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

4/17/2012 Game Thread #62: Pacers Vs. Sixers

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


REMINDER: Per PD policy, please do not share a link to, describe how to search for, request a link to, or request a PM about streaming video of a NBA game that is not coming directly through the NBA. Not even in a "wink-wink, nudge-nudge, know-what-I-mean" round-about sort of way. Thank you



Season Records: (W-L)
39-22
(Away: 18-14)
31-29
(Home: 19-13)
Upcoming Games:
Apr 19
Apr 21
Apr 23
Apr 25
Apr 28/29
vs vs vs vs
7:00 pm
7:00 pm
7:00 pm
7:00 pm
TBD pm


Projected Starting Lineup:
C
PF
SF
SG
PG
HIBBERT
WEST
GRANGER
GEORGE
HILL
Projected Starting Lineup:
C
PF
SF
SG
PG
BRAND
YOUNG
IGUODALA
MEEKS
HOLIDAY


Pacers
Darren Collison, sore groin, out

Sixers



Minimally Relevant Video:
Or if you prefer...


Semi-Relevant Video:
Uncle Reggie's debut


Eight Points, Nine Seconds Preview Review:
Jonathan Auping: Love isn’t in the Air (or on the floor)

  • Kevin Love sat out of tonight’s game after taking an inadvertent
    elbow to the head from JaVale McGee against the Nuggets last
    Thursday. Maybe he should have taken some of those pills that
    make the Pacers so tough
    .

  • If playoff teams are supposed to use the last few weeks of the
    season to stay sharp and execute the offensive sets that they
    are most likely to rely on in the playoffs then the Pacers are
    taking full advantage.

  • This week in “Former Pacers, Where are They Now?”: Brad
    Miller will be retiring at season’s end to focus on his hunting TV
    show. I’m really starting to get sick of all these NBA players
    that think they know everything about hunting. Way to
    encourage the stereotype, Brad.

  • Leandro Barbosa’s three point shooting is unpredictable to say
    the least. Looked pretty brutal in this one, but 50% three point
    shooting in the last nine games coming into the game for
    Leandro the Barbarian (shout out to reader, Jordan, for the solid
    nickname recommendation).

  • Speaking of Barbosa, the possibility of LB playing a similar role
    in the playoffs to the one that J.J. Barea played for the Dallas
    Mavericks last year is tempting to hope for. They obviously
    aren’t the same player, but the instant offense and energy off
    the bench is undeniable.

  • I haven’t seen Brad Miller shoot this much since dove hunting
    season.

  • I really take this sports-writing business seriously, but I’ll admit
    that I stopped watching the game for a few minutes in the second
    quarter when the Pacers had a 23 point lead in order to watch
    footage of the Tupac hologram performance at Coachella last
    weekend. I hear Malcolm Lee scored four points while I was gone.
    I stand by my decision.

  • As if it needed pointing out, everyone on this Pacers squad is
    playing with a very high level of confidence right now.

  • Well maybe not everyone. Darren Collison looked rusty. But a
    point guard controversy might be the only thing that can mess up
    such great chemistry. Let’s just assume DC will be back to playing
    at a high level by next game.

  • The play at the end of the second quarter where the Pacers got
    four offensive rebounds punctuated with George Hill slamming it
    home off the rim
    epitomized hustle and energy. The Pacers had
    questionable effort at times of this hectic schedule, but I think it’s
    safe to say they weathered the storm. If the effort and execution
    are there in the playoffs, it will take a whole lot to send this team
    home early.
CONTINUE READING AT 8p9s


Depressed Fan

It's not that the Sixers have collectively cashed in this season that bothers
me. It's not that they look like an NBADL team out there that keeps me up
at night. I can deal with bad teams. I've dealt with them in the past. There's
always been a reason to watch. The thing that makes this season so
unbelievably unbearable is that they had to start out so well. They had to
plant that seed of false hope, only to fall to pieces in front of our eyes. I'm
sure it's not the case, but when you watch them get beat up by the Magic
without Dwight, you can't help but say to yourself, "They don't even care."

Here's your rotation chart. Note the team played pretty well in the first
eight minutes, only allowing 14 points. Then Spencer Hawes came in and
Orlando scored 47 points over the next 16 minutes all with Hawes in the
middle:


This game was an abomination from early on. Jodie Meeks and Spencer
Hawes kept the Sixers from having about a 15-point lead in the first quarter,
then led the charge to a complete defensive collapse in the second quarter.
The details are immaterial at this point, this team isn't sinking, they've sunk.
And they know it.

