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

Odd Thoughts: Round 2 Game 1 2012 NBA Playoffs

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

  • #16
    Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 2 Game 1 2012 NBA Playoffs

    The highlight of the game for me was hearing Hubie Brown analyze our team for an entire game. Not to suggest he knows our team better than most of us who watch every game, but it was great to hear his take throughout the game.

    The question seems to be this. Do we go to West and Hibbert even more in game two? Or do we get Danny involved from the start.

    I would go with the first option. I want most plays to go through Roy and David West - that doesn't mean they have to shoot, but their matchups are the best for us. Sorry Danny you probably won't have a great scoring series, we need your defense in this series. Danny you will get your shots within the offensive framework after West or Hibbert get doubled.

    Danny better not jack up anymore horrible shots late in the game that lead directly to a heat fastbreak. - That was childish, inexcusable and maddening

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 2 Game 1 2012 NBA Playoffs

      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
      The question seems to be this. Do we go to West and Hibbert even more in game two? Or do we get Danny involved from the start.
      I don't think the team needs to get Granger more involved, I think Granger needs to get Granger more involved. It was absolutely maddening to see him just hang out at the three point line and not have any movement at all. Almost like he was a spectator during the game.

      Matter of fact, someone should go to the arena this morning and see if he is still there, standing at the three point line.

      Danny better not jack up anymore horrible shots late in the game that lead directly to a heat fastbreak. - That was childish, inexcusable and maddening
      I think it is to a point where people may as well just expect this from him. It is what he does, period.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 2 Game 1 2012 NBA Playoffs

        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
        Danny better not jack up anymore horrible shots late in the game that lead directly to a heat fastbreak. - That was childish, inexcusable and maddening
        it gives me horrible flashbacks from the past 3 years whenever DG takes those 3pt shots with a defender right infront of him.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 2 Game 1 2012 NBA Playoffs

          Ashley Adamson had tweeted this after the game:

          Right now Danny Granger is following same script for his post game performance as his on court performance. #noshow
          Granger is just becoming more and more difficult to support. Reverting to horrendous shot selection tendencies, half-assing it on defense, not even being accountable for his own bad performances. The addition of so much talent around him should have seen his overall game IMPROVE, but no, he has regressed this season.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 2 Game 1 2012 NBA Playoffs

            Stern just needs to come out and make all defensive contact a foul. There isn't anything a defender can do when an offensive player goes into the lane seeking out contact before they put a shot up. You either let them get all the way to the rim without any type of defensive effort, or you allow them to get into your body and the refs call it a foul. Either way, you're screwed.

            For those of you who say that the refs are just human and their ****** calls are just human error, you'd think that they'd be a little more conscientious of not making the stupidest calls possible. When you're biasness is called out for the entire world to see, and you then come in and officiate a game like that, I think we can conclude that they didn't like being called out and gave the big "Eff you Frank."
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 2 Game 1 2012 NBA Playoffs

              Originally posted by bellisimo View Post
              it gives me horrible flashbacks from the past 3 years whenever DG takes those 3pt shots with a defender right infront of him.
              I don't have a problem if the shot clock is winding down, or if the ball has first gone inside to Roy or David, but when danny shoots quickly the rest of the players are out of position to get back on defense and that was why the Heat got a couple of easy fastbreaks late in the game. Giving up layups like that late will surely cause the pacers to lose any close game.

              The key to this whole series is to make the Heat play 5-on-5.

              I can deal with the Pacers losing this series, the Heat are just better. But I want and expect the Pacers to play the right way

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 2 Game 1 2012 NBA Playoffs

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                The highlight of the game for me was hearing Hubie Brown analyze our team for an entire game. Not to suggest he knows our team better than most of us who watch every game, but it was great to hear his take throughout the game.
                For as good as Hubie is, Mike Turico was just as bad IMHO. I really wish I could get paid to be the play-by-play guy for the NBA, have my own radio show, and still not know a freaking thing about one of the last 8 teams in the playoffs. Keep up the good work Mike.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 2 Game 1 2012 NBA Playoffs

                  I think the whole game was basically a tale of two halves. In the first half I felt like the defense was as good as it could possibly be, particularly given that anything physical was a foul. I felt like the team was trying to go inside and then take some outside shots to keep the defense honest. Two more quarters of that kind of play would win the game.

                  But then came the egg of the second half. We suddenly couldn't find the paint with a GPS. We got tentative on defense to try to keep from fouling out (though letting guys actually foul out I thought was a much better move than a certain previous coach would have made, benching players with 4 or 5 fouls to save them for the next game or whatever). Our jump shooting inconsistency came home to roost. What free throws we DID get missed (something I have said was critical).

                  All that said, I think the team put up a very good showing for national TV. We didn't get it done down the stretch but I think most basketball fans understand that really is the difference between a perennial playoff team and a team of players in the second round for the first time.

                  I went away from this game with some confidence that we'll take one or two, which is both what I predicted and is very comparable to what we did against the Bulls.

