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

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

  • #16
    Re: Postgame thread

    Here are some of my thoughts from the other thread...

    Roy, IMO, is already in his own head, which is his typical MO now. And seeing West and Hansbrough out there together and being effective couldn't have helped his shaky confidence. I'm seriously concerned about Roy moving forward. How will he respond if we end up going with West and Hans in late game situations? Yes they aren't as tall as Roy, but they are both much stronger and can hold their position in the post much better on both ends of the court.

    I was very impressed with West. He seems to be extremely confident in that knee and was very active. I loved when he got the ball deep and used a quick elbow plunge into Noah's kidney to get the space he needed for the layup. That is a solid move. One that I think Hans will eventually add to his arsenal, and it would be great if he could teach Roy how to clear space like that, but unfortunately I just don't think Roy gets that. West is going to be a very good player for us this year, he looks in great shape and is clearly a confident vet out there.
    Also, Paul George is intriguing the hell out of me, that past two games, if you had just given me a quick question of his "impact" without looking at the box score, I would have guessed mediocre to minimal. But yet, 17 and 10 & 14 and 6. That is NOT Brandon Rush folks. That is an aggressive player who just isn't quite on his game yet. Very intrigued by those two stat lines, if he had been on his game either of those nights we'd probably be talking about him averaging 20 ppg in the two preseason games, yet he put up decent stats and had an impact without me really taking notice. That is a very good sign IMO. Still needs to work on his damn jump shot though.
    Also, to be fair to Granger, this has been his MO in the preseason for years, maybe it's a shooter finding his rhythm, I dunno, but I'm not concerned. When we last saw him, he gave us a pretty good effort against the Bulls in the playoffs when he was being blanketed by their whole defense.
    Last edited by Trader Joe; 12-21-2011, 10:14 AM.


    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Postgame thread

      Also, is there any doubt now why Bird wanted Rajon Rondo? Our point guard play has been pitiful. DC is, well, at this point he just looks like DC, which is to say a really good backup PG or a starter on an 8 seed. Hill is a 2 guard that really needs to play at an up tempo style, which is how San Antonio played when he was on the court. And Lance, while the talent might be there, is so raw that it is painful to watch him at times. Then there's Price, who honestly impressed the hell out of me in the 2 minutes or he got on the court last night.

      We NEED a quality PG, if Rondo or one of the big name PGs becomes available again, we need to be right at the front of the line.

      I will say Hill, had a couple passes that weren't caught that probably were easy buckets, so maybe that will change.
      Last edited by Trader Joe; 12-21-2011, 10:12 AM.


      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Postgame thread

        I don't have a problem with Granger cruising through the preseason. Heck, Reggie would cruise through the regular season in the 90's when our team was talented and could easily beat inferior teams.

        Granger will be 29 at the end of this season. He's not exactly a "young" dude anymore. He knows it's a condensed season and wants to make sure he has plenty of energy for it, so he's not going to go all out in a preseason game.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Postgame thread

          Originally posted by Tom White View Post
          Why would we want to blame JOB for Danny's lack of effort on D?
          It's simple.

          Granger's emergence as a serious NBA player coincided with JOB becoming coach. JOB's emphasis was always offense, 3 point shooting, and a fast pace. He gave lip service to defense but his actions betrayed the rhetoric. He considered Troy Murphy a great player.

          This was preached to Granger every day for many years. It clearly had an effect.
          Last edited by McKeyFan; 12-21-2011, 10:17 AM.
          "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Postgame thread

            Originally posted by Winner View Post
            I disagree. Once he gets some players he can pass to and know they are going to score the ball, he will look much better on offense. Also, he drives well and doesn't lose control of the ball very often. He is a three point shot away from being the point guard we desperately need.
            Is this really an excuse anymore? Granger, Hansbrough, West, George Hill.... all these guys have shown they can score in a variety of ways.
            Last edited by Trader Joe; 12-21-2011, 10:19 AM.


            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Postgame thread

              Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
              The disappointing duo of the game for me was Hibbert and Collison. Players at the 2 most important positions in the game of BB. Unless those 2 get their games together, it's gonna be a long long shortened season.
              Long way to go for this to be a trend, but yes, yes, and yes to your point - 2 essential position where we have to establish more quality an consistency. We may end up with barely mediocre. Hoping for major strides from these two, otherwise it's going to be a struggle.

