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/Knicks Postgame Thread 1/10/13

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

  • Re: Pacers/Knicks Postgame Thread 1/10/13

    Originally posted by Anthem View Post
    On Amare's first drive at Tyler, I was kinda surprised that none of the commentators pointed out that he had an entire handful of Tyler's jersey, and that Tyler looking down at it was what gave Amare the split-second he needed to make his move.

    I couldn't believe it when I saw it. Where the heck were the refs as it was SO obvious.

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers/Knicks Postgame Thread 1/10/13

      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
      He was their only option what do you expect?
      I thought they had a 3pt specialist that teams need to be contenders?

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers/Knicks Postgame Thread 1/10/13

        Originally posted by greyhound80 View Post
        Horrible job by those officials last night. JR PUNK, er, I mean Smith, just threw Lance OB with no call. Amare had a hand full of Tyler's jersey on a post up. Obvious foul. Amare slung DWest OB after a foul. You don't call those punk moves and that is what causes a fight to break out.
        Yea there were a lot of non calls, but that style of play really benefits the Pacers over anyone else in the league. I'd rather have the refs swallow their whistles and allow the Pacers to play their very physical brand of basketball.

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers/Knicks Postgame Thread 1/10/13

          Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
          We won't be able to. Ok just had to trade Harden cause they couldn't pay him, and their other 2 stars.
          We shall see.


          Comment


          • Re: Pacers/Knicks Postgame Thread 1/10/13

            Originally posted by greyhound80 View Post
            Horrible job by those officials last night. JR PUNK, er, I mean Smith, just threw Lance OB with no call. Amare had a hand full of Tyler's jersey on a post up. Obvious foul. Amare slung DWest OB after a foul. You don't call those punk moves and that is what causes a fight to break out.
            Will people get over the refs already, it's ridiculous. I've never seen so many people complain about the refs over one NON-Playoff game.

            The Pacers get away with quite a bit themselves on the defensive end themselves. No it's not blatant like a push in the back, grab of the jersey, etc. BUT it is tough physical defense that we get away with. If it means we don't get a few calls on the offensive end, so be it. If we could knock down an open jump shot more consistently, then we would wouldn't need to worry so much about the refs.

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers/Knicks Postgame Thread 1/10/13

              Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
              Will people get over the refs already, it's ridiculous. I've never seen so many people complain about the refs over one NON-Playoff game.

              The Pacers get away with quite a bit themselves on the defensive end themselves. No it's not blatant like a push in the back, grab of the jersey, etc. BUT it is tough physical defense that we get away with. If it means we don't get a few calls on the offensive end, so be it. If we could knock down an open jump shot more consistently, then we would wouldn't need to worry so much about the refs.

              Tough physical defense is not a foul.

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers/Knicks Postgame Thread 1/10/13

                I don't really care too much what the refs do in the first 3 quarters as long as they are letting us play with our D in the 4th and so far they pretty much have.


                Comment


                • Re: Pacers/Knicks Postgame Thread 1/10/13

                  Originally posted by Will Galen
                  We won't be able to. Ok just had to trade Harden cause they couldn't pay him, and their other 2 stars.
                  Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                  We shall see.
                  IMHO....I only see 3 scenarios happening in regards to Granger and West:

                  1 ) If the Team sees a similar loss in the 2nd round like last season ( or worse, lose in the 1st round of the Playoffs ), then I don't see the Pacers re-signing West ( unless he can be had for cheap ) AND looking to trade Granger in the summer of 2013 ( for LT relief while getting some assets...a la Harden and the Thunder ).

                  2 ) If the Team has a very hard fought 6 or 7 game 2nd Round Playoff series and loses, then I can see the Pacers re-signing West and then look to trade Granger in the Offseason and/or re-signing West....but not both.

                  3 ) The only way that I can possibly see them re-signing West and then looking to keep Granger this season ( and beyond ) is if the Team makes it to the ECF and/or beyond .
                  Last edited by CableKC; 01-11-2013, 02:20 PM.
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers/Knicks Postgame Thread 1/10/13

                    So, it looks like the Knicks play the Bulls tonight. Either losing would be beneficial to us, but I'm torn as to which one would help us more - i.e. which I should root for to win.... Never mind, I just answered my own question. I can't root for either of those teams to win. I'll just be happy with the loss of one them I guess

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers/Knicks Postgame Thread 1/10/13

                      Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                      Will people get over the refs already, it's ridiculous. I've never seen so many people complain about the refs over one NON-Playoff game.