                  Just remember Shepard's Prayer, guys, and keep focused the entire series.
                  BillS

                  A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                  Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 2 Game 1 2012 NBA Playoffs

                    Originally posted by Dr. Hibbert View Post
                    not even being accountable for his own bad performances.
                    Not sure how being unavailable for the press implies he isn't taking responsibility for his own bad performance. I could just as easily argue that it means he took it completely to heart and was too embarrassed to face the media.
                    BillS

                    A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                    Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 2 Game 1 2012 NBA Playoffs

                      Who is dressed that we aren't using? Pendergraph? We are 3 deep at PF; West, Hansbrough and Amundson (who is a PF, don't tell me he's a center). Dress Fez in The Enforcer's place and use him to foul LeBoshWade. "Hack-A-Baby" 2.0.
                      Senior at the University of Louisville.
                      Greenfield ---> The Ville

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 2 Game 1 2012 NBA Playoffs

                        I don't know if Danny is still thinking he's playing on the Satan-era Pacers and he needs to carry them or what, but he's becoming a chucker. We don't need nor do we want a chucker. Defense is far more important, especially on Bronbron.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 2 Game 1 2012 NBA Playoffs

                          I felt the same way about Fez. It felt like having a bigger body in there would have been an advantage when Roy was off the floor. If he was dressed, I would have put him in, just to see what effect he had. From what little I saw of him this season, he seems like the kind of guy that can hold his ground and get a rebound, just by being big and tall. I think that kind of player would be effective against Turiaf and Haslem.

                          One thing I question is Vogel's decision to shorten the bench. I know the conventional wisdom says you play your stars more minutes in the playoffs. But one of our teams major advantages was it's depth. We could wear other teams down because our guys were playing less minutes. But when we shorten our bench we give that advantage away.

                          I'd give Dahntay his minutes back. And encourage him to shoot the corner 3. He was our best 3 point shooter during the year. A solid defensive player with a reliable outside shot can't hurt you in the playoffs. Especially with Paul George struggling.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 2 Game 1 2012 NBA Playoffs

                            Granger and PG has been commented to death, so I'll throw out another observation- BIRD. I have watched Bird's expressions all thru the playoffs. His expressions in this game obviously weren't those of joy. He was seeing things he didn't like. Things he feels shouldn't be happening at this point... THE PLAYOFFS.

                            Bird's goal for the season was to get into the 2nd round of the playoffs which has happened. Bird like all the rest of us would like more, but I don't see it happening. I would love for it to happen, but I have to agree with UB the Heat is a better team and hopefully the Pacers can win a game or 2 while pushing the Heat in the series. Out of this, the Pacers open up the eyes of the casual fans who will start returning to watch the Pacers next season.

                            I stated during the 1st round I can see a number of new faces as reserves next season with some of the following players being gone.

                            Barbosa
                            Lou
                            Price
                            Tyler
                            Dahntay

                            There are some nice things about Barbosa, but he's not close to being that scorer off the bench Bird was looking for.

                            Lou is what Lou is. I like Lou, but unfortunately he's not the answer as the b/u Center. Nice 5th big when needed.

                            Price isn't necessary to this team, and if Bird's pet, Stephenson, is going to have a chance to be the player Bird feels he can be then Price needs to be gone.

                            Tyler has some nice attributes, but if he can't muscle and hit a close to the basket slop shot he isn't very effective when his shots are constantly blocked. He's not overly productive as a rebounder for a PF. When Tyler's on he can produce, but that doesn't happen that often. Pacers need an upgrade at b/u PF.

                            Dahntay is in a PO year, and I wouldn't be surprised to see him opt out after the nice reg season he had. I could see him getting picked up by another contender for more money with the last nice contract he'll get as a player.

                            I can see Bird upgrading the 2nd unit in order to be more competitive next year. I don't see Bird being satisfied with the bench he presently has. JMOAA

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 2 Game 1 2012 NBA Playoffs

                              People need to get over this idea that we have some secret weapon in Fez. There is a reason this guy was not dressed and could barely make a team this season. Yes he has some potential but he is extremely raw. This is the playoffs, this is no time to be playing around throwing your 15th man in the game to see if he can somehow miraculously compete with all-star cailber players. He is simply not talented enough to be a rotational player in the playoffs right now.

                              I see this mentality with fans of every team: the belief that you have some hidden gem at the end of the bench that if the coach would just be smart enough to give a chance then he would be the difference maker. I think it is just a psychological coping mechanism or something that allows fans to keep hope. That is the only reason I can think of why every single team's fans have at least one player they think of in this light.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 2 Game 1 2012 NBA Playoffs

                                Originally posted by BillS View Post
                                Not sure how being unavailable for the press implies he isn't taking responsibility for his own bad performance. I could just as easily argue that it means he took it completely to heart and was too embarrassed to face the media.
                                How is "being too embarrassed to face the media," any different than being unwilling to account for his **** performance?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X