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

Pretty Interesting Read

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

  • Pretty Interesting Read

    I didn't realize that we were this physical. It seems like once we figure out how a team is beating us we are able to make successful adjustments. In this case, the Jazz were quicker and defending much better.

    Once we started pounding it inside it was over for them. They also seem to have a lot of repect for us.

    Also I find it cool that we still play at Market Square Arena.

    http://www2.sltrib.com/jazz/Main/Sto...004&NUM=141654



    INDIANAPOLIS -- Andrei Kirilenko's face was nicked and scuffed Sunday, blood oozing from a half-dozen tiny cuts as though he had just staggered through 12 rounds with the welterweight champ.
    Figures. He and the Jazz spent the afternoon slugging it out with the Pacers for three quarters, each team landing blow after blow in a battle that looked dead even into the final round. But the Jazz turned their heads for just a moment, and pow! -- the Pacers knocked them out.
    The judges' scorecard in Market Square Arena read 94-80, but the Jazz's fight -- maybe kickboxing would be more appropriate, considering the shot Raja Bell took from Reggie Miller -- with the Eastern Conference leaders was a lot closer than that. Neither team held a lead bigger than six points until the fourth quarter of the foul-filled contest, but the Jazz's nerve finally wavered.
    "We put our heads down for a minute, and that's all it took," said Bell, who played a season-high 40 minutes and scored 21 points. "We were right there for three quarters."
    They were, even though they weren't sinking many shots. For the fifth consecutive game, the Jazz made fewer than 40 percent of their shots, and the total included nine missed layups. "That's like 'our' problem now," said Kirilenko, who led the Jazz with 22 points.
    "It kills us," agreed coach Jerry Sloan. "I guess we're going to have to do layup coaching. Or lay-down coaching."
    Not a bad idea, since "lay down" is what the Jazz did once Indiana, seemingly annoyed at having to work so hard on a weekend, cranked up the pressure near the end of the third quarter.
    The Jazz led 66-62 with 1:30 to play in the third, but they made only one basket, a layup by Jarron Collins, over the next 7 1/2 minutes. Indiana's 17-2 run included 11 free throws, just a sample of the 50 they took during the day, and a good reflection of how aggressive the Pacers were about attacking the basket.
    "They were posting up three different guys at times," Bell said, especially Jermaine O'Neal, who led Indiana with 22 points, and All Harrington, who scored 14. "When a team is punishing you and being aggressive, that's when you've got to return the favor. I don't think we necessarily did that, and that was the game right there."
    It was, especially since when the Pacers took over, the Jazz shied away from shooting. Shooters would get open but pass instead, until the shot clock forced worse shots on them.
    Sloan pleaded with Kirilenko and Sasha Pavlovic to recognize good shots, but finally he grew so frustrated, he yanked point guard Carlos Arroyo just 30 seconds after putting him back in the game when Arroyo popped open for a three-pointer, but passed instead.
    "We play right into their hands because we don't judge our time on the clock well enough," Sloan said. "Our guys get a little panicky, a little scattered. Good teams have the ability to take advantage of those situations, and they've got some veteran guys."
    That might have been the biggest difference Sunday, and it's a formula the Jazz routinely called upon in years past: play even with a lesser team for a while, then put them away with precision play at the end. The Pacers, running away with the East's No. 1 seed, knew when to turn it on, "and right then, our execution went away for little while," Kirilenko said. "We were ahead, then boom -- they were up by 10. And it's pretty hard to come back."
    Especially since the Pacers relentlessly fed O'Neal in the pivot. The all-star forward took 15 free throws, making 13, and keyed a stretch in which 18 of 24 Indiana points came at the line. The Jazz took 31 free throws and lost Jarron Collins and Raul Lopez to fouls, but couldn't bring themselves to complain about the discrepancy.
    "When you pound it inside and the refs see you being aggressive in there, they reward you for that," Bell said.
    Strangely, the biggest complaint about officiating came from Pacers coach Rick Carlisle, who was so livid over an offensive foul called on Miller -- when Miller twice appeared to kick Bell in the groin -- he stormed the court and earned an ejection.
    He missed an impressive fourth-quarter flurry by his team, over the game-but-outgunned Jazz, who lost for the fourth time in five games (and eighth time in 11), but appear recovered from their post-all-star hangover.
    "They are pretty good at post-up game. Everyone posts up and that's pretty hard to guard," said Kirilenko, daubing at his cuts. "That's why they lead the East."