Doug Collins has officially taken the "master of panic" mantle from Stan Van
Gundy, and he's wringing the life out of it. With a back-to-back-to-back on
the schedule, Collins cut Nikola Vucevic out of his rotation and went with a
7-man rotation, plus 32 minutes of Spencer Hawes. No one got rest. The
short-handed Magic didn't have to deal with fresh legs at any point. Collins
managed to coach tonight as if it was the 7th game of the Finals and put the
team in an even worse spot heading into the next two games. That's quite
an accomplishment.

The players have seemingly packed it in. The coach is clearly panicking. The
only question is whether there are enough games left in the season for the
Sixers to fall completely out of the playoff picture.

READ MORE FROM DEPRESSED FAN
This is the darkest timeline.

  • #2
    Re: 4/17/2012 Game Thread #62: Pacers Vs. Sixers

    This is a game that I suspect the 76'ers desperately want to win. At least for those on that team who haven't still checked out (which seems like something that team is legitimately dealing with ATM).

    As such, this is a great test game for us. If we can win this game easily, I predict we start seeing some press hype.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 4/17/2012 Game Thread #62: Pacers Vs. Sixers

      Which one of you said this...

      George Hill has started the last few games and been really good. The problem is our bench is terrible now without Hill. Darren Collison doesn't help it. We'd be better off just cutting him from the roster.
      I'm sorry, but that's beyond stupid.
      "I have never taken the high road, but I tell other people to ’cause then there’s more room for me on the low road."

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 4/17/2012 Game Thread #62: Pacers Vs. Sixers

        Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
        Officials: M. Callahan, D. Collins, D. Richardson
        Their coach is one of the refs?

        Last edited by AesopRockOn; 04-17-2012, 05:19 PM.
        You Got The Tony!!!!!!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: 4/17/2012 Game Thread #62: Pacers Vs. Sixers

          I really want this one.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: 4/17/2012 Game Thread #62: Pacers Vs. Sixers

            Originally posted by TOP View Post
            Which one of you said this...



            I'm sorry, but that's beyond stupid.
            I don't think that this particular RealGM poster is posting in the Digest. I would have noticed him. He makes vnzla81 sound like a DC fanboy.

            Anyway, about the game now.

            I hope that we continue to play convincingly like we did last night. I also hope that the Sixers are going to miss their jumpers tonight. When they are missing their jumpers, they can be dealt with. When their jumpers are on, they are still kinda dangerous.
            Originally posted by IrishPacer
            Empty vessels make the most noise.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: 4/17/2012 Game Thread #62: Pacers Vs. Sixers

              What's the over/under on missed Paul George dunks?

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: 4/17/2012 Game Thread #62: Pacers Vs. Sixers

                Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                I really want this one.
                I think we got this one Philly is just not that good.
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: 4/17/2012 Game Thread #62: Pacers Vs. Sixers

                  Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                  . . . I hope that we continue to play convincingly like we did last night. I also hope that the Sixers are going to miss their jumpers tonight. When they are missing their jumpers, they can be dealt with. When their jumpers are on, they are still kinda dangerous.
                  that description of the sixer's offense reminded me so much of the pacer teams of the last few years. if we shoot well, then we've got a chance. boy am i glad those days are over. it really is nice to have a team that can win without shooting well.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: 4/17/2012 Game Thread #62: Pacers Vs. Sixers

                    I'm going to call this one a "heat check" game.

                    They've been playing very well, but they've been doing it against lesser teams. Philly is falling apart, but I think we'll get a good effort out of them tonight, and this will be a test of our focus. If they come in overconfident, they could be in trouble. If they come in a little tired (they shouldn't), they could be in trouble.

                    I think this is a good litmus test for how we're going to handle the playoffs, and I hope the team approaches it with that mindset.

                    All that said, I fully expect a win tonight.
                    It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: 4/17/2012 Game Thread #62: Pacers Vs. Sixers

                      They got the gold uni's on tonight.....F**K!
                      Larry Bird and Ryan Grigson- wasting the talents of Paul George and Andrew Luck

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: 4/17/2012 Game Thread #62: Pacers Vs. Sixers

                        i'd prefer to win and not lose

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: 4/17/2012 Game Thread #62: Pacers Vs. Sixers

                          Originally posted by Magic P View Post
                          What's the over/under on missed Paul George dunks?
                          I'm gonna stick it at an even 2.
                          Time for a new sig.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: 4/17/2012 Game Thread #62: Pacers Vs. Sixers

                            Let's go Pacers!
                            "I have never taken the high road, but I tell other people to ’cause then there’s more room for me on the low road."

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: 4/17/2012 Game Thread #62: Pacers Vs. Sixers

                              What was that Jodie Meeks shot?
                              Originally posted by IrishPacer
                              Empty vessels make the most noise.

                              Comment

                              • Working...
                                X