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

4/16/2014 Game Thread #82: Pacers Vs. Magic

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

  • Re: 4/16/2014 Game Thread #82: Pacers Vs. Magic

    Good to see the guys playing relatively well. Only caught the last quarter and a half, but no such thing as a bad W. Have a little momentum heading into the playoffs.

    Now we go Hawk hunting
    Forever struggling to convince myself "In Larry we trust"
    Writer at NoseBleedSectionSports.com

    Comment


    • Re: 4/16/2014 Game Thread #82: Pacers Vs. Magic

      Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
      It would be really great to see a productive bench unit, like these guys are displaying now, during the playoffs.
      He won't play half of them.

      Comment


      • Re: 4/16/2014 Game Thread #82: Pacers Vs. Magic

        Bobkitties pulled away from Chicago... We get the Bulls rd 2 assuming we both win in rd 1...
        Abba Zaba, your my only friend.

        Comment


        • Re: 4/16/2014 Game Thread #82: Pacers Vs. Magic

          Originally posted by BenR1990 View Post
          I'm probably in the minority here, but the last few days I've been thinking I'd rather have the Bulls in the second round over Toronto. Toronto having that potential to shoot lights out scares me in addition to Valanciunas playing some excellent basketball the last couple weeks. At least with Chicago you know if you get to 90 first, you're probably winning.
          I absolutely feel the same....I think Toronto presents the toughest match-up in the East for the Pacers not named the Heat. They have proven they can out rebound us. They have a tough PG in Lowry and DeRozen really seems to play great against us. I really want to avoid them in the 2nd round.

          Comment


          • Re: 4/16/2014 Game Thread #82: Pacers Vs. Magic

            Originally posted by Shade View Post
            Our bench: 2-0, both games on the road, over 100 points in each game.
            They have certainly done their part.
            Originally posted by IrishPacer
            Empty vessels make the most noise.

            Comment


            • Re: 4/16/2014 Game Thread #82: Pacers Vs. Magic

              Sounds like LaVoy may get some run in the playoffs.

              Comment


              • Re: 4/16/2014 Game Thread #82: Pacers Vs. Magic

                Originally posted by Shade View Post
                Sounds like LaVoy may get some run in the playoffs.
                Where you getting this from? I would love this I think LaVoy is a great back up. His offensive game seems so smooth and he is great at positioning for rebounds. He is just all around a smooth player.

                Comment


                • Re: 4/16/2014 Game Thread #82: Pacers Vs. Magic

                  Originally posted by Shade View Post
                  Sounds like LaVoy may get some run in the playoffs.
                  Good. LaVoy has certainly played well enough to deserve some run. Did they say anything about Cope?

                  PS: And what does that mean about Bynum? The Magic announcers said that we expected Bynum to be ready for the playoffs. Do we need to issue a specific 12-man group that competes for the playoffs or can we change them in a day-by-day basis?
                  Originally posted by IrishPacer
                  Empty vessels make the most noise.

                  Comment


                  • Re: 4/16/2014 Game Thread #82: Pacers Vs. Magic

                    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                    I think that this is mainly because Cope can provide what this offense desperately needs at times. Peck focused on a every important point during our struggles. No one could consistently make an open jumper when this team was struggling. Cope can do that. Rasual can do that as well (most of the time, he did have two games against Milwaukee in which he didn't shot very well). That's why a lot of people wanted to see either one of them on the court when we were struggling to make a jumper.

                    I'd also say that Cope's value goes beyond his shooting as well. He is a legitimately good offensive player. He has a good pump fake, he can drive to the hoop (he isn't gonna dunk on anyone but he can score with a running hook and various other ways), he will make the extra pass, he has good enough court vision for a PF and in he knows how spacing work. In general, he understands offense. He isn't a savior but he is a weapon.
                    I know why, I've been promoting getting Butler minutes since Danny was traded. My point was that his offensive ability gets overstated because he can bring something that is needed, but ultimately probably isn't really an actual upgrade. It is more of a trade. Sometimes you need that trade, but ultimately in the long run it is smarter to stick with the guy who is currently playing over the other guy. Usually there is a very good reason why that guy is playing over him, you just don't get to see it because the other guy is playing limited minutes usually not against the same level of competition.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 4/16/2014 Game Thread #82: Pacers Vs. Magic

                      Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                      Do we need to issue a specific 12-man group that competes for the playoffs or can we change them in a day-by-day basis?
                      They can be changed in and out as long as players are eligible to play in the playoffs (all our guys are).
                      "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


                      • Re: 4/16/2014 Game Thread #82: Pacers Vs. Magic

                        Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                        Good. LaVoy has certainly played well enough to deserve some run. Did they say anything about Cope?

