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 / TWolves Post Game Thread - 2/19

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

  • #76
    Re: Pacers / TWolves Post Game Thread - 2/19

    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
    Dunno, we kept Ian in over Roy, but I thought they went back to Turiaf eventually (just checked, duh yeah they did, he had the spot up jumper as the shot clock was runnning down when had cut it to 5, and then he got hurt) and then Cunningham came in after.

    The Pacers defense should have been to foul Touriaf every time.
    {o,o}
    |)__)
    -"-"-

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Pacers / TWolves Post Game Thread - 2/19

      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
      DISCLAIMER: In no way am I saying officiating is the reason the Pacers lost.

      But, why is that acceptable? Rule books don't make differentials between players attitudes, and whether or not fouls should be called. This hurts the product, and it leads to the frustrations that boil over.
      Because there are a lot of calls in basketball that could legitimately go either way. Which direction they are called depends a lot on the subjective decision of the referee, and if he feels you don't deserve the call in such cases you won't get it.

      We're not talking blatant ignoring of the rules, just human nature when called upon to make a fast decision that is a coin-flip.
      BillS

      A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
      Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Pacers / TWolves Post Game Thread - 2/19

        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
        Agreed, UB. I don't get that same vibe at all. This feels like the opposite this team needs Frank to sit on them, to give them a kick to the rear. I would like to see Cope play more, the starters in particular I think need a stern message. The season ain't over. Right now Lance is acting like he's a superstar and he's not. If he's not careful he's going to turn into Tyreke Evans. How many 3s did he take in the first quarter? 3? Plus another pull up mid range jumper? This is not his game.
        Do we have someone on the bench with the gravitas to play bad cop and be listened to? I have a feeling that's part of what Shaw was able to do; does Nate get the same level of respect?
        BillS

        A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
        Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Pacers / TWolves Post Game Thread - 2/19

          Originally posted by BillS View Post
          Because there are a lot of calls in basketball that could legitimately go either way. Which direction they are called depends a lot on the subjective decision of the referee, and if he feels you don't deserve the call in such cases you won't get it.

          We're not talking blatant ignoring of the rules, just human nature when called upon to make a fast decision that is a coin-flip.
          Yeah, I don't buy it.

          Turiaf/Hibbert is the perfect example. Roy goes straight up, and officials watch closely if his arms come down if there's body contact, and call a foul if they do. Turaif was jumping straight up and then flailing his arms downward at the ball, and didn't get one single foul called on him for doing it. Not one.
          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Pacers / TWolves Post Game Thread - 2/19

            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
            And he's here the real doozy of a conundrum, who has given the best effort since the all star break and played the most above his ability? Ian, of course. So it's not even like putting Bynum in is this simple idea.

            Ian always gives a great effort and yes he has played solid the last couple of games, but we gotta give Bynum a shot as soon as he's ready to go. Bynum if healthy will give the second unit some much needed offense.

            Part of the reason that Lance has played sloppy lately is definitely because he has become a bit of a legend in his own mind, no doubt about that. But I'll cut Lance some slack when he does that stuff with the bench. Let's face it, his bench teammates aren't good right now. Ian will always be limited offensively. Scola and Granger are awful right now. CJ has been a solid offensive player this season, but I get tired of watching him launch long jumpers in transition when there are 20 seconds left on the shot clock.

            But as you said in a different post, PG and Lance need to defer to Hill more. Hill is a damn good player.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Pacers / TWolves Post Game Thread - 2/19

              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
              I thought our offense in the first quarter was awful, which directly led to our atrocious transition defense. (if you watched ESPN, Hubie Brown broke this down rather well) Our offense the rest of the game wasn't much better.

              Our shot selection was painful to watch, our ball movement was terrible, our passing was nonexistant, and we had several players trying to do things on their own (PG and Lance) We didn't trust our offense or our teammates. Were we selfish? - I won't say that, it was more hero ball as in things are going bad so let me bail us out. Instead of trusting the game plan, trusting the system trusting your teammates, trusting the coaching staff, we played hero ball.

              The T-Wolves play a different style of defense. They double team the post, trap ballhandlers, go for steals on every play. And the pacers offense played right into their style. Against that defense you need much more passing and player movement, and ball reversal and if you do that well, you can get some easy shots. There is a reason the T-Wolves are last in defensive FG% and yet 4th in creating turnovers. (My guess is the Spurs slice and dice the T-Wolves defense)

              And our transition defense was disgusting at least partially because of our horrible offense. Every bad shot was like a long outlet pass for the T-Wolves.

