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 Vs. Wizards Post-Game Thread - 1/10

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

  • #31
    Re: Pacers Vs. Wizards Post-Game Thread - 1/10

    Hopefully, a few days rest will do PG's shot good. His defense is definitely there, but offensively he is slumping.
    "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

    "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Pacers Vs. Wizards Post-Game Thread - 1/10

      I must have been at a different game. I thought Hill was getting used and abused all night long. While Watson was playing out of his mind. Vogel left Watson in the game to seal the win because Hill was letting Wall get to his spots too easily.
      You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Pacers Vs. Wizards Post-Game Thread - 1/10

        DWEST really stepping and being a vocal leader. im sure many of you heard on the FSN when it was picked up DWEST scolding Lance for the careless turnovers.

        truth is its not just Lance. Its PG as well. seems like the last two plus seasons the VERY SAME issues are present for this team.

        Turnovers, its our downfall. Why can we not with the chemistry at this time not turn the ball over carelessly. I don't know where we are ranked but just seems like we commit way too many careless passes.

        Where is GH3.? seems like his game has digressed. not calling out a trade but its frustrating. he did not step up the other nite vs ATL.


        team still has too many dry spells offensively. with our talent we should score in the hundreds consistently. im beginning to wonder if the offense needs some tweaks to if anything cut down the turnovers. although that is just more to do with Paul and Lance.


        When will Paul and Lance realize were better off just making the simple pass. the behind the head pass to Paul from Lance was ridiculous. unless your Larry Bird make the simple pass. not saying don't take risks but just careless passes .

        this team is suppose to be practicing championship habits. these careless passes in the playoffs are going to cost us.

        the way we play D if we can limit turnovers we beat anyone. I know we are not a pg oriented offense but is that to our advantage.

        other than Rondo its not worth restructuring. just fed up with careless passes that lead to turnovers.


        the Wizards did not even show up tonite. like DWEST scolded Lance on tonite.

        We need to take care of the ball.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Pacers Vs. Wizards Post-Game Thread - 1/10

          Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
          I must have been at a different game. I thought Hill was getting used and abused all night long. While Watson was playing out of his mind. Vogel left Watson in the game to seal the win because Hill was letting Wall get to his spots too easily.
          I was really happy to see this.....that is one of my only criticisms of Vogel is that he will often not fluctuate a bench players minutes even if the guy has got it going. There have been a few games where I thought Scola was a better player than West on that particular night yet Vogel would continue with the same minutes and substitution patterns despite this and bring in West. Watson/Hill is another spot this sometimes happens where Watson will be playing better on that given night and Hill comes in like usual anyways. Tonight though Vogel rewarded Watson's good play and effort with almost all the minutes in the 4th quarter and it was nice to see from Vogel. I hope Vogel continues to expand on knowing when is and isn't the right time to ride hot bench players. Tonight was a good night to ride Watson.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Pacers Vs. Wizards Post-Game Thread - 1/10

            Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
            I must have been at a different game. I thought Hill was getting used and abused all night long. While Watson was playing out of his mind. Vogel left Watson in the game to seal the win because Hill was letting Wall get to his spots too easily.
            Wall only made 4 shots. Here is a replay for each one of them:

            Basket number 1:

            http://stats.nba.com/cvp.html?GameID...GameEventID=20

            As you can see no one is to blame for that. Wall rebounds the ball and runs fast for a fast break basket, PG with West intercept him and stop the ball, West knocks the ball loose, Booker picks it up and leaves it for Ariza who finds Wall in the corner for a wide open 3. Hill was guarding Beal in the other corner and Lance with Roy were slow to get back because they were fighting for a rebound.

            Basket number 2:

            http://stats.nba.com/cvp.html?GameID...ameEventID=300

            Wall goes around a Booker twice and Hill and Roy switch. Roy contests the jumper from the front while Hill goes through the Booker pick and contests the shot from behind. Wall makes the shot anyway.