                        PS: And what does that mean about Bynum? The Magic announcers said that we expected Bynum to be ready for the playoffs. Do we need to issue a specific 12-man group that competes for the playoffs or can we change them in a day-by-day basis?
                        Not sure what our plans are with Bynum but I wouldn't be apposed to holding Bynum out until we play Miami. That is the one team he can truly make a big difference against this year in the playoffs.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 4/16/2014 Game Thread #82: Pacers Vs. Magic




                          Looks like they are having fun again....
                          "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


                          • Re: 4/16/2014 Game Thread #82: Pacers Vs. Magic

                            Originally posted by VideoVandal View Post
                            Not sure what our plans are with Bynum but I wouldn't be apposed to holding Bynum out until we play Miami. That is the one team he can truly make a big difference against this year in the playoffs.
                            I agree. We have to get there first but I said all along if Bynum could help us win just 1 game against the Heat it would be worth it.
                            Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                            Comment


                            • Re: 4/16/2014 Game Thread #82: Pacers Vs. Magic

                              Originally posted by khaos01207 View Post
                              All the sudden the team is together.
                              perfect timing, right?
                              Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 4/16/2014 Game Thread #82: Pacers Vs. Magic

                                Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                                I know why, I've been promoting getting Butler minutes since Danny was traded. My point was that his offensive ability gets overstated because he can bring something that is needed, but ultimately probably isn't really an actual upgrade. It is more of a trade. Sometimes you need that trade, but ultimately in the long run it is smarter to stick with the guy who is currently playing over the other guy. Usually there is a very good reason why that guy is playing over him, you just don't get to see it because the other guy is playing limited minutes usually not against the same level of competition.
                                I think that what he brings is an actual upgrade when used in the right context and against the right match-up.

                                I'll give two examples from last year's playoffs:

                                1) The Atlanta series. Atlanta starts Horford at C, Smith at PF, Korver at SF, Harris at SG and Teague at PG in the 2 first games of the series in Indiana. What was the result of this? PG went bonkers against Korver. He went to the line 18 times in game 1 (and also had a triple-double) and then dropped 27 points and 8 rebounds (along with 4 steals) in game 2. We won both games with ease. What did Atlanta do when the series headed to Atlanta? They adapted and changed their starting line-up.

                                They started Johan Petro at C, Horford at PF, Smith at SF, Harris at SG, Teague at PG and brought Korver off the bench. Petro only played 14 minutes but his presence at the beginning of the game resulted in a lot of Atlanta fast breaks because Horford didn't have to block out Hibbert anymore and was free to run the break. Atlanta got a 13-point lead in the first half and never looked back. They blew us out by 21 points. They stuck with this line-up in game 4 and won again (although, this time they won because Korver went 5/8 from 3).

                                The series returned to Indiana and it was our time to adapt now. And we did. We instructed Lance to attack the boards more aggressively (12 rebounds in game 5 and 11 in game 6) and push the pace. We got the ball to Hibbert a lot and he was able to punish Atlanta's big. And we won the series.

                                2) The New York series. We won game 1 because our starting 5 was awesome, we outrebounded them by 14 and DJ Augustin went off for 16 points in 13 points (Tyler's 8 points in 11 minutes were important as well). The Knicks didn't adapt in game 2 and beat us because our offense completely died at the end of the 3rd quarter and we went without a basket for almost a whole quarter (which was almost unprecedented).

                                The series headed to Indiana and in game 3 we won and proved that game 1 wasn't a fluke. We dominated them on the boards again (won the battle by 12) and Roy dropped 24 points on them. The Knicks were forced to adjust and they did it in game 4. They switched their original starting line-up (Chandler at C, Melo at PF, Shumpert at SF, Prigioni at SG, Felton at PG) and attempted to go big (Chandler at C, Kenyon Martin at PF, Melo at SF, Shupert at SG, Felton at PG). Their plan blew up in their face, though. We outrebounded them with an even bigger margin (18 boards) and since Martin couldn't really score it forced them to play 4vs5 offensively which didn't help the shooting of their top scorers at all.

                                They finally make the correct adjustment in game 5. What was that adjustment? They finally played Cope close to 20 minutes. Cope went 3/4 from 3, spread up our D and if you combine this with the fact that GH had a concussion and DJ Augustin was forced to start then you can see why we lost that game. They stuck to this plan in game 6 and almost forced a game 7. Melo had a great game, Cope and Shumpert were hitting 3s and New York, our bench was playing bad and they came really close to beating us in Indiana. Our starters wouldn't allow this, though. Lance, PG and Hibbert combined for 69 points and willed us to victory.

                                Johan Petro was a weapon that the Hawks used against us in the first round and played an important part in their wins in Atlanta. Cope was a weapon that the Knicks used against us after game 4 and they almost forced a game 5 because of it (granted, Shumpert and Melo played a big role in game 6 as well).

                                What I'm trying to say is this. Copeland is a weapon. Butler is a weapon. Scola is a weapon as well. Frank has to ensure that he uses his weapons to the maximum of their abilities. Personally, I believe that he is going to do it. I believe that he knows that he can use Copeland and Butler after those last two weeks.
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X