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 Sollozzo View Post
    Does anyone else think the IU-UK game was way better when they had it in Indy and Louisville?

    I went to a few of them at the Dome and it was always such an enjoyable day. The city was decorated for Christmas and there were thousands of IU and UK fans everywhere. And it was classic how half the Dome was red and the other half blue. It would be great if they had it at Lucas and the new Yum Center and Louisville.

    I just thought it was great how fans of both schools were able to go to the game when it was a neutral site. It added to the intense atmosphere. It would have been enjoyable to see thousands of depressed UK fans after last night's result had that game been played at Lucas.
    No. Nothing beats a game at AH, as evidenced last night.

    Comment


    • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
      Please, how many times did we turn it over trying to force feed Zeller the ball? It's nice to say "Get Zeller the balL!" but against a team with the length UK has, you can't always do that. They cover the post entry pass better than any team in America.
      True, most of the time. However, there were at least three times down the stretch where Cody was wide-freaking-open under the basket. You have to lob those to him.

      Comment


      • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
        So many great photos tonight, so many great memories, one great shot. Christian Watford welcome to IU basketball immortality. I will never forget tonight, what an amazing win for IU and Hoosier Nation. So much hard work has gone into making this game a reality, but remember it doesn't stop here. The Movement is coming, we aren't going anywhere. Indiana Basketball is back, and I love it. For everyone that has stayed true during the past 3 years, let this soak in and then let's get ready for more nights like this. Unlike that school to our north, we need to get back to not focusing on individual victories for too long, we're in the business of hanging banners. Go Hoosiers.
        As pissed as I was that we blew that lead, nothing beats winning a game of that magnitude in that fashion. I haven't been that excited about an IU game since the 2002 Duke payback.

        Comment


        • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

          Wow did they ever try and give that game away, not posting up Zeller for the last 10mins was a boneheaded move. Especially with his defender having 4 fouls! He would have drawn double teams all night long at that point. Could have gotten some great looks passing to the open man. Instead they settled for contested jumpers. Is IU's offense normally that inept? They need to find a away to better to defend quick guards like Teague, or else their ceiling this year is extremely low.

          Great win at the end though, I was sure they were about to give it away, especially not getting off a shot the possession before. They ran that game winning play earlier in the game and UK had nothing for it then either.
          You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

          Comment


          • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

            Oh yeah Dickie V was talking about that UK player with the Uni-brow as a potential #1 draft pick? That kid was horrible.
            You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

            Comment


            • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

              Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
              Does anyone else think the IU-UK game was way better when they had it in Indy and Louisville?

              I went to a few of them at the Dome and it was always such an enjoyable day. The city was decorated for Christmas and there were thousands of IU and UK fans everywhere. And it was classic how half the Dome was red and the other half blue. It would be great if they had it at Lucas and the new Yum Center and Louisville.

              I just thought it was great how fans of both schools were able to go to the game when it was a neutral site. It added to the intense atmosphere. It would have been enjoyable to see thousands of depressed UK fans after last night's result had that game been played at Lucas.
              Not sure we would have won without AH.


              Comment


              • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

                Originally posted by Shade View Post
                True, most of the time. However, there were at least three times down the stretch where Cody was wide-freaking-open under the basket. You have to lob those to him.
                I just don't think anyone on our team is confident enough in their passing right now to consistently make those plays, JMO.


                Comment


                • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

                  Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                  Wow did they ever try and give that game away, not posting up Zeller for the last 10mins was a boneheaded move. Especially with his defender having 4 fouls! He would have drawn double teams all night long at that point. Could have gotten some great looks passing to the open man. Instead they settled for contested jumpers. Is IU's offense normally that inept? They need to find a away to better to defend quick guards like Teague, or else their ceiling this year is extremely low.

                  Great win at the end though, I was sure they were about to give it away, especially not getting off a shot the possession before. They ran that game winning play earlier in the game and UK had nothing for it then either.
                  If the ceiling is "Capable of beating the number 1 team in America" I guess I'll take that low ceiling.


                  Comment


                  • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

                    Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                    Oh yeah Dickie V was talking about that UK player with the Uni-brow as a potential #1 draft pick? That kid was horrible.
                    I've never bought into him. He was basically an unheard of recruit til Calipari decided to offer him to come to UK and he shot up the boards. He's a very good athlete, but he needs a whole lot of discipline on both ends of the court.


                    Comment


                    • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

                      For anyone looking for Don Fischer's call of the end:

                      "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                      "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                      Comment


                      • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

                        Originally posted by Sandman21 View Post
                        For anyone looking for Don Fischer's call of the end:

                        3 years of pent up excitement flowing forth in one commentator's call...chills.


                        Comment


                        • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

                          Incredible game and an incredible finish. Easily the biggest win of the crean era. The hoosiers have several ways they can score. This game shall go down as one of the biggest wins in the hall ever. And beating kentucky made it all the sweeter. This squad won't win every game however, I do think they can compete with anyone.
                          Next year's squad should be pretty damn interesting. We are pretty deep now. Deeper than any squad the hoosiers have had in many,many years. Next year's team will be even deeper still.
                          Exciting times again in hoosierland!

                          Comment


                          • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

                            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                            Not sure we would have won without AH.


                            Maybe not. I'm just saying that I think the rivalry had more flare when it was at a neutral site with the attendance split 50/50 between the fanbases.

                            The fact that you had thousands of IU and UK fans sitting in the same gym together was something else. Each side would try to be louder than the other. There was nothing like it in the 90's when both programs were on top. Being in downtown Indy before an IU/UK game and seeing all the blue and red sweatshirts was an awesome experience. I never went to one in Louisville, but the atmosphere there always looked the same too, except that Freedom Hall was obviously much smaller than the Dome. But you still had a split gym and that's what counted.

                            Yeah, Assembly Hall is special. But we play games there all year. IU/UK is a one of a kind rivalry and playing it on a neutral court met that it wasn't just like any other game. There was something to be said about having a massive RCA Dome split 50/50 between UK and IU fans. The fact that both fanbases had to be in the same gym added to the venom. Whoever won would be cheering in the concourses after the game while the other side was visibly irate and looked like they wanted to hit someone. That's a true rivalry right there. Now? It's just like any other home game, IE it's almost 100% IU fans (or 100% UK fans at Rupp). Beating UK at Assembly Hall is obviously a magical experience and last night will stay with us forever, but having no UK fans around to gloat to makes it a bit less intense than it would have been in the old days.

                            The IU-UK fans don't get to interact in the same gym anymore. That's what sucks about it. It hurts the rivalry.

                            It was awesome winning that at Assembly Hall, but can you imagine the intensity had that been at Lucas? Seeing the looks on the UK fans' faces would have been priceless. Now if you're a fan of the visiting team you are an outcast.
                            Last edited by Sollozzo; 12-11-2011, 01:48 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

                              I dunno, I had probably 5 UK fans around me in terms of, I could hear them being jackasses, and that's about all I can stomach of those a-holes.


                              Comment


                              • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

                                Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                                Watch Kentucky the next time they play, they are incredible at defending the post entry pass with their length. Zeller isn't strong enough...yet, to knock Davis back enough to create a good window for the pass.
                                I'm not going to stay on this very long, but there were a multitude of times CZ was open- wide open- and the ball never got to him. Just sayin'.

                                You seem to be quite chippy lately in multiple posts. Need some more sleep?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X