            Basket number 3:

            http://stats.nba.com/cvp.html?GameID...ameEventID=338

            You could possibly blame this on Hill. He doesn't fight over Gortat's screen quickly and Wall gets loose for a pull-up jumper right over Roy. Of course, Wall's pull-ups aren't the shots that we are particularly afraid of as a team but still Hill could fight over that particular screen better.

            Basket number 4:

            http://stats.nba.com/cvp.html?GameID...ameEventID=433

            CJ turns the ball over, Nene finds the Wall on the break and Wall dunks it. Hill wasn't even in the game.

            So, that's it. You want to put the blame for both of Wall's pull-ups on Hill? You can do it. I would only hold him responsible for the second one (basket number 3) but opinions can differ. Regardless, nothing from this game indicates that Hill was "used and abused". If he was used and abused then Wall would have made more than 4 shots (2 of them when Hill wasn't even guarding him). Wall missed 11 shots and I'm pretty sure that Hill was a big factor why.

            That said, CJ was indeed great today. No argument against that. But Hill was pretty damn good as well.
            Originally posted by IrishPacer
            Empty vessels make the most noise.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Pacers Vs. Wizards Post-Game Thread - 1/10

              Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
              I went to this game. It was nice to see a great crowd against an unexciting opponent.
              Another sellout too.
              "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

              "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Pacers Vs. Wizards Post-Game Thread - 1/10

                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                I know we are not a pg oriented offense but is that to our advantage.
                Yes, it is to our advantage. Look at what Miami does when opponents hit them with a PnR attack. They obliterate them. They make PGs suffer with the way they pressure the ball-handler. They can also put LBJ on the opposing PG and make him give up the ball easily. Our offense is not great but it's exactly what we need against Miami in particular.
                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Pacers Vs. Wizards Post-Game Thread - 1/10

                  Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                  Paul seems to play too loose against lesser competition. I think he does that intentionally. He may be overconfident and trying to mimic Kobe Bryant and he just doesn't have the consistency yet. At this point, I would just let him roll.

                  As for Lance, I think he should be leading the offense every single time down the court.

                  I agree with you on PG but Im not okay with "letting him roll" with it. Somone else mentioned it but we do miss Shaw in that regard. I don't think Kobe ever plays loose or overconfidently he just plays to win game in and game out. I realize Paul is only 23 but it is time he stop playing so "loose" and non chalent.

                  Reggie showboated but he never played loose. He scrapped. I would like to see more scrapp and fundamental basketball.


                  I do not want Lance bringing it up everytime until he stops caring about triple doubles to get paid begins making solid fundamental passes. Love Lance but this is not an and 1 video at rucker park.

                  I love DWEST for busting Lances *** for the sloppy careless passes. Same with PG... PG you cannot make a bounce pass to Roy Hibbert between two players and it be at Big Dawgs knees.

                  When these 2 kids hit their prime they are gonna be damn good but I guess until then we gotta take it in stride with the showboating.

                  Hope Pacers resolve the turnover issues by the Postseason.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Pacers Vs. Wizards Post-Game Thread - 1/10

                    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                    Yes, it is to our advantage. Look at what Miami does when opponents hit them with a PnR attack. They obliterate them. They make PGs suffer with the way they pressure the ball-handler. They can also put LBJ on the opposing PG and make him give up the ball easily. Our offense is not great but it's exactly what we need against Miami in particular.
                    Yet we only get beat by MIA when we turn the ball over. Rondo crushes the Heat. Heat fans fear Rondo in a Pacers uniform.

                    All im really saying is we need to cut down on the turnovers. We average 15 a game and the league worst is 17.

                    http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/te...t/avgTurnovers


                    We can cut it down to 10 if Lance and PG would stop trying to imitate Magic and Larry.


                    Point is this team cant hit the broadside of a barn at times. 15 turnovers equals 15 less shots a game. lets say we cut it down to 8 TO's.

                    that's 7 more shots. and gives us an extra 6 pts a game. Those 6 pts in the playoffs will matter.


