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

2013 Eastern Conference Finals: (1) Miami vs. (3) Indiana

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

  • #91
    Re: 2013 Eastern Conference Finals: (1) Miami vs. (3) Indiana

    I think we learned some lessons from last year against the heat.

    1.Our bench sucked - we tried with marginal success to remedy that.

    2.Roy had trouble staying on the court.
    I think the league has changed a little bit in our favor. The whole "flopping rule" for example. Also as Roy mentioned he has drilled and drilled going straight up.
    He'll still be in trouble some - but he's going to give THEM a lot of trouble.

    3.We couldn't pass into the post worth crap. I complained about that all last season and the inability to pass over the fronting D against Miami just made me grind my teeth to powder. I saw improvement in this area right away this season, and have little doubt that we will see improvement in this area.

    Can we beat them? Yes.
    In spite of LaPunk's assertions the Heat are not a "great team".

    Will we? I don't know. I felt better about it awhile ago.

    The turnovers scare the crap out of me.
    DWest inside has to somewhat equal Bosh's outside.
    Lance has to hold his own against a future Hall of Famer.
    The refs have to let us play D and not be sucked in by all that flopping non-sense.
    PG has to D up against a very strong and capable scorer and still have something left on the other side.

    Be strong.
    OWN the paint.
    Don't back down or wilt.
    Keep composed.
    Make them play our game. Stifle and frustrate them.

    Let's get one down there and then ride it out.

    It should be exciting at least.
    I hope we pull it off. I don't like the way they were built, the arrogance they exude, the nut hugging "respect" they get - from the press (and especially the zebras).

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: 2013 Eastern Conference Finals: (1) Miami vs. (3) Indiana

      Our balance will triumph, Pacers in 6!
      Go Pacers!

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: 2013 Eastern Conference Finals: (1) Miami vs. (3) Indiana




        The Avenge-cers. Let's go.
        Last edited by Day-V; 05-19-2013, 10:32 PM.

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: 2013 Eastern Conference Finals: (1) Miami vs. (3) Indiana

          Originally posted by solid View Post

          Be strong.
          OWN the paint.
          Don't back down or wilt.
          Keep composed.
          Make them play our game. Stifle and frustrate them.
          .
          I think the biggest key is game pace. Play fast and the Pacers have more turnovers and get Miami's running game going.
          Play a very deliberate pace and grind the Heat into dust and have a chance to win the series.
          Continue to play one on one defense primarily. If you do not the three's will start raining down on the Pacers. Much like the Knicks.
          Knicks have a better center but the Heat have a better Carmelo.
          {o,o}
          |)__)
          -"-"-

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: 2013 Eastern Conference Finals: (1) Miami vs. (3) Indiana

            "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: 2013 Eastern Conference Finals: (1) Miami vs. (3) Indiana

              Why doesnt Hibbert guard Haslem and West guard Bosh? Allows Hibbert to stay closer to the basket. Haslem's got some range but not to the 3 point line like Bosh.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: 2013 Eastern Conference Finals: (1) Miami vs. (3) Indiana

                last time the ravens went to the super bowl? 2000. last time pacers went to the finals? 2000! heck even a parallel can be given to the ravens and pacers with the whole defense and like the pacers everyone was counting them out in the post season cause of the way they limped into the playoffs and lost a spot in the seeding...maybe just maybe the pacers can catch lightning in a bottle like the ravens did this year.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: 2013 Eastern Conference Finals: (1) Miami vs. (3) Indiana

                  Originally posted by Kemo View Post
                  Here in the Philippines, there is a local pro basketball club (who won a championship just last Sunday) who uses the slogan "We not Me" (and a twitter hashtag #wenotme ) because of the concept of playing together as a team without really having a dominant "me" guy running the show. When I saw this pic I think that slogan applies to this Pacers team as well.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: 2013 Eastern Conference Finals: (1) Miami vs. (3) Indiana

                    Whenever I breakdown a series I always start with defense, I always suggest that the pacers defense is the key to a series. Not against the heat though. I assume the Pacers defense will be good, if they can keep the Heat in the halfcourt, if the heat are playing 5 on 5, I am not worried.

                    For the pacers to beat the Heat however, the pacers offense cannot turn the ball over - actually as Quinn likes to point out the key is to really limit the live turnovers. If we turn the ball over and the heat take the ball out - not a big problem, if we turn it over and the Heat can run it back at us - huge problem.

                    Beyond that the pacers need to be able to score consistantly throughout the game. But this isn't the Knicks. The heat will front the post - pacers will likely have a very hard time getting the ball inside to Roy and West. The Heat try to keep the ball out of the low post instead of trying to be ready to defend once the ball is in the loow post. So our ability to beat the fronting will be a huge key to this series.

                    Fronting can open up offensive rebounding, also can open up driving lanes to the basket.

                    One thing I do want to mention for our defense. One huge difference between the Knicks and heat. Heat will make Hibbert guard Bosh. Knicks were never able to get Hibbert to guard his own man. And that is the ley to limiting Roy's impact on defense

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2013 Eastern Conference Finals: (1) Miami vs. (3) Indiana

                      Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
                      or we could just put West on Bosh and have Hibbert guard Haslem
                      That's going to happen when the Heat play Haslem and Birdman.

                      But what do we do when they play Battier / LeBron / Bosh at the frontcourt?
                      Originally posted by IrishPacer
                      Empty vessels make the most noise.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2013 Eastern Conference Finals: (1) Miami vs. (3) Indiana

                        Gonna agree with Shade, Heat in 5.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2013 Eastern Conference Finals: (1) Miami vs. (3) Indiana

                          If Stevenson plays like he did in game 6, WE WILL BEAT MIAMI!!!
                          Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2013 Eastern Conference Finals: (1) Miami vs. (3) Indiana

                            Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
                            or we could just put West on Bosh and have Hibbert guard Haslem
                            That part doesn't concern me. What does is when they go with Bosh and Battier.

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2013 Eastern Conference Finals: (1) Miami vs. (3) Indiana

                              ESPN "expert" picks

                              http://espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/2013...ms/heat-pacers

                              Heat in 5: Arnovitz, Doolittle, Gutierrez, Stein
                              Heat in 6: Adande, Broussard, Elhassen, Haberstroh, Pelton, Thorpe, Wallace, Windhorst
                              Heat in 7: Abbott, Ford

                              Pacers in anything: (crickets chirping)

                              At least none of the 14 picked a Heat sweep, which is something I guess
                              The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2013 Eastern Conference Finals: (1) Miami vs. (3) Indiana

                                Heat in 7 I think. Hope I'm wrong


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X