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

  • #16
    Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

    Originally posted by Really? View Post
    This is ridiculous, not dirty, and we don't even have anyone to lay the wood, don't really see many hard screens, you would have to think there is a better title out there for this group...
    Like...Smash Mouth?
    If games are won and lost on a calculator and piece of paper, then why do we bother to play them?

    @LetsTalkPacers

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

      Very few players, let alone teams, can fall into that category currently. If you're talking about dirty, might as well start with Kevin "Honey Nut" Garnett.
      You Got The Tony!!!!!!

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

        Playing hard and together with a physical brand of basketball isn't bad boys.... its basketball as it should be played. I watch alot of NBA and its really noticeable how determined defensively this group is. They are mentally tough moreso than physically. They have a deep desire to not let the other team score and get pissed when they do. Really awesome!!

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

          I remember Kevin Love saying after a loss that the Pacers all must take these "tough guy pills". I just wish we could keep drafting these kind of guys. No surrender, no defeat. Get ahead and stomp in the throat mentality. LOVE IT.

          Comment


          • #20
            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.
            Last edited by Kstat; 02-07-2013, 04:34 PM.

            It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

            Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
            Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
            NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

              Originally posted by CableKC View Post
              Yeah, I don't want the Pacers to be associated with that Will Smith / Martin Lawrence movie as well.
              Why not? It's a great movie!!
              Danger Zone

              Comment


              • #22
                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.
                Exactly.

                There's a line in Nas' "Hate Me Now" that goes...

                "People fear what they don't understand, hate what they can't conquer. I guess that's just the fury of man."

                Pundits are going to "hate" on the Pacers because they can't explain why we're so good without having a SUPERSTAR. Our winning ways go against the grain in the current NBA. Let them hate!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

                  ^^ Love that 80s reggae, was jammin this in my head when I read the title.

                  Yea, I don't see the bad boy comparisons at all. I hope that doesn't stick.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Thingfish View Post
                    ^^ Love that 80s reggae, was jammin this in my head when I read the title.

                    Yea, I don't see the bad boy comparisons at all. I hope that doesn't stick.
                    Roster wise? Of course not.

                    As a philosophy? The pacers are trying to emulate what the pistons did. A least that's how Bird built this team.

                    I know this way of dong things. I grew up with it. I've spent most of my life with a front row seat for it. This team is unmistakably trending down that path. This is actually bird's second attempt, but I think he realized he needed more stable players to sustain it.

                    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

                      Again, it is still getting me rubbing me wrong how all these pundits are seeing this- I do like the idea that Indiana is playing tough, because without a doubt they are. Talk about soft all you want but Roy throws as hard as screens as anybody in the league. So does West. Roy will go up agaisnt anyone and block the shot. Ask LBJ. And when Danny gets back that's one more hard nosed player who uses physicality as an asset. George Hill of course is probably the strongest PG in the league. The toughness of this team is certainly there.

                      But they keep saying they aren't talented. The pundit also pointed out the very TRUE statement that you pretty much need a top 5 offense to truly compete. I completely agree with that. Yet he somehow forgot to add the fact that this team is adding a 18ppg scorer by playoff start??? How is this not incredibly important?

                      Put it this way, Last year's number NINE offense just changed their spotup shooting guard for a 18ppg scorer. That doesn't maybe clue everyone in that this offense has the potential to be extremely potent during the playoffs? This is what NO pundit has mentioned. I agree all day long that if the Pacers don't score, they won't win. Zach Lowe said as much earlier. The problem is, everyone keeps acting like this isn't a possibility.

                      Or one more way to look at Indiana's offense by the start of the playoffs compared to last years Indiana team:

                      The PG position has improved. The shooting guard position has made a MASSIVE improvement. The SF is essentially the same. The PF has made a big improvement. The Center has regressed a LOT. The 6th man is a MASSIVE improvement. No one thinks this offense can become a top five offense? I DO.

                      Paul George already has all the skills and ability to be a 25ppg highly efficient scorer. He's not there yet. He's a 20ppg scorer. (yes, over the last 1/2). He's slowly learning, and it takes a season of learning all the different ways you can score. Experience is all it is. Which means come playoff time, Paul George simply won't be the same player he is RIGHT now. Paul George, tho the numbers won't necessarily support it yet without a fullseason behind him, by playoff time maybe be one of the 10 best players in the league. Easy. Easy.