  • #2
    Re: Pretty Interesting Read

    Strangely, the biggest complaint about officiating came from Pacers coach Rick Carlisle, who was so livid over an offensive foul called on Miller -- when Miller twice appeared to kick Bell in the groin -- he stormed the court and earned an ejection.
    If I hadn't seen the game, and this was all I had to go by, I would have imagined it much differently than it actually looked. They make it sound like Reggie's shoes were busting his balls.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Pretty Interesting Read

      Here is the article from Salt Lake's leading newspaper...The Deseret-News

      Jazz can't keep pace

      Experienced Indiana handles Utah kiddie corps
      By Tim Buckley
      Deseret Morning News

      INDIANAPOLIS — Utah winning this one might have been nearly akin to tiny Milan beating Muncie Central in the 1954 Indiana high school state-championship game, inspiring a movie with which you are probably familiar.

      Utah Jazz center Greg Ostertag snares rebound despite efforts of Indiana's Scot Pollard, left, and Anthony Johnson in Sunday's game.

      Darron Cummings, Associated Press
      Fifty years after that historic upset, however, Hoosiers II — NBA-style — was not to be.
      Indiana instead leaned on its veteran savvy Sunday to beat the Jazz 94-80 at Conseco Fieldhouse, using a 9-0 run in the fourth quarter and 21 points from All-Star power forward Jermaine O'Neal to do away with a kiddie-corps team that already this season has pulled off its fair share of unexpected victories.
      "I'm not really sure that we knew what we were doing," said Jazz coach Jerry Sloan, whose 27-30 club ended a four-game Eastern road swing 1-3.
      But Indiana — at 41-15, leaders of the league's Eastern Conference and the NBA's first team to 41 wins this season — did act as if it had a clue or two.
      "You're talking about veteran players that know how to make plays, and know how to continue to execute," Sloan said of those from a franchise that still starts 38-year-old Reggie Miller.
      "When we made a mistake," he added, "we held our heads down and felt sorry for ourselves."
      Sloan was particularly miffed about a sequence late in the third quarter, when the Jazz — hanging with Indiana all the way until then — dropped their guard.
      With Utah up 66-65 and 8.9 seconds to go in the period, starting point guard Carlos Arroyo drove the lane and scooped a layup attempt that failed to fall.
      It was just one of numerous layups Utah would not convert — yet again.
      "It kills us," Sloan said of the Jazz's frequent blown gimmies. "I guess we're gonna have to do some layup coaching," he added. "Or laydown coaching."
      Yet it was what Utah did after Arroyo's miss — or did not do, as was the case — that really ratcheted Sloan's ire.
      Rather than fight for the rebound and hustle back on defense, the Jazz allowed O'Neal to yank down the board and ignite a long-outlet fastbreak that ended with Scot Pollard feeding Jonathan Bender for a slam dunk with less than a second left.
      "I think my mistakes in the third quarter hurt us," Arroyo said.
      "There at the end of the quarter I think I may have gotten hit," he added, "but we didn't get the call, and we didn't get back on defense, and they got (the) layup."
      Monster jam, actually.
      Now up 67-66, the Pacers led the rest of the way.
      "We played with them," Sloan said, "a little bit there for three quarters."
      Or was it the Pacers just playin' with the Jazz?
      "We felt," said Pollard, the Murray native, "like we had to get out there, play hard, play together and show that we're the best in the East."
      That the Pacers did.
      Indiana's separation started when Pollard hooked in a 3-footer with 8:13 remaining.
      He was fouled on the play by Jazz backup point Raul Lopez, and — after a time-out — hit the free throw that followed to spur Indiana's run.
      The Pacers proceeded to take control of the inside on both ends, going hard to the basket to draw several of the 35 fouls that resulted in their whopping 50 free-throw attempts while also pushing the much-meeker Jazz well out on the perimeter.
      "They were pounding it inside on us and (going) to the free-throw line," Jazz swingman Raja Bell said. "That can swing the game, and it did.
      "When a team is punishing you and being aggressive, that's when you have to return the favor," Bell added. "And I don't think we necessarily did that."
      The Jazz instead missed four jumpers during Indiana's decisive run, helping to put the Pacers up 79-68 and assure that the rout was on.
      "We put our heads down, for a minute," Bell said.
      "We stopped execution a little bit — for like five minutes," added Jazz forward Andrei Kirilenko, whose 22 points were a game-high. "And they just went like 'boom' — minus 10 points, and it's hard to get it back."
      Sunday, the Jazz never did.
      "Good teams have that ability," Sloan said of the way Indiana blew open what for three-plus quarters had been a close game.
      "They have the ability to go out and dominate you in that situation," he added. "Our guys get a little panicky and a little scattered."
      In Indiana, it's the difference between being Milan and Muncie Central.
      Except on one fabled day.
      ...Still "flying casual"
      @roaminggnome74

