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/Sixers Post Game 42: Living by the three

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

  • #16
    Re: Pacers/Sixers Post Game 42: Living by the three

    what the hell? what time did this game start? I thought the game was tonight...UHGGGGGGGGGG
    oh well nice to see we won...LOL
    just sucks missing a win considering there may not be a whole lot.
    "GIMMIE DAT!"-DANGER

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Pacers/Sixers Post Game 42: Living by the three

      Originally posted by jmoney2584 View Post
      OMG, like totally! I'm psyched to be the Celtics' equivalent of the bread and butter you get at Outback before your salad comes....hot and soft, easy to chew....
      you must be in the "lets tank" crowd...I think we can beat the cavs...or the celtics for that matter...or orlando! they suck!
      "GIMMIE DAT!"-DANGER

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Pacers/Sixers Post Game 42: Living by the three

        Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
        Ike was a pleasant surprise this afternoon.
        An afternoon delight even.
        Read my Pacers blog:
        8points9seconds.com

        Follow my twitter:

        @8pts9secs

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Pacers/Sixers Post Game 42: Living by the three

          Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
          Man, why did JOB let Ike off the bench?

          All he did was score, dunk, rebound, and make assists.

          Hopefully, JO will recover soon.
          NBA: It's not about whether or not your team wins or loses--it is about how your favorites play the game.
          "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

          "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Pacers/Sixers Post Game 42: Living by the three

            Originally posted by OnlyPacersLeft View Post
            you must be in the "lets tank" crowd...I think we can beat the cavs...or the celtics for that matter...or orlando! they suck!
            HAHA yea you got me...red-handed...

            I'm not crapping on others views, I just have my own opinions on things. One of those opinions is that in a 7-game series..we could not beat Cleveland, Detorit, Orlando, or Boston....maybe in a 3-game series, which doesn't exist...but I think we would be exposed for having no inside presence pretty quickly. I would hate to see us take this current line-up into a playoff matchup against the Magic...can you imagine what Dwight Howard would do to our front line? Yeeeesshh, talk about Sportscenter top 10.
            Roy Hibbert.... It's the POWER!!!

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Pacers/Sixers Post Game 42: Living by the three

              Just like Stephen Graham, let's see Ike put together a nice string of games and not just one pretty decent performance against a crappy frontline before crowning him the savior.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Pacers/Sixers Post Game 42: Living by the three

                I don't think anyone is crowning him savior, but he can't put together a string of anything unless he sees floor time.
                Roy Hibbert.... It's the POWER!!!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Pacers/Sixers Post Game 42: Living by the three

                  I looked at the Box score and there were 2 things that stood out.

                  1 ) Murphy with +19 with 2 rebounds and then Foster with -18 with 10 rebounds.

                  2 ) Dunleavy with 7 turnovers.
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Pacers/Sixers Post Game 42: Living by the three

                    I really like Thadeus Young from the 76ers. He's shooting over 50% for the season and looks like a very nice scorer and rebounder, and he doesn't turn 20 until June. It wouldn't surprise me if he ended up one of the 3-4 best players from this draft class. I'd seriously consider moving Granger for him.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Pacers/Sixers Post Game 42: Living by the three

                      Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                      I looked at the Box score and there were 2 things that stood out.

                      1 ) Murphy with +19 with 2 rebounds and then Foster with -18 with 10 rebounds.

                      2 ) Dunleavy with 7 turnovers.
                      I had the day off and got to watch the game. That was nice. Unfortunately, I am sick as a dog and took some meds which made me doze through most of the 4th quarter.

                      On the Murph/Foster +/-, Murphy played well while he was in the game. Foster did his usual Foster things, except that his defense wasn't any better than Murphy's this game. Foster was on the floor for pretty much the whole time during a 16-0 Philly run in the 2nd quarter.

                      Ike played very well off the bench. He had a lot of energy and was very active on the boards. He looked a little lost in the defensive rotations, but what else is new, right? He also had a great pass that got somebody a layup; best pass I've ever seen him make. It was interesting to note that he played the 5 spot, rather than the four.

                      Rush, Granger, and Dunleavy all played very solid games.

                      Tinsley had, I think, 7 of his 12 assists in the first half. He had to sit quite a bit in the second half due to foul trouble. He was a great distributor today, but seemed a little disinterested like he did 2 games ago. His game was solid, but I think his recent squabbles with O'Brien have definitely affected his leadership role.