                      George Hill is roughly the 10th best point in the league. Paul George is rapidly asserting himself as one of the best in the game. (again for all these guys saying we aren't quite talented enough). Danny Granger is still one of the best SF's in the league, healthy he's one of the 30 best in the league. David West is one of the 30 best in the league EASY. An underrated forward who is completely different from the guy he was last year. Roy Hibbert is a nightmare on offense, but he's one of the five best defensive centers in the league, in a time when defensive powerhouse centers abound.

                      Then their is Lance on the bench. Tyler, Ian. This team is extremely talented.

                      Or against the most talentd team in the NBA, a comparison:

                      Westbrook > Hill
                      Martin < PG
                      Durant > Granger (our worst matchup? We still have an allstar!!)
                      Ibaka > West (Yes, West would destroy Ibaka, who's a great team defender, but gets abused by PF's who know how to score)
                      Perkins < Roy

                      Lance > OKC's bench.

                      I disagree, but a smart NBA analyst could make the argument that Indiana is equal or more talented than OKC. It's not true, but it isn't crazy either. And OKC is the most talented team in the NBA.

                      Indiana does NOT lack talent. I don't buy that at all.

                      Can anyone name a playoff team in the NBA that will start four players on offense that can all beat you?? Anyone??
                      Last edited by mattie; 02-07-2013, 04:50 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

                        Please dont associate our/my beloved team with anything having to do with Detroit...especially the Pistons. There are far more direct opposites associated between the two than similarities....starting with class....from both the team and their fans. So please.
                        The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                          The pussification of the NBA continues, when hard play is now considered dirty.

                          I would like anyone who actually believes they "skirt" around being dirty to come up with a list of examples. I honestly cannot recall anything even semi "dirty." I don't equate hard fouls with dirty, not even close.
                          Welcome to the NBA. Magic, Michael and Larry will show you the ropes. But remember, don't play too hard. It's considered dirty play. You're not supposed to compete with them, you're supposed to look good losing like every one else. Casual fans don't like seeing their favorite players shoot 7-22.

                          Sound familiar?


                          It's ALWAYS been like this!

                          I'm going to conclude this by saying what I said yesterday, since apparently some people didn't read it:

                          From an outsider's perspective, let me get you prepared for the next 5-6 years:

                          1. Fans of big markets are not going to like you.
                          2. Fans of the teams you eliminate are not going to like you.
                          3. Fans of teams that value offense over defense are going to HATE you.
                          4. Unless Paul George about doubles his scoring output to Kobe/TMac/Durant levels, he's never going to be a national media darling. Missed shots aren't sexy....

                          You're not going to accept this, but the reality is this: The Pacers play in Indiana. The Pacers play a decided physical defense-first philosophy. Neither of those things will endear them nationally. Heck, it's not exactly endearing them locally either. The Pacers haven't been a major draw in Indianapolis since the Bird/Reggie days of free flowing offense and three point shooters at every position.

                          I get that you're riding the Pacers high right now, and you can't see how the Pacers won't become the NBA's next great dynasty and loved by all...but that's just not going to happen. The hierarchy doesn't like being disturbed. You're going to knock much bigger names than Paul George out of the playoffs, and casual fans will get annoyed by it (unless it's Miami).

                          God forbid you keep Carmelo or Rose out of the finals....the national media will be borderline-offended in the "why am I stuck in Indianapolis covering the NBA finals when I could be spending a week in New York/Chicago" sense.
                          Last edited by Kstat; 02-07-2013, 05:01 PM.

                          It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                          Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                          Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                          NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

                            So we play defense and make our fouls count for something?

                            It's basketball, right?

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Oh man, we are getting our media identity: "The New Bad Boys" [ESPN]

                              If how we play now gets us labeled as the new Bad Boys, then I'm all for it.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by MyFavMartin View Post
                                So we play defense and make our fouls count for something?

                                It's basketball, right?
                                Welcome to the NBA.

                                God is it ever amusing watching it happen to someone else....

                                It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                                Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                                Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                                NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X