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

Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

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

  • #61
    Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

    Originally posted by Kstat View Post
    Danny Granger probably has a dirtier reputation around the NBA than Dwyane Wade, merely because he had the audacity to...
    ...unjustifiably mock Steve Novak.
    This is the darkest timeline.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

      I don't understand why you guys are arguing, it's like your arguing for the sake of arguing. It's just a nickname, who cares, as long as Pacers get some attention in the media, a nice change to read something about them, instead of the usual Lakers/Heat stories.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

        I think we're tough and physical, but I don't think that makes us anywhere close to the Bad Boys.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

          2 championships, 3 Eastern Conference championships, and 5 straight years in the Eastern Conference Finals. Yeah, I can totally see why the Pacers wouldn't want to be compared to that type of success. According to one poster in particular, that's not a sustained level of success. Geez.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

            I prefer to not be associated with the Detroit Pistons in any way except dominating them annually in the Central Division. This team is not the bad boys. We are our own idenity.

            I do like how numerous commenttators has stated better "bring your lunchpale vs these boys"

            boys i gotta a feeling if Granger is healthy he will have a solid season. he can play 4th option at times on this team some nights. The current Pacers team resembles nothing to when Jim O'Brien was coaching here. In fact, if anything its become similar to the team Carlise coached here the season of the brawl.

            Tinsley, Miller, Artest, JO, Foster: Jackson, Fred Jones, Anthony Johnson, David Harrison.. anyone else remember the remaining players.

            Right now if i had to choose between starrting 5's.

            Hill, George, Granger, West, Hibbert:

            when playing well tinsley was real good. Hill is much more consistent and better character.

            Paul George is a stud, but hard to not choose REGGIE

            Granger or Artest. the sane artest all day but Granger has been steady and dedicateed to this Franchise. Granger by a landslide.

            West easily over JO. West is the best PF to ever play for this Franchise. both Dale and DWest are BAMF's.

            Hibbert or Foster. tough call. im one who believe Fosters jersey maybe not worthy of a Banner definitely is deserved of significant recognition. Hibbert can definitely be the MAN. Hibbert can eclipse Smits as the best center for this Franchise.

            that 03-04 team was a LEGIT TITLE Contender. its truly Amazing the Pacers have rebounded from oblivion.

            Bird had soo many critics at one time on here and several other sites esp indysstar. I said it elsewhere i will say it again.

            Bird could easily have saved this state the franchise.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

              How about "BAMFS of the NBA"? (borrowed the term from Seth)

              On the serious side, in terms of perception, Kstat is right. But it doesn't mean I like it simply because it doesn't help the image of the Pacers that are trying so hard to bring back the fans again. The team doesn't commit as many flagrant fouls as the other teams. Heck, this squad is usually the receiving end of those kinds of fouls. And they don't do much cheap shots if there is any. And while the "Bad Boys" of the Pistons were really great players, there is just this baggage associated with them. So maybe while ESPN is at it, maybe they can do a better job in promoting a better image of the Pacers. You know, something like how the media did with Memphis right now.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

                Originally posted by 15th parallel View Post
                How about "BAMFS of the NBA"? (borrowed the term from Seth)

                On the serious side, in terms of perception, Kstat is right. But it doesn't mean I like it simply because it doesn't help the image of the Pacers that are trying so hard to bring back the fans again. The team doesn't commit as many flagrant fouls as the other teams. Heck, this squad is usually the receiving end of those kinds of fouls. And they don't do much cheap shots if there is any. And while the "Bad Boys" of the Pistons were really great players, there is just this baggage associated with them. So maybe while ESPN is at it, maybe they can do a better job in promoting a better image of the Pacers. You know, something like how the media did with Memphis right now.
                You touched on a point that I hadn't thought of. Are Pacer fans concerned that this "comparison" will negatively affect the perception to casual fans and that will thus affect the popularity of the team locally? I could see how that could be a concern after the post-brawl years.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

