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

The Dallas game

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

  • #16
    Re: The Dallas game

    I think I'd at least argue that Pierce, Odom, RJ and Artest should all be menioned "in the same breath" - its hard for me to decide which of those SFs is best.
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: The Dallas game

      Brand I gave serious consideration, and wouldn't lose sleep adding him to my list.

      Jefferson is not as good as Ron. Watch them play each other and you'll see what I mean. Ron owns him. Lewis is stepping up, but he's not nearly established enough for me to put him with this list of players. Nash has poor D. Pierce is very good, but I think he's a notch below Artest now. Only 1 notch, but a notch nonetheless.

      Amare, I just haven't seen him much this season. For all I know he deserves to be on the list.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: The Dallas game

        Originally posted by canyoufeelit
        Do you think Al would have gone into the stands? Tough question.
        Yes... I don't there are many players who wouldn't have went after someone throwing a cup of liquid on them in similar circumstances.

        -Bball
        Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

        ------

        "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

        -John Wooden

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: The Dallas game

          Originally posted by Jay@Section204
          I think I'd at least argue that Pierce, Odom, RJ and Artest should all be menioned "in the same breath" - its hard for me to decide which of those SFs is best.
          Also keep in mind that while you may want to argue that Artest is the DPOY, all of those guys are very good defenders as well and that Odom and Pierce have almost-singlehandedly led teams into the playoffs with not much else help (rookie Wade and Ricky Davis... yeah)

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: The Dallas game

            Originally posted by canyoufeelit
            I can debate these too I'm not gonna argue Stevie, Odom, or Pau, but...

            Elton Brand gives you 20 and 10 and is a big man, big imppact on the game

            Richard Jefferson is scoring 22 per game, is a pretty good defender himself, and one of the fastest wing players in the league

            Rashard Lewis is a great complimentary player and a matchup night mare... 18 ppg from a 6'10" SF who shoots 3 pointers at a 41% clip? Wow.

            Steve Nash is the engine that's driving the league's best team

            Paul Pierce is still the explosive scorer and post up player he was 3 years ago, don't tell me you've forgotten that playoff series where he and Toine lit up Artest

            Amare is dunking on everybody to a tune of 26 points per game and shooting .584 (!) from the field. How is that not a better talent than Ron Artest?
            Ok, so Jefferson is ONLY getting 22ppg? Considering he was the Nets 1st, 2nd and 3rd scoring option I don't find that THAT impressive. Ron had 24+ points in the few games he played this year against a NICE FG% not too mention the defence he brings. Jefferson would DREAM he is in Artests league (with regards to his play oncourt).

            Hope YOU haven't forgotten how the last play-offs went for Pierce and who was defending him than and who got the better end? Also Pierce is a great player, but also a spoiled one. If he doesn't get his way look at his demeanour vs his coach.

            Lewis is nice and is having a great year, he is a great player and indeed a nightmare matchup for most teams. I don't know much about his defense though and Ron still scores more (and I dare say off-hand defends better).

            Steve Nash is one of the absolute top PGs, however I hope he can hold on to the 2nd part of the season. He has made a name for not doing so well in that part of the year. GREAT player and leader though.

            I don't want to dispute Brand, I am just happy the Bulls traded him away to the Clippers, the Bulls could have been scary now with him. Great player.

            Amare is hard to dispute as well, though he might be a bit one dimensional in the way he scores, but who cares? It works and he is only 22, right?

            Regards,

            Mourning
            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


            • #21
              Re: The Dallas game

              Originally posted by Bball
              Yes... I don't there are many players who wouldn't have went after someone throwing a cup of liquid on them in similar circumstances.

              -Bball
              Al was the guy who restrained Ron in many altercations over the years... think the Pat Riley one. I think Al Harrington would have shown more self-control than Stephen Jackson, would NOT have escalated the situation on the court like Jax did, and would have pulled Artest out of the stands and not been the one who needed to be pulled out, like Stephen was

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: The Dallas game

                Originally posted by canyoufeelit
                Also keep in mind that while you may want to argue that Artest is the DPOY, all of those guys are very good defenders as well and that Odom and Pierce have almost-singlehandedly led teams into the playoffs with not much else help (rookie Wade and Ricky Davis... yeah)
                I think you are seriously undervaluing last years Miami team and I think you are over valuing the eastern conference last 2 play-off spots.

                Regards,

                Mourning
                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


                • #23
                  Re: The Dallas game

                  Originally posted by Mourning
                  I think you are seriously undervaluing last years Miami team and I think you are over valuing the eastern conference last 2 play-off spots.

                  Regards,

                  Mourning
                  Wade is definitely good, the rest of the team is so-so and looks very good now because of a certain 7'1 330 pound center.

