Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Pacers/old Brooklyn postgame thread

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

  • #31
    Re: Pacers/old Brooklyn postgame thread

    Mini Magic...

    One improvement Lance has made is that he's upping his level of play on the road. He'd already upped it at home. He needs to maintain a level of consistency on the road. It doesn't have to be 'this' good like tonight though...

    His energy is infectious. Not just to the team but to the fans too. And when you have a player that likes passing the ball like he does and making plays, that is also infectious.
    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


    • #32
      Re: Pacers/old Brooklyn postgame thread

      I hate Paul Pierce that is all

      (oh yes great win)

      Sucks that we have to wait till Saturday to see them play again.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Pacers/old Brooklyn postgame thread

        Just going over the Nets roster, I realized that I strongly dislike most of their players. Screw Plumlee, screw Pierce, screw Garnett, screw Deron Williams, screw Andray Blatche, and the biggest middle finger to their drunk-driving, wife-beating head coach. If they were relevant I would probably hate that team, but since they are nothing I can't really care about them.

        Every game like this I grow more and more arrogant with the Pacers. It's getting to the point where other NBA teams outside of Miami, OKC, San Antonio, and Portland are hard to watch because they are just so much worse at basketball than the Pacers.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Pacers/old Brooklyn postgame thread

          I liked and respected the Celtic versions of Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett (though I'm sure I would have quickly learned to hate them if the Pacers had ever matched up against them in the playoffs over the last couple years), but watching them right now in Brooklyn uniforms is just pathetic.

          KG's career unofficially ended when freaking Andrea Bargnani was serving him up with trash talk a couple of weeks ago. That spoke volumes about KG's current place on the totem pole. No one respects that clown anymore and his whole intense act is just a sad parody of itself at this point. If his career were a dog, then he's at the stage where he's a 16 year old with cataracts that's going to the bathroom uncontrollably in the house. It's time to put KG's career out of its misery.
          Last edited by Sollozzo; 12-24-2013, 01:51 AM.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Pacers/old Brooklyn postgame thread

            The poster in question does the same thing on the Colts forum as well, it's pretty annoying.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Pacers/old Brooklyn postgame thread

              Paul Pierce's first scoreless game since 1999.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Pacers/old Brooklyn postgame thread

                Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                I liked and respected the Celtic versions of Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett (though I'm sure I would have quickly learned to hate them if the Pacers had ever matched up against them in the playoffs), but watching them right now in Brooklyn uniforms is just pathetic.

                KG's career unofficially ended when freaking Andrea Bargnani was serving him up with trash talk a couple of weeks ago. That spoke volumes about KG's current place on the totem pole. No one respects that clown anymore and his whole intense act is just a sad parody of itself at this point. If his career were a dog, then he's at the stage where he's a 16 year old with cataracts that's going to the bathroom uncontrollably in the house. It's time to put KG's career out of its misery.

                I never liked KG to begin with or Pierce for that matter but I agree those two are done and should just accept it. Even a crippled Kobe right now appears more effective than they've been in the few games he played this season.

                Of course when it comes to Pierce a large part of my annoyance with him is his incessant need to throw his chewed gum at fans here.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Pacers/old Brooklyn postgame thread

                  Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
                  Paul Pierce's first scoreless game since 1999.
                  Scoreless or clueless?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Pacers/old Brooklyn postgame thread

                    sure is fun having a great team to follow again. they have come so very far from the days of running stretch 4 for 48 minutes.
                    no murphy/posey ball to leave me feeling sick and depressed!
                    instead, we have a well-balanced squad that can hurt you from multiple angles and the defense is routinely great and often suffocating.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Pacers/old Brooklyn postgame thread

                      Lance keeps impressing me. There's just no way we can let him go.
                      //

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Pacers/old Brooklyn postgame thread

                        Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                        Go to a few threads before the season and you may find a few posts I made about Stephenson having more potential than Paul George.

                        I am sticking to that.
                        And my offseason idea was to trade Lance since he is a hot commodity and could land you a top 5 pick, giving you talent back (hopefully) and a badly needed salary break. The reasoning is that you couldn't get near the same value for an old, returning from injury Danny as you could for an up and coming talent, not that I hated Lance's game or anything.

                        But even in that thinking it's still a disaster now as he's blown past anything you could reasonably expect from a top 5 pick (ie, you can get better but the odds are against it). We saw Danny and Paul show dramatic improvements, but somehow Lance has outdone both of them. It's very enjoyable to see him finding a real NBA game to sprinkle his street game onto. Just two years ago he wasn't a strong shooter and had very little rhyme or reason to the spectacle he tried to put on most nights. Now, even with the flash and shimmies, he's making brilliant basketball choices. That's the part that should be emphasized because that had been how he used to waste his talent - poor choices.