                    Again, Im thankful DWEST blasted Lance. Lance got the message clearly it sounded lke when he was interviewed at halftime.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Pacers Vs. Wizards Post-Game Thread - 1/10

                      Glad to see Beal back playing; he's a nice young player and he did well despite some tight D from Paul. Wow, we sure are running PG a lot of PnR plays. Maybe he needs a little more off the ball action. Lance's antics, man. After that charge he picked up, he was just standing under the basket, I guess, yelling at the refs; it seemed like he was asking what happened, like everyone went off the court but no one had clued him in on the situation. I think Larry was actually asleep when the Wiz broadcast cut to him towards the end of the game. 66 points is impressive, but not good for the attention span.

                      Ian Report: Eh, considering he went up against Nene, Gortat, and Seraphin at the end (when he generally struggles against bigger bigs), he did fine. His isos at the end of the shotclock could be a lot funnier. He nearly fouled out but also got a couple of calls on Nene; I thought the refs were inconsistent on most of the stuff around the basket, for Roy too. More dynamic in the first half than the second. Gets docked for missing two out of three free throws, though the Pacers were mostly bad from the line. 'B'.
                      You Got The Tony!!!!!!

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Pacers Vs. Wizards Post-Game Thread - 1/10

                        Originally posted by AesopRockOn View Post
                        I think Larry was actually asleep when the Wiz broadcast cut to him towards the end of the game.

                        haha. thank you for the Larry Bird comment. would love a gif/image of that if available. lmao.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Pacers Vs. Wizards Post-Game Thread - 1/10

                          Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                          Yet we only get beat by MIA when we turn the ball over. Rondo crushes the Heat. Heat fans fear Rondo in a Pacers uniform.

                          All im really saying is we need to cut down on the turnovers. We average 15 a game and the league worst is 17.

                          http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/te...t/avgTurnovers


                          We can cut it down to 10 if Lance and PG would stop trying to imitate Magic and Larry.


                          Point is this team cant hit the broadside of a barn at times. 15 turnovers equals 15 less shots a game. lets say we cut it down to 8 TO's.

                          that's 7 more shots. and gives us an extra 6 pts a game. Those 6 pts in the playoffs will matter.


                          Again, Im thankful DWEST blasted Lance. Lance got the message clearly it sounded lke when he was interviewed at halftime.
                          Do you know when we turn the ball over, my friend? When Lance and Paul try to be PGs and run a lot of PnRs. That's when we turn it over. We don't turn it over a lot when we play through the post like we should against Miami.

                          A big part of our recent turnover problems it's our new offensive sets that involve a lot of motion. It gets us a lot of cleaner looks than we had in the past but they are also riskier and we end up having more turnovers than we had 2 seasons ago.
                          Originally posted by IrishPacer
                          Empty vessels make the most noise.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Pacers Vs. Wizards Post-Game Thread - 1/10

                            Originally posted by AesopRockOn View Post
                            Ian Report: Eh, considering he went up against Nene, Gortat, and Seraphin at the end (when he generally struggles against bigger bigs), he did fine. His isos at the end of the shotclock could be a lot funnier. He nearly fouled out but also got a couple of calls on Nene; I thought the refs were inconsistent on most of the stuff around the basket, for Roy too. More dynamic in the first half than the second. Gets docked for missing two out of three free throws, though the Pacers were mostly bad from the line. 'B'.
                            I would actually give him an A. He was very active tonight and battled for every inch against Nene.
                            Originally posted by IrishPacer
                            Empty vessels make the most noise.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Pacers Vs. Wizards Post-Game Thread - 1/10

                              Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
                              Words can not describe how big of an upgrade C.J. Watson is over D.J. Augustin
                              I'ma try to use some words to describe it though:


                              real big upgrade.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Pacers Vs. Wizards Post-Game Thread - 1/10

                                Originally posted by dal9 View Post
                                I'ma try to use some words to describe it though:


                                real big upgrade.
                                Hella big.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X