              I am expecting the film session today to be extremely painful for the Pacers. if they went play by play and pointed out all the mistakes it might take them 4 or 5 hours.

              A disgusting loss. They did not resemble a good team at all. They did not resemble a together team at all.
              I think this is as upset as I've seen you on this board!

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Pacers / TWolves Post Game Thread - 2/19

                Things that bother me right now.

                When we turn in a great game the next game we seem to lose focus. The better the game the worse we seem to do in the next one. This especially scares me for the playoffs, last year we spotted the Heat a game in game 1, this year I am worried we will blow them out then come back the next game and give it to them by not playing well at all.

                We suck on Back to Backs (at least there are none of these in the playoffs)

                Our D has really fallen off here lately, we went from 82 PPG to 92 in a month and it seems to be getting worse.

                It's also important to keep in mind that Minn NEEDED this game for their playoff hopes to stay alive at all. The Pacers clearly came in not fearing the Wolves and got bit. We will see more of these just bellow or just in the playoffs teams who NEED to win to stay in the race, the Pacers need to understand that they NEED to win to get home court advantage, stop only paying attention to Miami, pay attention to OKC too you want home court in the Finals too.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Pacers / TWolves Post Game Thread - 2/19

                  I have not read this thread outside of page one.

                  I think the next 3 games will be a test for this team. Can they dominate teams on the inside on offense? And can they defend the pick and roll better? I don't think we will know this answer in the next three games. But they have to start addressing these changes.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Pacers / TWolves Post Game Thread - 2/19

                    Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                    What in the world would the return of a bench player have to do with it? That makes zero sense
                    It throws off the chemistry. The players are trying to get him involved instead of him getting himself involved. Just face it Danny has seen his better days. He is nowhere close to the player he was. He is still a nice guy but that is not going to help us get to where we want to go. For all you Granger lovers the experiment is over. He has had plenty of games and should be improving. He is headed backwards and it is obvious.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Pacers / TWolves Post Game Thread - 2/19

                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      Yeah, I don't buy it.

                      Turiaf/Hibbert is the perfect example. Roy goes straight up, and officials watch closely if his arms come down if there's body contact, and call a foul if they do. Turaif was jumping straight up and then flailing his arms downward at the ball, and didn't get one single foul called on him for doing it. Not one.
                      Stop whining you're starting to sound like the Pacers

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Pacers / TWolves Post Game Thread - 2/19

                        Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                        So much for getting back to Inside Out play.
                        Yeah, that was me preaching about that. SMH! I guess I missed that pretty badly, didn't I.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Pacers / TWolves Post Game Thread - 2/19

                          Originally posted by doctor-h View Post
                          Stop whining you're starting to sound like the Pacers
                          It's my party, I'll whine if I want too.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Pacers / TWolves Post Game Thread - 2/19

                            Our next 5 games

                            @MIL, vs LAL, vs MIL, @BOS, vs UTAH

                            We BEST go 5-0.


                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Pacers / TWolves Post Game Thread - 2/19

                              Honestly our schedule is pretty damn cushy up until the next Heat game. If we lose more than 3 games during that stretch we should really be disappointed in ourselves.

                              And honestly, if you look at the Heat schedule during the same time, they probably aren't going to cough up more than 2 or 3 games. So we sort of have to do this. I always assumed this home court would come down to less than 3 games, which really puts an emphasis on our head to head matchups. I believe this team can do it, but they need to focus up. It's do or die time for the 1 seed.
                              Last edited by Trader Joe; 02-20-2014, 12:24 PM.


                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Pacers / TWolves Post Game Thread - 2/19

                                Trader Joe, 5 post entry passes in the entire 1st quarter, one of them to your 7.2 center, that is very very bad.
                                It is not like he doesn't have position, he does, but gets ignored and when he gets a pass it is either to high or to low, or just in general poor.

                                (others) Granger gets no shots, if he doesn't get the ball, the ones he has to take are out of rythm and out of position at the end of a shotclock, the few times he gets the ball in rythm he hits at a very high clip, however i do admit he stops trying after 5 sprints around and being ignored time and again by Lance who rather goes for his own glory.

                                Lance needs to be sat down a while and shown that he is not nearly as good as he thinks he is and that without the team around him, he'd have a very low market value.
                                So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                                If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                                Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X