                  Originally posted by shags View Post
                  You touched on a point that I hadn't thought of. Are Pacer fans concerned that this "comparison" will negatively affect the perception to casual fans and that will thus affect the popularity of the team locally? I could see how that could be a concern after the post-brawl years.
                  Exactly. The Bad Boys in terms of their great level of defense is a compliment. The Bad Boys in terms of bad reputation is not good for the team. They just got over the "Team of Thugs" image. Casual fans may take things negatively if the Pacers are promoted as being the new Bad Boys. I admire that Pistons team btw, but with a team trying so hard to reach out to turned off fans, you just don't want to be associated with that term.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

                    We shall see in the playoffs. Starting in round one game one. But I will watch our next game first.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

                      Originally posted by 15th parallel View Post
                      Exactly. The Bad Boys in terms of their great level of defense is a compliment. The Bad Boys in terms of bad reputation is not good for the team. They just got over the "Team of Thugs" image. Casual fans may take things negatively if the Pacers are promoted as being the new Bad Boys. I admire that Pistons team btw, but with a team trying so hard to reach out to turned off fans, you just don't want to be associated with that term.
                      I understand. That's a completely legitimate concern IMO.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

                        Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                        Usually I'm not the kind to say I told to so, but.....

                        By the way, the bad boys weren't necessarily dirty, ether, aside from laimbeer and mahorn, and we lost mahorn after one year.

                        This is the identity that you're going to get, wether you want it or not. You play a defense first philosophy, in a small market, without a media superstar. It goes against conventional logic, so this is the conclusion that the masses will jump to.

                        Forgive the lameness of this, but if you're going to get a seat at the table, this is pretty much what you're going to have to get used to. You can either swim against the current, or put on the black hat and use it to your advantage.

                        The bad boys wen from also fans to a mini dynasty when isiah said "**** this, if you want us to be the bad guys, we'll show you bad guys." The pistons actually ordered custom made Detroit Raider merchandise, sponsored by Al Davis. Zeke was the first guy to discover a dirty little secret about the NBA. The bad guys can win.

                        I believe Reggie miller understood this as well, but his teams never really took that step with him to the dark side.

                        I guess my point is, the bad boys philosophy was never really about cheating or hurting people. They did very little of both, despite their reputation. It's about embracing being the party crashers, throwing the middle finger to the league, and being loved more locally by how much every other other place in the league resents you for not being typical.
                        I know your a Piston fan but I dont want anything to do with the Franchise in Detroit. Thomas played at Indiana, he wasnt a dirty player he was just really good. Laimbeer was though. If Foster were still playing maybe the comparision would be more accurrate.

                        We will earn a seat at the table the way Indiana Basketball does it. Tough hard nosed fundamentally sound basketball.

                        With all due respect. In no way do I want this team to be refereneced to anything Pistons.

                        Its an insult to what this Franchise has recovered from.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

                          I think we're more like the 2004 Pistons than we are the 89/90 Pistons.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

                            Originally posted by PacersPride View Post

                            We will earn a seat at the table the way Indiana Basketball does it. Tough hard nosed fundamentally sound basketball.
                            I completely agree. This team is basically the anti-thesis of the bad boys. Former Spur George Hill is not a bad boy. Neither is our all-star. Neither is DWest who is Mr. Fundamental...a poor man's Tim Duncan. Then you have that tough guy Hibbert who throws people around. Yeh...bad to the bone.

                            Seriously though, this team just plays good fundamental basketball and it's solid with that extra spice of Paul and Lance who may have the talent to get it done.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

                              Thorpe is clueless about the NBA. The fact he considers the Pacers 'dirty' is just another example of how he knows absolutely nothing about the NBA except his clients (who he tries to promote 24/7).

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

                                I don't give a rip how the national media or opposing fans label the team. But be prepared for it to really ramp up if the Pacers end up in another knock down drag out playoff series with the Heat.

                                I just want the front office to own this style of play and stick with it personnel wise going forward. Walsh failed to do that in the mid-90's and IMO cost the team at least one more trip to the finals and maybe a championship in the strike year or 98 had we got past the Bulls.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X