                  Yes... the Celtics kind of sleepwalked into the playoffs, but the bottom line is they got there even being the mess that they were last year

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: The Dallas game

                    I think most of us would actually agree that he's somewhere between #12 and about #18 or so.

                    Its not like *I've* ever said he isn't a top-fifteen or top-twenty player. When I say the negatives outweigh the positives, I'm fully aware of the positives, I just think the negatives are in a class all by them selves.


                    Not to get too far off-topic, because Peck asked some important questions up at the top, but there's a two-page spread in the Tribune today about whether the marriage between the Cubs and Sammy Sosa can be saved. I was reading the articles and opinions in the debate about him, and thinking, "If Pacers fans read this and substituted 'Ron Artest' for 'Sammy Sosa', it could be a very enlightening discussion.

                    How good must a player be so that the off-court issues don't matter?

                    Hypothetically, if Ron were the league's MVP, and yet his off-court stuff was still undermining the team's effort to win a championship, what do you do? One difference here is that Ron is absolutely, positively NOT the Pacers' 'franchise player'. Jermaine O'Neal is.
                    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                    And life itself, rushing over me
                    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: The Dallas game

                      Originally posted by canyoufeelit
                      Al was the guy who restrained Ron in many altercations over the years... think the Pat Riley one. I think Al Harrington would have shown more self-control than Stephen Jackson, would NOT have escalated the situation on the court like Jax did, and would have pulled Artest out of the stands and not been the one who needed to be pulled out, like Stephen was
                      Don't move the target on me...
                      I agree that if Artest got hit it is likely Harrington would've been trying to restrain Ron. I answered to the premise if Harrington was hit by a drink from fans in a similar circumstance that IMO he would've went after the thrower. I have no way of knowing... it is just a feeling. OTOH, at this point in time if it was to happen I think relatively few (if any) would go after the thrower (because a precedent has been set and the punishment (and timeframe) will deter that happening for most).

                      But on 11/19/04 or before I think most NBA players would've went after the thrower in a similar situation. BUT, that said, certain players have more to lose than others and certain players have used up more of their 'benefit of the doubt' cards with the league.

                      ...But we're getting off topic and I'm just speculating.

                      -Bball
                      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                      ------

                      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                      -John Wooden

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: The Dallas game

                        my only beefs with your cuts, Hicks, are Nash, Stoudamire, and Brand.

                        In today's NBA, where Defense is only %40 of the game (it was %60 last year), offense now trumps defense, wheras defense had the edge. Its harder to put your hands on people, due to the new rules.

                        As for Brand, he's the best player in the NBA that nobody knows about. I might even take him over Stoudamire.

                        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


                        • #27
                          Re: The Dallas game

                          I do not think Al would have went into the stands had he been in Artest's role, and I can't think of too many players who would, really. Other players definitely would be pissed off and yell and point, maybe walk into the stands, but certainly not charge and things certainly wouldn't happen the way they did with Ron

                          Now, what I was saying earlier...

                          Hypothetical situation: Put Al in Stephen Jackson's role. That's who replaced him. What does Al do?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: The Dallas game

                            Originally posted by canyoufeelit
                            Okay that's it, here's a list of players that are better than Ron Artest:

                            1) KG
                            2) Duncan
                            3) Shaq
                            4) Kobe
                            5) McGrady
                            6) Ray Allen
                            7) Elton Brand
                            8) Baron Davis
                            9) Steve Francis
                            10) Pau Gasol
                            11) Allen Iverson
                            12) LeBron James
                            13) Richard Jefferson
                            14) Jason Kidd
                            15) Rashard Lewis
                            16) Steve Nash
                            17) Dirk
                            18) Jermaine O'Neal
                            19) Lamar Odom
                            20) Paul Pierce
                            21) Amare Stoudemire
                            22) Dwyane Wade

                            Can you dispute any of these? Of course you can. But not ALL. Let's not get it twisted: Ron is NOT an elite player in the NBA, he is a good complimentary player. But top 15? Naaaah. And I'm sure I forgot some players too


                            You are crazy. Your first 5 plus J.O, as top 6, OK those players are better than Ron.

                            After that I would argue big time.

                            You don't seem to appreciate defense, effort,intensity and the effect those things have on a team.

                            To be a top 10 player which Artest is you first have to at least play in one playoff game. Just one. Brand has never been close to a playoff game.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: The Dallas game

                              So name all those on his list that should be cut, UB. I'm curious to see who your top 10 are.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: The Dallas game

                                As far as which players would have gone into the stands, well we know Legler and Greg Anthony said they would have done the same thing, well they said that until their bosses got a hold of them.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X