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

Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

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

  • #16
    Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

    Originally posted by imawhat View Post
    The only time Rawle should get in the game is when it's over. I see absolutely no reason to play him.
    I think he just needs to start playing within himself. Focus on defense and not turning the ball over.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

      I saw Mark tonight but I missed Slick.

      Mark, nice suit.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

        Originally posted by aero View Post
        im shocked to see a David Harrison sighting
        He didn't play long, but he was fairly impressive in the mintues he played. 8 minutes, 2-2 from the field, 5 points, 4 rebounds.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

          Am I the only one that remembers the year of the collapse? That was - what? 4 years ago?
          “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

          “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

            4 years ago.

            Jamaal Tinsley's mom dies, Ron's behavior catches up, Jermaine's stepdad shoots himself, and Brad Miller goes down with an injury....ALL within a two-week period.

            Previous to that, the Pacers had the best record in the Eastern Conference...Isiah was coaching the all-star team. After that, all downhill.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

              Perhaps this will rival the collapse the LA refers to but I would suggest it's not the same level of collapse. That team was good (at least potentially) our post trade team has never been anywhere near being called good. Not really pre-trade either but at least there was more talent.
              I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

              -Emiliano Zapata

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

                Oh yeah and speaking of this ominous crisis, I'd say from an on-court standpoint it might be a crisis now. But whatever the case, I know this sounds bad, but first it will be hard to avoid the crisis they speak of and second it will hopefully force Bird and Walsh to do something about it.

                Ironically, I thought the move to rid us of Al and Jax was supposed to diffuse this type of tension and bring a more harmouious tenor on multiple levels. What gives here? Hmm...
                I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                -Emiliano Zapata

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

                  Something has happened in the locker room, either between players or between players and Carlisle. Thye've all quit on each other.

                  Jo battled hard in the first three losses this past week scoring and rebounding like an all star...but in the loss to the Clippers there was no fire, no passion, no emotion in his eyes. It's like he's given up on this team. Why further damage his knee and body when no one else seems to care. Foster also seems to have lost his aggressive nature. Murphy looks lost. Armstrong's friendly smiles and pats on the butt are history. They're just going through the motions.....but why. What's happened, why now...why quit on each other with the playoffs looming within sight. Nobody is talking...Bird, Walsh, Carlisle, the players...we're all just talking to ourselves.

                  Kravitz, Slick...somebody get the story for us, please!

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    I am listening to Mark and Slick and they are both saying that if the pacers team doesn't have some success on this road trip things could really snow ball into a crises. They are lacking confidence in each other - they need some success.



                    Keep in mind Mark and Slick are on the team bus, on the charter flight - typically you have to read between the lines to pickup on what they are saying. I sense they are fearing a situation that is unraveling quickly and if it continues it will completely unravel. Mark and Slick need to be listened to because of the access they have to the players in day-to-day type situations. They can't come out and say a lot of things, but what they do say should carry a lot of weight

                    Should be interesting.
                    No new news there. Anybody that's been watching this team can see it. No energy, no emotion, dead offense, deader defense. Falling fast. I don't think we'll make the playoffs, probably by a bunch. Said it a week ago.
                    The ONLY hope this team has of turning it around is if Marquis can play the rest of the season. He's the only guy I see with the skills that can make a difference if he plays. Not that hes so awesome, but he gives the offense another dimension that they desperately need.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

                      I'm not one to jump the gun to join the doomsday bandwagon, but it really looks like more then the sum of a few losses right now. If this team is on the verge of unraveling, then why is it? It looks like the consensus on here is that Rick may need to go, and I have to question his effectiveness myself. So if it's Rick then why is he so much less effective? I couldn't buy into the "players are tuning him out theory". We just have too many new players going back to the start of the season. I don't see them tuning him out this soon. If it's team chemistry I would have expected it to start out weak after the trade, not wait until now to show. I know we're at least a great guard away from competing for a championship, but this team is playing beneath itself right now. I just don't get it.
                      Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

                        It begins and ends with effort.
                        And that's been sometimes yes sometimes no for a couple of seasons now.
                        We aren't as bad as we look now but it seems to be snowballing.
                        Murphy and Dunleavy are good bench players. nothing more. We can't defend anybody with those two plus Tinsley playing.
                        To me if Quis is out they have to play TInsley, then try Granger at 2. At least that gives us a decent shooter at the 2. Then try Shawne at the 3 spot with more minutes to Diagu. Foster starts. Murphy and Dunleavy off the bench.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

                          Originally posted by Cobol Sam View Post
                          I think he just needs to start playing within himself. Focus on defense and not turning the ball over.
                          Yeah, I think he is trying to be more than he is as well. He's actually regressed since the first month and plays more out of control.

                          He's not as good as Baston, but you shouldn't have to fear him being in the game for 5 minutes, but lately that's been the case. He earned his way past James White, but if that choice was made off of what he's shown the last month he'd be long gone.


                          I'm not that thrilled with Mcleod vs Saras at this point either. More and more to me the best part of the deal looks to be Dun for Jack, and initially I considered Ike and Murph the big scores on the trade.



                          There is a good reason for the team to be losing confidence in each other, not too many guys are getting it done. JO of course, Foster on the glass and defense, Quis when he plays, Tins off and on, Dun on offense and only inside the arc...Granger is slumping, as good as Shawne has looked he's still got some of the inconsistancy of a rookie, Army has just totally lost it at this point (hard to be surprised there, we already got more out of him than we could have hoped for), Ike is insanely raw and often confused (god help the Pacers if Ike gets doubled).

                          The team has just bled talent for 2 years now and it's really starting to show. Honestly, bench guys like James Jones and Fred Jones would be getting solid playing time for the Pacers right now. Croshere can't get in a lick in Dallas, but he'd be playing for the Pacers. And AJ would be in for Army at this point.

                          Don't get me wrong on DA, he's a damn fun player to watch and he does hustle, he's just not getting his kind of results very often at this point and he's continuing to try and force the action (and his shot).



                          But I've got a feeling about the Sacto game, I think they'll win it before getting crushed by Utah. After that they get a mild dose of breathing room. I think they are going to get beat out by NY for the playoffs, but they aren't dead yet, there's still time to fix some things.

                          Remember the Colts going into the playoffs? Tell me that loss to Houston or the pounding by Tennessee said Super Bowl to any of you.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

                            Comparing the Pacers situation to that of the Colts is unfair to the Colts. The Colts have been true contenders for the past several seasons before finally winning it. The last time the Pacers were contenders was in the 61 win season.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

                              i think the point is that we shouldn't be freaking out right now. yes they look terrible but so did the colts for that stretch specifically defense and suddenly it clicked. yes we've had a few huge losses YET we're still #6 in the east at the moment. so the end of the world is not upon us.
                              This is the darkest timeline.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Mark & Slick: the Pacers are a team in crises, close to unravelling

                                The Colts have a great talent level, led by arguably the most dominating QB in NFL history.

                                The Pacers have Jamaal Tinsley and Mike Dunleavy Jr.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X