                        This isn't just Lance getting older, this maturity takes work and a good environment. I've heard others say it as well as myself, you couldn't just put Lance on any NBA team 2 years ago and get this kinda game out of him. This is an ideal situation for him, tailored to his needs when it comes to real growth.



                        So 4 games now Ian has looked like the "holy smokes, he could almost start instead of Roy" version that we kept seeing glimpses of but never really saw for a full game. It's not just his hands. His blocks and rebounds have been those of a guy really locking into an awareness of his role and the flow of the game. Dare I say that the Detroit game was Ian's "PG24 in GSW" game? He and Roy really got a reality check vs Monroe and Drummand and you'd almost think he took it really personal.



                        The interior passing is through the roof. I've noticed them starting to really work off West cutting to the FT line for backdoor passes (like against post fronting and QB pointed out a game or two ago) and even when guys haven't been ready you are seeing the attempt to make that one final passing step that leads to dynasty kinda offense. I told Trader Joe that to me it's a thing that will look sloppy for a bit, but by March/April it will be a huge strength.


                        Transitions!!! After a decade or more of watching transitions being blown, this roster is starting to really work a multi-player transition pretty well. Even last year and some of this year they tended to just have one guy drive it the entire length on a break. But lately they've been getting more adventurous with transition passes. The Watson-Lance combo was especially nice.



                        Overall this team doesn't look like a team trying to figure out their identity or how to play. They look like a team that knows what they can do on a simplistic level and is now really interested in pushing itself farther in terms of true team interaction. It so reminds me of the kind of ball you'd see out of the 80's Lakers/Celts/Bad Boys and to a lesser extent Jordan's Bulls (they leaned on him more than those other 3 teams leaned on one star).



                        The Pacers should just use a clown car to introduce the team because it's like dangerous players just keep popping out endlessly. The number of guys that can really hurt you, and at either end, is incredible.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Pacers/old Brooklyn postgame thread

                          Also it sucked to see Granger not yet ready to handle a back to back. Not that we should expect it, just that it sucked watching the game that probably had to happen for Danny as part of his recovery. At least he gets some days to recover and now he's put that first back to back behind him. Once he's up to speed and you have a serious threat from Paul, Lance and Danny, how do you stop it? Any one of them can clearly light up the board in a hurry and that doesn't even address the risk of Hill, West, Scola and Hibbert to score.

                          They could very well be dialed in by the time they see Miami again, and those last 2 games could really change the Vegas odds drastically.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Pacers/old Brooklyn postgame thread

                            Not sure if anyone was watching the Brooklyn broadcast, but it was really sad. Blowing out the Rockets and the Celtics was fun because those are two teams on the way up and we just killed them. But this was a funeral without any eulogies. There was a point in the broadcast where they "interviewed" Joe Johnson about Brook's season ending injury. The color guy described it as "Joe getting punched in the stomach after every question". I wasn't even mad at the Pierce flagrant-2, almost kind of expected it. Right now, the Nets look like what New York City streets smell like. Kind of a bummer to be honest.

                            Ian Report: What Seth said.

                            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                            So 4 games now Ian has looked like the "holy smokes, he could almost start instead of Roy" version that we kept seeing glimpses of but never really saw for a full game. It's not just his hands. His blocks and rebounds have been those of a guy really locking into an awareness of his role and the flow of the game. Dare I say that the Detroit game was Ian's "PG24 in GSW" game? He and Roy really got a reality check vs Monroe and Drummand and you'd almost think he took it really personal.
                            Ian actually outplayed Hibbert today, though Roy had some foul trouble and looked a little slow in the first half on his post-ups. It got better in the second half with some nice spins; no idea how KG got to the free throw line. Mahinmi looked like he was leading the garbage time unit on offense and defense, a big step up for him on the road. Some of his nice plays came off disinterested Nets sadness, but he did his thing. B+
                            You Got The Tony!!!!!!

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Pacers/old Brooklyn postgame thread

                              Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                              If his career were a dog, then he's at the stage where he's a 16 year old with cataracts that's going to the bathroom uncontrollably in the house. It's time to put KG's career out of its misery.
                              OK, this is a good analogy, but I just read that somewhere else (or here) a few days ago. Did you say that in another thread recently or steal that from someone else?

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Pacers/old Brooklyn postgame thread

                                Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
                                Paul Pierce's first scoreless game since 1999.
                                The Pacers have a habit of doing that to the former Boston Celtic Geriatric 3. Pierce with a scoreless game....the Pacers regularly do that to Ray Allen. Next goal...make KG scoreless .
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X