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/Nuggets Postgame Thread 1/28/13

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

  • Re: Pacers/Nuggets Postgame Thread 1/28/13

    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
    Yep I'm watching the play again and Iguadola didn't foul Paul George on that play, good call.
    Well I'm watching it again and I see a textbook blocking foul. As George starts to make his move, Iggy hops forward causing his outside shoulder to collide with George's inside shoulder with his arm stretched across his body to prevent George from getting around him.
    Time for a new sig.

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers/Nuggets Postgame Thread 1/28/13

      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
      And the foul on Paul George was the right call too, Paul George pushes Iguadola with his elbow when he is on the air, huge mistake by Paul George.
      lol
      Time for a new sig.

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers/Nuggets Postgame Thread 1/28/13

        Originally posted by mattie View Post
        The defense is noticeably worse with the DJ/Hill backcourt, so I just don't want to see it. As LG33 noted, it's probably not all DJ's fault either. Hill statistically, for his entire career including SAS, is only a little bit above average against wings, so that might play into it as well.

        Regardless, I'd rather have a wing like OJ out there who can knock down the shot from anywhere (or he should, his entire career he's been a helluva shooter with huge range), and decent defense.

        I don't think OJ will ever be a great player, but I don't see why he won't be a solid bench player for years to come. He's 23 and he's completely filled out so he won't get much better, but once he completely figures out defense at the NBA level, he should be an above average defender that can shoot from anywhere. That's a real nice player off the bench.
        Yea I get that. I don't really like when Indy goes small with Hill and DJ either, but I'd be more than happy with DJ as a long term backup (not overpaid, of course)

        Considering OJ is a rookie, I'm really happy with what he's done. Once he gets his 3 shot dialed in and gets accustomed to the pace of the NBA, he'll be a really solid player, kind of like the Courtney Lee type.
        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


        • Re: Pacers/Nuggets Postgame Thread 1/28/13

          Originally posted by BornReady View Post
          Do you guys really think DJ is that bad? To be honest, I thought he's played pretty solid even though he's not a strong defensive player...
          He's relegated to being nothing more than the guy bringing up the ball and then being a spot up 3pt shooter.
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers/Nuggets Postgame Thread 1/28/13

            Originally posted by BornReady View Post
            Yea I get that. I don't really like when Indy goes small with Hill and DJ either, but I'd be more than happy with DJ as a long term backup (not overpaid, of course)

            Considering OJ is a rookie, I'm really happy with what he's done. Once he gets his 3 shot dialed in and gets accustomed to the pace of the NBA, he'll be a really solid player, kind of like the Courtney Lee type.
            It's funny you said that, I almost mentioned Courtney Lee. I think they're incredibly similar which is why I'm happy. I think we got Courtney Lee on a rookie contract... give him minutes!

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers/Nuggets Postgame Thread 1/28/13

              The only thing I don't like about that Paul George play I didn't see before is that PG gives up on the play to sell the foul. It doesn't look like Iggy did much to knock it away, just PG kind of let go to flail his hands a little. I don't like to see that, especially considering the whistle hadn't blown.
              Time for a new sig.

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers/Nuggets Postgame Thread 1/28/13

                By the way, Bulls fans on RealGM:

                On the Iggy steal:

                Originally posted by Chicago fan 1
                That was a reach
                Originally posted by Chicago fan 2
                Originally posted by Chicago fan 1
                That was a reach
                For the sake of Indy losing this and making cusion for our 3rd spot....no it was not.
                On PG's foul:

                Originally posted by Chicago fan 3
                If that was a foul, then so was what Iggy did to George on the previous possession. But I'll take it.
                Originally posted by Chicago fan 4
                home cookin....
                Here's the thread:

                http://forums.realgm.com/boards/view...9036&start=225

                When your division rivals say that the refs screwed your team then they are more often than not because you know that they benefit from your losses.

                But ignore the neutral (if not hostile) perspective. Just keep following your agenda.
                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers/Nuggets Postgame Thread 1/28/13

                  Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                  His running mate stated multiple times in the game thread that he didn't believe George was fouled by Iguodala, so I doubt you have luck there.

                  Some posters on this forum seem to make a point of rooting against our team and players. It's not trolling, just a way of protection themselves against disappointment. If you convince yourself your team has no hope because of an abundance of "evidence," you get to pick and choose when to "know" that the results are fools gold or be pleasantly surprised. If you expect an 0-82 record, you can't ever be disappointed.

                  It's a defense mechanism, of sorts.
                  I get the feeling the people you're talking about are trying too hard to be anti-homers. Perhaps you can call them "homerphobic". Being contrarians to the "homers" at all cost to show every one that they themselves are not "simple minded homers".

                  Don't be afraid to have a little homer in you occasionally, it comes with being a fan (and often times you might not even be the homer that you fear).
                  Last edited by Merz; 01-29-2013, 02:16 AM.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers/Nuggets Postgame Thread 1/28/13

                    Damn you Iggy!