                      The one thing that really worries me about this new lineup is the rebounding. We got doubled up on the offensive glass today by a team that's not really known for being great rebounders.

                      I was dissapointed that Graham didn't get to play.

                      That's about all I can remember.
                      "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                      - Salman Rushdie

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Pacers/Sixers Post Game 42: Living by the three

                        Originally posted by jmoney2584 View Post
                        I would hate to see us take this current line-up into a playoff matchup against the Magic...can you imagine what Dwight Howard would do to our front line? Yeeeesshh, talk about Sportscenter top 10.
                        Jeff Foster defends Dwight as well as anyone in the league. Before the matchup against Orlando this year (which we won by the way) Dwight was always very much kept in check against us because of Jeff. Dwight exposes the ball too much when he gets it on the low post and Jeff slaps it out of his hands.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Pacers/Sixers Post Game 42: Living by the three

                          Originally posted by mb221 View Post
                          Just like Stephen Graham, let's see Ike put together a nice string of games and not just one pretty decent performance against a crappy frontline before crowning him the savior.
                          That would require the coach putting them in the following game...

                          -Bball
                          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                          ------

                          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Pacers/Sixers Post Game 42: Living by the three

                            Originally posted by Isaac View Post
                            Jeff Foster defends Dwight as well as anyone in the league. Before the matchup against Orlando this year (which we won by the way) Dwight was always very much kept in check against us because of Jeff. Dwight exposes the ball too much when he gets it on the low post and Jeff slaps it out of his hands.
                            I would be more inclined to say Dwight played badly one game than say Jeff played him well. We all know Jeff plays "good azz defense", but in a PLAYOFF type atmosphere the fact is DHOWARD is a superstar and Jeff foster is just a 7 footer who can rebound and move his feet. On top of that, so "maybe" Jeff limits Howard to 15 points...maybe...but DH will dominate the paint on the defensive side and we will be forced to live by the three for an entire series, you can not be effective in the playoffs with ONLY a perimeter game. What happens when Jeff comes out of the game, who guards Howard then? "No one" is the answer you are looking for. What happens when Jeffs back flares up again and he's out, do we want Troy Murphy guarding him? pretty much not. Do i need to elaborate on how we would guard KG? or the all-around insid-out talent od Detroit? I would really hate to give Maxiell the series of his life against our weak interior. Sorry but this team has no real playoff aspirations.
                            Roy Hibbert.... It's the POWER!!!

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Pacers/Sixers Post Game 42: Living by the three

                              Originally posted by jmoney2584 View Post
                              I would be more inclined to say Dwight played badly one game than say Jeff played him well.
                              I think you misunderstood me. In the game we played against Orlando this year Dwight played very well against us. Before then Jeff has always contained him. I remember one game last year where just about every time Dwight touched the ball he lost it a second later due to Jeff knocking it loose.

                              However, the Pacers were in Chicago the next night, (I always arrive early for games here to talk to the players) and I told Jeff he had to realize that he was the one and only Dwight stopper in the league and he said he felt like Dwight had figured out how to score on him towards the end of the game and would probably dominate next time they faced each other.

                              Originally posted by jmoney2584 View Post
                              Sorry but this team has no real playoff aspirations.
                              I agree with you, and I realize that if we make the playoffs we are almost certainly a one and done team. I just feel like young players can do a ton of growing up in the playoffs, even if it is only for 4 or 5 games. Players who play on teams that go to the playoffs mature a lot faster then players who are on lottery teams year in year out. I think Danny did almost as much growing up in the series against New Jersey his rookie year then he did during the entire regular season. I am in the minority of people that would rather see this team get swept by Boston then have a low lottery pick.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Pacers/Sixers Post Game 42: Living by the three

                                Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
                                On the Murph/Foster +/-, Murphy played well while he was in the game. Foster did his usual Foster things, except that his defense wasn't any better than Murphy's this game. Foster was on the floor for pretty much the whole time during a 16-0 Philly run in the 2nd quarter.
                                Only one other player had a negative +/- on the day, and that was Quis with a -1.

                                Was Jeff out there by himself during that run, or is there a little more to the situation?

                                It's just a very odd looking +/- line for him.
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X