                      The Pacers get away with quite a bit themselves on the defensive end themselves. No it's not blatant like a push in the back, grab of the jersey, etc. BUT it is tough physical defense that we get away with. If it means we don't get a few calls on the offensive end, so be it. If we could knock down an open jump shot more consistently, then we would wouldn't need to worry so much about the refs.
                      I know. But I have never complained about officials or thought "We don't get the calls". I thought last night was unusually bad.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers/Knicks Postgame Thread 1/10/13

                        Originally posted by CoolHand View Post
                        So, it looks like the Knicks play the Bulls tonight. Either losing would be beneficial to us, but I'm torn as to which one would help us more - i.e. which I should root for to win.... Never mind, I just answered my own question. I can't root for either of those teams to win. I'll just be happy with the loss of one them I guess
                        Always root against the Knicks.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers/Knicks Postgame Thread 1/10/13





                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers/Knicks Postgame Thread 1/10/13

                            Originally posted by greyhound80 View Post
                            I know. But I have never complained about officials or thought "We don't get the calls". I thought last night was unusually bad.
                            Derek Staford was officiating. He is my latest worst official. He's not very good and his style of running a game doesn't seem to match up with the Pacer's playing style. It's not the officials in general, it is a couple of officials in particular that majorly suck.
                            Last edited by xIndyFan; 01-11-2013, 05:39 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers/Knicks Postgame Thread 1/10/13

                              A lot of calls don't get made, for both teams. Honestly I'd rather our offense get beat up by the other team and they let our defense be as suffocating as possible. I know good physical D isn't really a foul but in the NBA today you get a lot of Refs that can't always tell the difference. The only call that bugged me was PG's 5th or 6th steal where he sprinted back and JR racked him across the front and Paul still got the shot up over the rim and in. That was clearly an and-one, so much so that even during the highlights Kenny the Jet called them out on it.
                              "There is a time to play and a time to win. It is what you do during winning time that differentiates the average players from stars."

                              ~Ahmad Rashad~

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers/Knicks Postgame Thread 1/10/13

                                Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
                                Your argument is valid. Too bad you must couch it in such self righteous and disrespectful ways, such as "psshhhh" and expressing disagreement with other viewpoints by calling them "BS". Particularly when, if you read the post closely, you'll the point was that if Mahinmi continued his current level of play, MAYBE the OP's original assertion could be DEBATEABLE.

                                If you look you'll find me on here multiple times saying Hibbert's top priority for this team is defense and rebounding, not offensive production. I doubt the Hibbert - Mahinmi starting debate comes to fruition because I will be surprised if Mahinmi can play at his recent level consistently over time.

                                However, I do think Mahinmi has arguably outplayed Hibbert in terms of all - around performance over the last several games. This includes a very solid, physical contribution defensively and on the glass. And, I'm not convinced that Mahinmi, due to his superior speed/athleticism, wouldn't have been a better matchup v. Miami against the more mobile Bosh. Fortunately, he cooled off as the game progressed, but it was painfully obvious Hibbert was mismatched as Bosh nailed wide open mid - range J after wide open mid - range J.
                                Yea fair enough my bad my statement was more to the original poster. Just simply saying like Kenny said when Shaq tried to call out Roy he will never be a great scoring big man that isn't really his game, can he be much more efficient when he does get chances, sure 40 percent for a big is pretty bad (and we've seen him have much more skill and efficiency on O in past)......but I'm pretty sure Atlanta Hawks fans weren't calling for Dikembe's starting job because he was only averaging 11 a game.....Ian plays like he just did rest of season and Roy plays like he has been rest of season Roy would still rightfully be the starter IMO, Ian might start eating some more minutes but Roy would still need to be starter. Roy is on the short list of DPOY right now granted he probably won't win it because even though the award is called DPOY voters seem to always give it to a guy that plays good offense as well, but the point is Roy along with PG are anchoring a special defense and to even mention that he may need to get demoted while pulling his weight in every conceivable way on defense is crazy in my mind.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X