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Pretty Interesting Read

        Strangely, the biggest complaint about officiating came from Pacers coach Rick Carlisle, who was so livid over an offensive foul called on Miller -- when Miller twice appeared to kick Bell in the groin -- he stormed the court and earned an ejection.
        If I hadn't seen the game, and this was all I had to go by, I would have imagined it much differently than it actually looked. They make it sound like Reggie's shoes were busting his balls.
        Well, the one replay I saw did look that way. Reggies straight leg came up and thru Raja's legs and the next thing you saw was RB on the floor holding his nugs.
        *************************
        hmmm RB..raja...coincidence? Yeah and he has NO place being thought of in the same thought baloon with Raaaja Brown.
        *************************
        Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Pretty Interesting Read

          Well Raja said himself that it LOOKED a lot worse than it was. In other words he did a pretty good acting job to let the refs know what happened.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Pretty Interesting Read

            Strangely, the biggest complaint about officiating came from Pacers coach Rick Carlisle, who was so livid over an offensive foul called on Miller -- when Miller twice appeared to kick Bell in the groin -- he stormed the court and earned an ejection.
            If I hadn't seen the game, and this was all I had to go by, I would have imagined it much differently than it actually looked. They make it sound like Reggie's shoes were busting his balls.
            Well, the one replay I saw did look that way. Reggies straight leg came up and thru Raja's legs and the next thing you saw was RB on the floor holding his nugs.
            *************************
            hmmm RB..raja...coincidence? Yeah and he has NO place being thought of in the same thought baloon with Raaaja Brown.
            *************************
            Maybe it was a little revenge for what Bell did to Artest in Dallas last year...Maybe, Reggie was trying to bait Raja into something, like how Raja baited Artest last year in Dallas... Just a thought!
            ...Still "flying casual"
            @roaminggnome74

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Pretty Interesting Read

              I still snicker sometimes when I read accounts about the Pacers' "savvy and experience" seeing as how we are one of the younger teams in the league.
              The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Pretty Interesting Read

                Strangely, the biggest complaint about officiating came from Pacers coach Rick Carlisle, who was so livid over an offensive foul called on Miller -- when Miller twice appeared to kick Bell in the groin -- he stormed the court and earned an ejection.
                If I hadn't seen the game, and this was all I had to go by, I would have imagined it much differently than it actually looked. They make it sound like Reggie's shoes were busting his balls.
                Well, the one replay I saw did look that way. Reggies straight leg came up and thru Raja's legs and the next thing you saw was RB on the floor holding his nugs.
                *************************
                hmmm RB..raja...coincidence? Yeah and he has NO place being thought of in the same thought baloon with Raaaja Brown.
                *************************
                Maybe it was a little revenge for what Bell did to Artest in Dallas last year...Maybe, Reggie was trying to bait Raja into something, like how Raja baited Artest last year in Dallas... Just a thought!

                No, I think Raja was just up in Reggies mug and Reg couldn't deal with it.

                Reggie hasn't really had to deal with anyone defending him hard much this year so when they do, and do it well, it pisses him off I'm sure.

                Especially a 3rd year player

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Pretty Interesting Read

                  I still snicker sometimes when I read accounts about the Pacers' "savvy and experience" seeing as how we are one of the younger teams in the league.

                  You make a great point, I've noticed almost after every game the opposing coach and or players say how '"veteran" the Pacers are.

                  It speaks to the style the Pacers play. Pacers play like a team that has savvy and experience. They are disciplined and under control, unlike in years past and I credit the coaching as much as anything

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X