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/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

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

  • #31
    Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

    Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
    Yep. I was one of those haters but I've been really impressed these last couple games. Really happy to see him finding his role with the team.
    Let's hope he can continue to be useful once he goes back to the bench - because that is ultimately the role we need him to produce in.
    "Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better." - Albert Camus

    "Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well." - Voltaire

    "Everyone's values are defined by what they will tolerate when it is done to others." - William Greider

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

      Originally posted by dohman View Post
      I hate to be THAT GUY. But Danny is almost expendable. PG and Lance is a great defensive tandem. We are going to need a PF soon so it might be worth it to take a chance on trading for a future elite young PF.
      Danny is not expendable. Without him, our offense blows. We're 28th in the league. That offense will not get it done against the top teams.

      If we want to go deep in the playoffs, we need Danny.

      Lance and PG will be a great tandem in the future. I believe that Lance's offensive game will grow. I believe that PG can improve even more.

      But for the time being, we need Danny.
      Originally posted by IrishPacer
      Empty vessels make the most noise.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

        Originally posted by dohman View Post
        I hate to be THAT GUY. But Danny is almost expendable. PG and Lance is a great defensive tandem. We are going to need a PF soon so it might be worth it to take a chance on trading for a future elite young PF.
        lol oh nonono don't be that guy! I wanna see Granger alongside George and see how Lance does off the bench with DJ.
        Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

          Danny still has quite a few years in him. Only thing I'm ever worried about as possibly adding a little size, shotblocking and defense in place of our single 10m expiring contract.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

            Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
            and big Roy is yet again little Roy
            That's a pretty good way of summarizing it.

            And folks, including his teammates, need to quit excusing/consoling/cajoling him. It gets old. He can leave his sensitivity off the court and out of the locker room. It's time to put on his big boy pants and grow a pair.

            And by the way, he should actually learn how to shoot the hook. It should be released high above/behind the head where it can and should be a very accurate shot, not from an extended position out in front of the body, where it is more like a prayer being sent towards a dart board.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

              Hopefully a few good games can get DJ going. But I think his good play is likely a product of playing with the better players (as he's not a score first PG.) Ben on the other hand was terrible. And he was playing against 3rd stringers and D-League players.

              Lance is so lost on offense it's hilarious. It's a typical young player move to just stand in a corner at the three point line when you don't know what to do. I think for right now he's better off if he plays more like Tyler (as in, on instinct..not as in not passing and missing layups). It's hard to make the transition to more of a fundamentally sound/team game, but he's doing a good job. This just wasn't one of his better games.

              Paul George...good lord. The funny thing about the game tonight was, as good as he played, his game was filled with mistakes that a more polished player wouldn't make. He's really got the potential to be special. And it is looking more and more like he'll end up the best player in his draft class.

              Roy looked better, but offensively he's not good. That being said, I watched Dwight Howard and Pau Gasol struggle like Roy does last night. And they do it pretty often themselves. It makes me think that perhaps big men just don't shoot as well as we expect them too. (Sort of like how we expect all players to make all of their layups.) Roy, when healthy, is much better offensively than he's shown; but I wonder if people do expect a little much from him.

              DWest played like he was Daddy Hansbrough tonight. Tyler is Tyler..the rest of the bench, I'm not sure I want to talk about. (Other than Ian, who has been pretty good.)

              Overall, pretty good game. It's pretty inevitable that the bench is going to lose the lead, particularly against Washington (whose bench tends to score quite well.) But I can't wait for Danny to come back. Hopefully Frank will figure out a way to use them both in the offense. I don't want PG to go invisible again.
              Last edited by Sookie; 01-02-2013, 10:21 PM.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

                If games are won and lost on a calculator and piece of paper, then why do we bother to play them?

                @LetsTalkPacers

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

                  Originally posted by beast23 View Post
                  That's a pretty good way of summarizing it.

                  And folks, including his teammates, need to quit excusing/consoling/cajoling him. It gets old. He can leave his sensitivity off the court and out of the locker room. It's time to put on his big boy pants and grow a pair.
                  What exactly did Roy do wrong tonight?
                  Originally posted by IrishPacer
                  Empty vessels make the most noise.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

                    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                    Danny is not expendable. Without him, our offense blows. We're 28th in the league. That offense will not get it done against the top teams.

                    If we want to go deep in the playoffs, we need Danny.

                    Lance and PG will be a great tandem in the future. I believe that Lance's offensive game will grow. I believe that PG can improve even more.

                    But for the time being, we need Danny.
                    I'd like to thank you for your post but can't bring myself to thank you for something that should be intuitively obvious to every member of this forum.

                    So, I guess I'll just apologize for my backhanded compliment.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

                      Roy actually had a pretty decent stat line. But good Lord was he getting pushed around like a little girl by a smaller Seraphin. Great interior passing by Roy tonight though!

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

                        Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                        What exactly did Roy do wrong tonight?
                        I'm not really being fair to him at all based on this one game. I saw the post I quoted on and just sort of let loose with my pent up emotions. His sensitivities and doldrums are wearing on me a bit. He didn't deserve what I gave him for this particular game.

                        Let's just say I'm a game or so late or a game or so early, depending on your perspective.

                        The observation regarding the form of his hook, however, is pretty much accurate for the vast majority of his games. Whether he is fortunate enough to hit the shot or not.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

                          Originally posted by beast23 View Post
                          I'm not really being fair to him at all based on this one game. I saw the post I quoted on and just sort of let loose with my pent up emotions. His sensitivities and doldrums are wearing on me a bit. He didn't deserve what I gave him for this particular game.

                          Let's just say I'm a game or so late or a game or so early, depending on your perspective.

                          The observation regarding the form of his hook, however, is pretty much accurate for the vast majority of his games. Whether he is fortunate enough to hit the shot or not.
                          Yeah, I can agree witht he observation regarding the form of his hook (although I was never good at shooting it or any other shot ).

                          I can also understand the frustration about Roy's play. I was just curious about why you posted it today as he had a quite efficient game
                          Originally posted by IrishPacer
                          Empty vessels make the most noise.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

                            I missed the game, but I was wondering about the Roy comments as well. If he'd been hitting 6 of 11 all season long he wouldn't be getting any flak. Of course, 4 rebounds ain't gonna cut it, but overall his rebounding hasn't been a problem.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

                              Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                              I missed the game, but I was wondering about the Roy comments as well. If he'd been hitting 6 of 11 all season long he wouldn't be getting any flak. Of course, 4 rebounds ain't gonna cut it, but overall his rebounding hasn't been a problem.
                              When Paul George is snatching 14 boards, i find it hard to complain about anyone's rebounding being low. PG is just a damn good rebounder.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Pacers/Wizards Postgame Thread 1/2/13

                                Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                                Of course, 4 rebounds ain't gonna cut it, but overall his rebounding hasn't been a problem.
                                4 rebounds do not cut it normally but PG grabbed 13 defensive boards today so I'll let it go for tonight
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X