Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
    Sooooo, cdash, you said you didn't feel good about this even if they won. How about now that they're up by 20? lol
    They sure scared me with their deer-in-headlights play in the first half. Silly mistakes, missing bunnies, Stevens' successfully luring Zeller out of the post and away from the rim on defense, etc. The difference between this year's team and the past few years is that this team didn't shrink in the second half. They answered, looked mature, confident. I loved it. So perhaps I spoke too soon about feeling bad about this game. I didn't think we would lower the boom on them like that.

    Comment


    • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

      Very nice second half. This team has improved so much! Hopefully they step up vs. NC State. Kentucky... well, that's too much to ask, but I bet we won't be intimidated anymore.
      The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

      Comment


      • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

        Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
        Very nice second half. This team has improved so much! Hopefully they step up vs. NC State. Kentucky... well, that's too much to ask, but I bet we won't be intimidated anymore.
        If we beat NC State, I am driving my *** 6 hours to go watch that UK game in person. I don't really think we have much of a chance at winning, but I just want to see how absolutely nuts Assembly Hall goes for that one if we are undefeated going into it.

        Comment


        • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

          Very excited for the first time in a while!

          (I went to IU from 2006-2010, graduated May '10, so I got one year of Kelvin Sampson/Eric Gordon, and then...)

          I'm not a fan of Christian Watford at all. 6-8 forward who plays like a bad 6-0 guard, takes way too many dribbles in the post, bad handles, selfish and too laid back to be an impact guy, etc.

          BUT I love the efforts by all the other guys! Even on nights when they're not getting anything to fall. Would have liked to see Elston play a little more aggressively early on, but pleasant surprise from Pritchard tonight, and Sheeladipo is going to be a force for the next few years (especially as the supporting cast continues to build).

          Defensive intensity is nuts this year. Can tell Crean really stressed it. Hardest they've played on D in years.

          Only major thing coming out of this game is I think Crean needs to strongly consider sitting Watford for Elston or Sheehey. Watford needs to get the message about being a supporting element, not a featured guy.

          Comment


          • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

            i was quite impressed with what i saw from both squads. this was a gritty, tough hustle type of game. plenty of diving for loose balls and such. butler is currently 3-3 however, if they can play that kind of defense on a regular basis, they will beat teams this year because of it.

            as for my Hoosiers, they were tested tonight by butler's defense and their solid shooting.
            iu has the depth advantage though and that always helps when you can maintain a strong offensive presence even when several regular starters are sitting down.

            Comment


            • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

              Watched it from BWW's in Arkansas. Anyone who's paid attention to scores know's IU looks better than Butler this year, but this did have the feel of a "symbolic" win. Looking forward to seeing them against NC State and UK.

              Comment


              • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

                Originally posted by cdash View Post
                I don't like Denari calling this game. First off, I was excited for Gus. Second, I follow him on Twitter and he is a Butler fanboy. Can't say I can tell during the game, but it's always on my mind.
                So why wasn't Gus calling the game? During the IU/PU bucket game they were promoing the IU v Butler matchup and promoting Gus Johnson with the call....
                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


                • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

                  I'll just come out and say it, Butler plays ugly, ugly junkyard basketball and it's what makes them so successful. They are not the basketball purist school they portray themselves to be, but they have a gameplan and they stick to it. Based on pure talent that game should have never been close, but because of the way Butler plays they always hang around much longer than they should and if you don't step on their necks around the 10 minute mark of the second half they are going to give you serious problems.

                  Credit to the young Hoosiers for doing that, but after really watching Butler now for a couple years, particularly the past year or so after Hayward went pro, I can see why people struggle so much with them. They play junkyard basketball, and I'm not trying to make that an insult because it clearly works and keeps teams off balance. I'm very happy with this game, I don't know if Butler will make the tournament, but if they do I have no doubt they will be a tough out and IU showed some serious mental toughness tonight to finish off Butler when the Bulldogs gave them the window to do so. That is a HUGE step.

                  The first half was ugly and the first 10 minutes of the second wasn't much better, but when Butler started to crack credit to Hulls, Sheehey, Oladipo, and Zeller for smelling blood and ripping out their hearts. I thought that was just a great sign. Last year's team would have completely missed that chance.

                  Our big work between now and NC State should be on the boards, way too many offensive rebounds given up tonight is my biggest complaint. Also, need to come up with some more efficient sets for Watford and VJIII IMO.
                  Last edited by Trader Joe; 11-28-2011, 01:49 AM.


