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

Pacers/Cavaliers postgame thread

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

  • #76
    Re: Pacers/Cavaliers postgame thread

    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
    Wall looked ok as a rookie, but Irving looks a lot better to me, and Wall had a lot more hpye out of college.

    I thought the cavs defense was good tonight, the best defense against the pacers thus far
    Irving has better quicks and a nasty rock the ball/crossover plus lateral shimmy/fake that is going to get him past nearly all defenders with little issue. The shimmy is where he can keep the dribble in the same hand and just throw a shoulder shimmy to get a guy to bite and give him the driving lane. Then you add in the crossover. Yeesh. It's like Damon Stoudamire's first couple of seasons.

    Wall's thing is transitional SPEED, not quicks. He's more Kidd where if he gets the ball at the FT line or farther on a rebound or TO and it's a freaking track meet the other way.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Pacers/Cavaliers postgame thread

      So I'm looking up at the stats board, can't remember if it was late in the second quarter or at the beginning of the third, but most of our starters were back in the game. And I'm noticing that we have a whopping 2 assists from the group, which had logged some significant minutes to that point.

      I could bring up the fact that there were numerous times that I was hollering for D. Jones to pass the ball off, but I recall several instances when other Pacers players just tried to ram through 2 or 3 defenders when they could have easily passed the ball off to someone else for a short jumper.

      I'm not saying that we have a selfish group of players, but making that extra pass could have helped tonight. Seemed like we got a few extra offensive foul calls against us but could not tell if they were legit from where I was sitting.

      Defense is good, but we will still probably need to step it up as well as the offense, on the road against even the average teams we play, if we expect to win these types of games. I actually think that Cleveland may finish just under .500, but as someone else mentioned, it's really tough to figure out where we are just yet in this young season.

      At 3-0, these are not complaints, but merely my take on things.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Pacers/Cavaliers postgame thread

        6-15 shooting isnt exactly an amazing performance. he looked great for some stretches but lousy for others.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Pacers/Cavaliers postgame thread

          Originally posted by Sandman21 View Post

          Yeah, George doesn't want to be here. Hopefully tonight is the end of that whole discussion. He's coming out of his slump.
          Look at Dahntay in the background. He looks seriously moved by that exchange.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Pacers/Cavaliers postgame thread

            also i would love Dahntay if he didnt think he was Kobe. i think he'd be a nice piece if he wasnt such a cot damn black hole

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Pacers/Cavaliers postgame thread

              Originally posted by Sandman21 View Post

              Yeah, George doesn't want to be here. Hopefully tonight is the end of that whole discussion. He's coming out of his slump.
              Larry Bird in the background clapping. He likes what he sees out this team.
              You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Pacers/Cavaliers postgame thread

                Dahntay was #8 on the minute list tonight. That's not overuse considering we are thin on the wing. Anyway, you have to take the good with the bad since we didn't pick up Mayo or Crawford.

                The good being the W and the fact DJ was limited to 16 minutes...and made 4 points on 4 attempts. He's not terrible. He also plays with intensity. IMO, we are fortunate he's available and as a third stringer he will be awesome. We just need to add another good wing and DJ will be transformed into a great cheerleader and very capable 3rd string wing.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Pacers/Cavaliers postgame thread

                  I don't think dahnaty is a black hole because frank wants him to for a pretty simple reason. If he had good shot selections, he would actually be good and would get more time.

                  He gets to the basket, he can create a pull up, he shoots a high percentage, and he plays defense with tons of energy. Why wouldn't he play?
                  Last edited by Since86; 12-31-2011, 01:39 AM.
                  Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Pacers/Cavaliers postgame thread

                    Originally posted by cdash
                    Look at Dahntay in the background. He looks seriously moved by that exchange.
                    Well considering the Fieldhouse was ROCKING by that point, can you blame him?
                    "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


                    • #85
                      Re: Pacers/Cavaliers postgame thread

                      Roy has looked like he can score at will in the post this year. He's kept position much better than I can recall last year, just stronger in his core in general. He's been our best player this season by far, and that's with subpar entry passes into the post and light usage.

                      15-12.3 2 blocks 1.5 assists on 57 percent shooting from your center? I'll take it anyday. Roy is actually a pretty good rebounder now, although he was never as bad as people make it out to be. Super tall dudes typically aren't as great at it as they would seem to be.
                      Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Pacers/Cavaliers postgame thread

                        Originally posted by Scot Pollard View Post
                        I don't know why the attendance was low tonight. Where'd everyone go from the home opener is what I wanted to know? We were 2-0 from that point to tonight.

                        I spoke with a lady at the box office and she said after the New Year/the holiday season, attendance will probably be higher.
                        Um, first of all the opener has all the half season ticket holders both going, and I think all the mini-plans as well.

                        Then you sell tickets for 10-20-40 to the 3 levels. If it was always 40 to sit in the lower bowl they'd sell out a ton. They'd make less actual income, but it would be full.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Pacers/Cavaliers postgame thread

                          Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                          Well really, that's what I mean. I get annoyed at him. His faults are unacceptable. But I like him. I appreciate him, and see what Vogel probably sees. But I like him even more when he's doing that cheerleading thing on the bench.

                          And obviously I'd prefer Dahntay sit. The alternative to Dahntay playing is Price playing. Clearly I prefer the latter.
                          Yeah, sorry I was just going to edit my post after re-reading your original post (I first saw it quoted). I think we actually agree completely.

                          His shooting stinks, his shot selection stinks, but his aggressive drives to the rim does draw fouls which gets his PPS up a big.

                          If he was doing this when the regular offense broke down you'd appreciate him salvaging something. But when guys like Roy, DC, Danny or Hill go unnoticed with his tunnel vision for the rim it gets annoying.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by kester99 View Post
                            I agree that Dahntay seems to believe that 'shooting guard' means he's supposed to shoot when the ball comes to him.

                            But in his defense, he had the highest fg% of any of our wings last year, and the second highest Points-per-Shot on the team....so maybe this IS a guy you want to put the ball up??
                            He has mostly been backing up the SF position. darren,hill and DJ played a lot together. I agree he is to selfish on offense, just wanted to highlight this small lineup.

                            Sent from my Galaxy Nexus

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Pacers/Cavaliers postgame thread


                              Seems like Peck and Diamond Dave were impressed as well.
                              You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Pacers/Cavaliers postgame thread

                                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                                Yeah, sorry I was just going to edit my post after re-reading your original post (I first saw it quoted). I think we actually agree completely.

                                His shooting stinks, his shot selection stinks, but his aggressive drives to the rim does draw fouls which gets his PPS up a big.

                                If he was doing this when the regular offense broke down you'd appreciate him salvaging something. But when guys like Roy, DC, Danny or Hill go unnoticed with his tunnel vision for the rim it gets annoying.
                                This is true, but it's a good sign we are outgrowing the time when DJ was a good option. Yet, I tend to think we don't need a whipping boy on this team. I think all of these guys have something to add. DJ provides intensity and sometimes helps with momentum. He's not a poor defender either. But sure, he not only hurts the flow of the offense but once it's in his hands the offense is all DJ...and that's the downside.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X