Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

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

  • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
    What worries me is that Temple is an extremely sloppy undisciplined offensive team that takes terrible shots........and yet they almost won. Their physical defense completely MANHANDLED us today. Now we showed a lot of poise down the stretch today with our backs against the wall and found a way to win the game, but I'm worried about how terrible our offense looks. We've had trouble with physical defenses all season. When you punch us in the face a bit, we look bad.
    Yes, that is IU's achilles heel. They will have to rely on their own defense to win games in this tournament which they did today. That being said, the refs allowed Temple to get away with a ton of contact. If they had called a tighter game the outcome would have been much more in IU's favor.
    Last edited by hoosierguy; 03-24-2013, 06:44 PM.

    Comment


    • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

      I'm going to look at it this way - it could be a mental victory more than anything since we finally managed to grind out a win playing against a quintessential grind it out team. But, no question, play like that against Syracuse and get blown out.

      The thing I don't get is it just looks like they just weren't even that in to it mentally/emotionally for most of the game. At times, it looks like they're almost it's just agony for them to go out there and stay upbeat and focused.
      I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

      -Emiliano Zapata

      Comment


      • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

        Originally posted by hoosierguy View Post
        That isn't true. Crean can and has won big games at IU but that is different than contending for a TITLE more often than not.

        Bball said Crean can't win big games to which I say he already has. Winning the conference title outright and advancing to consecutive Sweet Sixteens involves winning several big games. Winning a national championship is a different animal altogether.
        Crean's system needs to win, and it will win. I don't have a doubt about that. BUT when the game's get tougher and the system is having problems I have absolutely no confidence that Crean will pull the right strings to eek out a win in any one game. In most big game matchups I have my doubts that Crean will be the bench equal of the opposing team. If the system is clicking, it probably won't matter. If the other team can disrupt the system I don't know that IU has a counter punch they can go to with Crean doing something differently... instead of maddenly inconsistent rotations and cooling off his own hot hands.

        So yeah... Crean's teams will be well-stocked and over-run several teams including some big games and win their share and then some of regular season games. BUT they will have a much harder time taking that thru the BTT or the NCAA tournament. So it depends on what your definition of 'big' games happens to be. Honestly, they lost a home game to clinch the Big Ten regular season championship outright and I'm still not sure how they won that MI game to clinch it anyway. So yeah, it's possible for the system to win some big games. It's possible the system could win the NCAA... I'm just not convinced that the team will ever have the players and depth to go all the way on the system alone without needing some chess moves from the bench. And when those moves are needed I'm not sure Crean won't be his own worst enemy.
        Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

        ------

        "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

        -John Wooden

        Comment


        • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

          Originally posted by Bball View Post
          the big games, the important games, will always be a struggle with him at the helm. Will the Hoosier Nation be satisfied with that?
          Yeah, when they really needed that road win at OSU, and when they played MSU in the Breslin Center where they haven't won in like 20 years, and when they had to win on the road on senior day at UM on national TV to win the conference championship,

          yeah, those big games, those important games, they were just too much of a struggle

          give me a break

          Sometimes I want to throw something when he does mass substitutions for guys playing well, always with 11-13 min left in a half, but for the most part I'm a happy camper with Tom Crean running the show.
          The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

          Comment


          • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

            the CWat swat:

            The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

            Comment


            • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

              Wat Swat for the win.

              I also am a lot more upbeat about this win than a lot of you. We played at their pace and won. 10-0 run to close out the half. Finally won a gritty game. Took Wyatt out of the game. There are a lot of positives going forward. I tweeted (not that anyone cares, this is just a brag) before the tourney that Temple would be our toughest game in our region. We are going to Roll 'Cuse and Miami or whoever it may be.

              Comment


              • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

                The interwebs say: IU/Syracuse will tip at approximately 9:45EDT on Thursday night.

                Network: CBS
                Announcers: Lundquist and Raftery
                Last edited by obnoxiousmodesty; 03-24-2013, 11:18 PM.
                Take me out to the black, tell 'em I ain't coming back. Burn the land and boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me.

                Comment


                • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

                  Christian Watford is legend.


                  Comment


                  • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

                    Comment


                    • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

                      sweet 16 schedule:

                      Marquette #3 E vs. Miami (Fla.) #2 E
                      Verizon Center (Washington, D.C.)
                      Thursday, March 28 7:15 pm CBS

                      Arizona #6 W vs. Ohio St. #2 W
                      Staples Center (Los Angeles, CA)
                      Thursday, March 28 7:47 pm TBS

                      Syracuse #4 E vs. Indiana #1 E
                      Verizon Center (Washington, D.C.)
                      Thursday, March 28 9:45 pm CBS

                      La Salle #13 vs. Wichita St. #9 W
                      Staples Center (Los Angeles, CA)
                      Thursday, March 28 10:17 pm TBS

                      Oregon #12 MW vs. Louisville #1 MW
                      Lucas Oil Stadium (Indianapolis, Ind.)
                      Friday, March 29 7:15 pm CBS

                      Michigan #4 S vs. Kansas #1 S
                      Cowboys Stadium (Arlington, TX)
                      Friday, March 29 7:37 pm TBS

                      Michigan St. #3 MW vs. Duke #2 MW
                      Lucas Oil Stadium (Indianapolis, Ind.)
                      Friday, March 29 9:45 pm CBS

                      FGCU #15 S vs. Florida #3 S
                      Cowboys Stadium (Arlington, TX)
                      Friday, March 29 10:07 pm TBS
                      The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                      Comment


                      • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

                        Not surprisingly, Ron Patterson will be rooting for Syracuse when they play Indiana in the Sweet 16.