                  Comment


                  • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

                    Also, it was pretty clear Butler came out to intimidate us tonight with their physical play, particularly against Zeller, another big A+ to him for responding not letting it take him out of his game and to keep plugging along. ONly once did he really float outside and take a bad jump shot, he kept pounding and working inside for position even when he wasn't always being rewarded with good passes, and it finally all came together in beautiful motion when Sheehey nailed the no look assist to Zeller. His constant effort in the post makes up for a lot of the issues we have in terms of Hulls being the only guy who can really consistently throw an entry pass.


                    Comment


                    • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

                      Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
                      For IU...

                      PG defense has allowed costly penetration at times
                      Defensive boards need work
                      Need a bit more ball movement to be successful against Butler's style of D
                      For all the questions Crean has gotten, I thought his adjustments at half time and through out the second half addressed many of these issues.

                      We brought more help D on Hopkins. Pritchard and Elston and Sheehey got more minutes when Watford was struggling on the boards, and the ball movement definitely picked up. I think Crean has to get some credit for how the game closed out.


                      Comment


                      • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

                        Originally posted by cdash View Post
                        He's not this bad all the time, but this is the type of game he plays: selfish. He has no athleticism or lift, he doesn't play within the team, and frequently does stupid things with the ball. I won't be shedding any tears when he graduates.
                        Maybe, but like or not, he's got that goofy streakiness to his game, and I think we're decent enough to hide it for the most part. As bizarre as it sounds, we know Watford can have those games where he uses his size advantage perfectly and he can't be stopped. I expect he'll win us a game or two this year with a couple of those games. Yes he'll probably frustrate us a lot of the time, but with Elston's improvement and Zeller's arrival, Crean has the ability to pull the string on his minutes in games where he just doesn't have it, which is what we sort of saw in the second half tonight. Lots of Pritchard, Elston, and even Sheehey at the 4.


                        Comment


                        • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

                          Originally posted by cdash View Post
                          They sure scared me with their deer-in-headlights play in the first half. Silly mistakes, missing bunnies, Stevens' successfully luring Zeller out of the post and away from the rim on defense, etc. The difference between this year's team and the past few years is that this team didn't shrink in the second half. They answered, looked mature, confident. I loved it. So perhaps I spoke too soon about feeling bad about this game. I didn't think we would lower the boom on them like that.
                          Just call it the Zeller and Hulls effect. Two proven winners who have won at every single level they have ever played at, against the highest level of competition. Let's not forget Hulls captained undefeated Bloomington South team through 4A in Indiana whcih is pretty ridiculous. I saw those B-South teams play and they were never the most talented teams in 4A, but the backcourt of Hulls and Dee Davis (now a freshman at Xavier) was a delight to watch.

                          When Hulls and Zeller saw Butler lifting on effort at around the 10 minute mark even thought it was just for a second, their games changed immediately, they smelled the chance to land a knockout punch and they did it. When you combine that with the motors that Oladipo and Sheehey are playing with, it makes for a very tough combination for a team like Butler to match.


                          Comment


                          • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

                            Also, 75 points against Butler, regardless of how you get there, is nothing to sneeze at. The rotate as well as any team in the country. IMO, this years Butler team has the talent of a Gardner Webb or something similar. Hopkins is a good player, but there isn't a whole lot of raw talent on there other than that. I mean Stigall is one of their leading scorers and the guy just doesn't have anything in his arsenal other than catch and shoot. I mean heck, for all the impressive stuff Hopkins did tonight, he was still incredibly reckless with the ball, 7 turnovers.

                            Stevens tonight once again showed me why he is such a good coach. Don't get me wrong I thought Crean stood his ground and made the right adjustments, but Butler's defensive rotations are really phenomenal.

                            EDIT: One last thing, Zeller absolutely schooled Andrew Smith. Schooled him.
                            Last edited by Trader Joe; 11-28-2011, 02:08 AM.


                            Comment


                            • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

                              One more thought, for those of you who are expecting Yogi to come in and just flat out remove Jordan Hulls from the ball handling equation and make him just a shooter, I wouldn't count on it. 38 minutes tonight from Jordy, and I think Crean absolutely loves the kid, to him he is Diener 2.0 and Crean LOVED Diener.


                              Not saying they cna't play together, but I am saying that I think Hulls will be handling the ball just much as Yogi when they are both on the court.


                              Comment


                              • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

                                Originally posted by Bball View Post
                                So why wasn't Gus calling the game? During the IU/PU bucket game they were promoing the IU v Butler matchup and promoting Gus Johnson with the call....
                                They said something about travel difficulties. Apparently getting him from Oklahoma City to Bloomington was a challenge.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X