              I'd also like to throw DG into discussion here even though his position is far from essential compared to C/PG. Where is the effort/passion/commitment? This guy was our captain last year and he was already fading. The guy should be at least an above average defender, yet if he doesn't impact the game by scoring, he's is not contributing anyplace else. That has to change.
              I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

              -Emiliano Zapata

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Postgame thread

                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                a PG needs to get all of the engine parts involved in moving. Otherwise, the engine is hit and miss while sputtering. I want a PASS 1st PG who plays great "D", and can score when necessary in order to keep the opposition honest. This sure isn't a description of Collison by any means.
                I think Lance provides everything you are asking for . . . except for great D. Nevertheless, he can provide decent defense because of his height and length.
                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Postgame thread

                  JT, absolutely agree on the Collison points. The one thing about it though, is that we got great value in that trade. I think Collison is a backup PG. I've thought that since we have had him. He can be a hell of a change of pace PG coming in for spot minutes.

                  We match up poorly with the Bulls. Their best two aspects are their front court toughness and DRose. Our weakest aspects are front court toughness and terrible PG play.

                  I think we are going to struggle with giving guys enough playing time to make them happy. It could be a bad recipe for the locker room this year. Hill should start, but won't. Hansborough won't start, but I think West might be the better fit with Collison, for now.

                  Again, we have some easier early games, although on the road. I hope we win a few of those games and get our confidence and chemistry going. That will be the key to our season is how do we do getting out of the gate.
                  "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Postgame thread

                    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                    Roy, IMO, is already in his own head, which is his typical MO now. And seeing West and Hansbrough out there together and being effective couldn't have helped his shaky confidence. I'm seriously concerned about Roy moving forward. How will he respond if we end up going with West and Hans in late game situations?
                    Roy better be used to the idea of not being on the court at the end of games. If it's not West and Hansbrough, it will be Foster.
                    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                    Also, Paul George is intriguing the hell out of me,
                    There was one play when West (I think) lobbed a pass to Paul George under the basket for a nice smooth score. I swear I thought it was Hibbert. PG is so tall he might be able to play some frontcourt minutes.
                    Last edited by McKeyFan; 12-21-2011, 10:26 AM.
                    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Postgame thread

                      I really liked that the Pacers went toe to toe with the Bulls in rebounding. I also liked how often they were able to get to the line.
                      The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
                      http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
                      RSS Feed
                      Subscribe via iTunes

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Postgame thread

                        Originally posted by FlavaDave View Post
                        I really liked that the Pacers went toe to toe with the Bulls in rebounding. I also liked how often they were able to get to the line.
                        This is a big point that no one has mentioned! That is the biggest team positive. The Bulls were the best rebounding team in the NBA last year and we held our own. Mark Boyle tweeted about this very thing.

                        Even Roy did a decent job on the boards. 8 rebounds. That was easily our strongest team suit.


                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Postgame thread

                          I worry that some of you are drawing conclusions after two preseason games, after a lockout, with a new staff, against a team that plays great D, won 62 games last year, obviously has the same staff, and the roster is basically the same other than IMPROVING the 2-guard spot. Some pretty strong statements floating around.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Postgame thread

                            One takeaway I had was our tentativeness. It seemed like there were a lot of times when we would make a pass, be in a position to either shoot or attempt to score, but the player would hesitate because the first thing he would do is look for another pass. That's a big factor, too.

                            I like the theory of preaching that to this team because if they can figure things out and get comfortable with making those extra passes it will make the offense much more potent, but the problem is that until or unless that happens, it swings the other way and makes the offense even worse.

                            Let's see how this develops as we move along and get more reps while playing together against some less than stellar defenses. I think this might get a lot better.

                            Last thing I'll mention, too, is that I think some of them are still getting in full NBA shape. I was noticing that misses were coming up short what felt like quite a bit. Sometimes pretty flat, too. This comes to mind with Roy and Hill in particular.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Postgame thread

                              A lot of these problems can be traced back to the lockout. The early easy schedule is a huge blessing.
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Postgame thread

                                Originally posted by Ownagedood View Post
                                Hansbrough and West have been very impressive in my mind. If Tyler can consistantly play like he is right now, he will easily win the 6th man award.
                                If Hansbrough keeps playing like he did in the two preseason games, he will be the team's best player, right? I will be very interested to see if he can develop consistency in playing at close to this level, and, if he does, how well the Pacers will do in getting him enough minutes.
                                Last edited by Freddie fan; 12-21-2011, 11:09 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X