                        http://www.syracuse.com/orangebasket...ecruit_ro.html

                        Ron Patterson was supposed to be playing for the Indiana Hoosiers this Thursday in the NCAA Tournament’s East Region semifinal game against Syracuse.

                        Instead, Patterson will be cheering for the Orange and sending text messages to his would-be Indiana teammates.

                        “I’ll be cheering for Syracuse,’’ Patterson said in a telephone interview on Monday. “Absolutely. I don’t like Indiana.’’

                        Those words carry meaning as Patterson would seem to be the ultimate Hoosier.

                        Patterson, a 6-foot-3 guard out of Indianapolis, originally committed to Indiana, turning down offers from Illinois, Ohio State, Minnesota and DePaul. He had broken scoring records at Broad Ripple High School, which counts current New York Knicks coach Mike Woodson and current Indiana Pacer George Hill among its alumni. Patterson had been named to Indianapolis’ all-city team.

                        He had played the Indiana Elite AAU team along with fellow Indiana recruits Jeremy Hollowell, Yogi Ferrell, Hanner Mosquera-Perea and Peter Jurkin.

                        And then Patterson’s dream of being a Hoosier turned into a nightmare. Although he had qualified under the NCAA’s admission standards, Patterson had failed to meet Indiana’s enrollment requirements. He enrolled in a summer faculty sponsorship program at Indiana, taking two classes.

                        “He got a C and a C-minus in his summer school classes,’’ Chris Hawkins, Patterson’s AAU coach, said. “That fell below the mandatory 2.0 that you have to have for this faculty sponsor program.’’

                        Patterson appealed to IU’s faculty sponsorship board. The board denied the appeal.
                        The decision was met with some skepticism. Indiana had 14 players on scholarship, one over the NCAA’s limit. Some, including Patterson and his parents, believe Indiana used a technicality to cut Patterson.

                        “I feel like they made a bad decision,’’ Patterson said. “I didn’t like it. It was an excuse. They needed to get rid of someone.’’

                        Patterson was suddenly without a scholarship and it was very late in the recruiting game. A few schools, including Xavier and Purdue, had scholarships available. But Patterson wanted to avoid making a rushed decision.

                        “I wanted to weigh my options out more,’’ he said.

                        So Patterson enrolled at Brewster Academy in Wolfeboro, N.H. The New England prep school has produced a number of high-profile players including Syracuse’s C.J. Fair and Michigan freshman Mitch McGary.

                        “It felt like (new) all over again,’’ Patterson said. “I didn’t think I’d hear from as many schools as I did.’’

                        Coaches flock to Brewster each fall to watch workouts. Patterson quickly received offers from Marquette, Villanova, Providence, Boston College, Miami, SMU, Kansas State, Texas A&M and Illinois. Then Syracuse assistant Gerry McNamara took a trip to Brewster, mainly to check out a 6-9 junior named Chris McCullough.

                        “He impressed coach McNamara,’’ Hawkins said. “Then coach (Jim) Boeheim came up for another workout.’’

                        Patterson took one official visit to Xavier. The following weekend, he visited Syracuse and committed to the Orange.

                        “They didn’t recruit me in high school, but I’ve always liked Syracuse,’’ Patterson said. “It shows that sometimes things happen for a reason.’’

                        Patterson enjoyed a successful season at Brewster. The Bobcats went 32-6 for the season. Patterson hit the game-winning shot to beat St. Thomas More in the NEPSAC championship game. He was named the NEPSAC Player of the Year.

                        Throughout the past year, he stayed in touch with Hollowell, who averaged 2.9 points in 9.9 minutes per game for the Hoosiers.

                        “We text and call each other with weekly updates,’’ said Patterson. But there’s been no communication so far this week. “I haven’t talked to him since I‘ve known Syracuse would be playing them.’’

                        Patterson said he does plan to talk to his would-be Indiana teammate sometime this week.

                        “Probably a little trash-talk,’’ Patterson said. “I’ll tell him to lace his shoes up real tight.’’

                        Comment


                        • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

                          Boohoo, my grades weren't good enough so I got the axe.

                          Whether we had to get rid of someone or not, not keeping your grades up when you knew that might be the case makes him look even dumber.
                          Last edited by Trader Joe; 03-26-2013, 11:33 AM.


                          Comment


                          • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

                            Talk about an article fishing for a storyline, Jesus. Who gives a **** about who a 17 year old wants to win? Reminds me of the Purdue people that play up the Crean "I've been thinking about you a whole lot" thing when it was sent to a kid from Aurora, CO he was in contact with the week after the theater shooting. Don't get me started on the ****ing idiots that think Crean kissing his son on the lips just before they tipped the Temple game like it's...something, who the hell knows.

                            Honestly, I don't really like the majority of college fanbases lol. But I like the media far less.
                            Last edited by Heisenberg; 03-26-2013, 11:34 AM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

                              How do you get a C- in a summer class?
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

                                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                                How do you get a C- in a summer class?
                                I just like how entitled he is. "Yeah I didn't get the grades to meet the clearly defined requirements, but they should have kept me anyway!"


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X