                    You suck enough to ruin my FTs category in fantasy this week and the entire season, but when you have to miss one, you make him!

                    Don't you dare blaming the refs

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers/Nuggets Postgame Thread 1/28/13

                      Why on earth is Paul shooting that shot with Hill and West on the team?

                      I think Frank needs to stand up for our players on occasion. The lopsided officiating is old hat.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers/Nuggets Postgame Thread 1/28/13

                        Originally posted by AesopRockOn View Post
                        Denver pretty much asked us to steal this game. Iggy missed FOUR straight free throws. Gallo scored 25+ and they didn't keep going to him with West on him. Our offensive lack of execution did us in.

                        PG was fouled out on the wing by Iggy. But what the hell was he doing? You're better off taking a timeout with four seconds on the shot clock than starting your move from 28 feet out. This team just completely breaks down when they can't get into the paint via West. Lance and Hill overdribble and PG settles.

                        And I'll say it 'cause I'm that crazy. Not playing Green is hurting our defense.
                        Was about to thank this, but then I saw the last line. Just can't agree with that. Green is average at best on defense.
                        I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                        -Emiliano Zapata

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers/Nuggets Postgame Thread 1/28/13

                          I think the last call was technically a foul on PG, but given that it wasn't that obvious/severe and in that situation in the game, I'm surprised it was called.

                          However, it should be pointed out that Paul got set up by the little back cut in a situation where all you should be doing is protecting the rim, particularly against Iggy. So it did look like he was slightly compromised in terms of positional defense.

                          Then, Iguodala on the previous play may have been a foul, but he was never beaten by PG. He was always in reasonable position and it just didn't look like he was in recovery mode.

                          I thought Denver controlled (not necessarily complete domination) the game (style/energy) from roughly early to mid 2nd qtr to mid to late 4th. I give us a ton of credit for staging the massive rally and I thought the final foul call was questionable. Really liked PG and Lance's overall games. OJ's play in limited minutes continues to encourage.

                          All that said, we dug a double digit hole, thus making it very difficult on ourselves. They had two key reserves out, but their bench still absolutely spanked us, and despite it all (last call included), we still had opportunities to seize the game. We just did not get it done.

                          On the negative side, I understand the argument about possibly losing them, but I'm going on record right now saying GH and RH's big money deals will eventually become challenging. Both PG and West are deserving of more and then you still have to have $ left over to build legit depth, not like the fool's gold we brought in this offseason.

                          Combined 7/24 from them tonight. Both solid, but ultimately unspectacular players. Yes, Hib's D has been good, but he's completely one dimensional. Can't consistently manufacture garbage points by converting put backs at the rim. Hill is a good player, but I'm sorry he's just not a full time point guard.

                          West coming up with 4 or 5 rebounds from the 4 a little too often now for my taste. Vogel/Pacers need to take a lesson from Denver about ball and player movement on offense. Helps when you have two point guards that can make the right pass consistently in p - n - r situations as well.

                          We need to find a way to play better and more consistently as a unit. This is a good team, but as of now not a contending team in my view. No way I see us beating Miami or any number of teams in the West in a 7 game series. Granger + continued development might be step in the right direction, but long way to go as of now.
                          I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                          -Emiliano Zapata

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers/Nuggets Postgame Thread 1/28/13

                            Originally posted by bunt View Post
                            They're on a west coast trip, playing 3 very solid teams. At least two of which will probably make the playoffs. Yeah the Pacers are playing like crap right, but its part of the highs and lows of an82 game season. Every team goes through these spurts.

                            Also, its laughable the few that are defending that last play. That was a bad call, one the refs shouldn't make in that situation, and its debatable if its a foul in the middle of the game. This isn't a noncontact sport. Not to mention there was less contact on that last play than PG's turnover the play prior. If the refs don't make that call on Iguadola on the second to last play, then it should have gone to overtime. Doesn't excuse the Pacers performance the previous 42 minutes, but the poor performance of the Pacers certainly doesn't excuse the bad call at the end either.
                            This! People saying the Pacers shouldn't have gotten themselves into this situation at the end of the game need to take into consideration that that goes for Denver aswell (they should have put us away and they didn't that's on them not on us) and the Pacers playing badly doesn't mean they should get ridiculous calls against them.
                            2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                            2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                            2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers/Nuggets Postgame Thread 1/28/13

                              Originally posted by Pacemaker View Post
                              Really Hibbert? REALLY? Hibbert 3-12 !!!! Really? 8 measly points AGAIN. Looks like that 8 ppg avg is here to stay.
                              This guy is a joke. all those who said his offense would turn around just don't know basketball. I you pay attention you will see he is weak and out of shape and that does not cut it in the NBA.. I want a refund...

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers/Nuggets Postgame Thread 1/28/13

                                Vogel really has to work on his last second play calling, If its not a pick and roll with hill and West it looks really bad. Also that run was made when Lance was running the half court offense I hope we see more of that. Makes you wonder how good this team would be if we had a real point guard...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X