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 / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

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

  • #91
    Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

    Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
    SO in crunch time you are okay with inefficient hero ball? I'm not.
    I think this was coaching. ET was brought in here to score points. Our offense has been mediocre to bad all year. ET has the green light, and he had it going for most of the game. He gives us another option that opposing teams have to worry about in the fourth quarter
    Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

      The hierarchy on this team is hilarious. Lance is always looking to impress David West, and now Turner is looking to impress Lance.
      Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

        Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
        Crunch time to me would be the last 6 minutes of the game with the score difference in single digits. I don't think most teams run iso sets until the final minute. Infact most teams in this league run PnR exclusively in crunch time.
        6 minutes is not really useful, what do you call final 2 minutes, the final minute? Evan got us shots he's perfectly capable of making off the dribble with minimal possibility of a turnover. In alot of instances that is better than what our offense manages to generate. Having it as an option is a Good thing. Evan also finds a guy on the pick and pop frequently when his own shot isn't there.
        Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

          Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
          Not people, one single irrational person.
          Not true. Singling out graphic-er is unfair even though I disagree with him on Turner. People fight over little things every day in this forum. We have an "Evan or Lance" thread that was started right after Evan played his first game here and has somehow devolved into a Granger vs Bosh debate (I don't know why). The "Danny Granger signs with the Clippers" thread devolved quickly into a Granger bashing thread. In every game thread we have people that question this team and say that they are not true championship contenders and whine about not beating the other team by 20 points night in and night out.

          We're fighting about almost everything lately while there is no reason at all for infighting.
          Originally posted by IrishPacer
          Empty vessels make the most noise.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

            Originally posted by Coopdog23 View Post
            define hero ball
            Well there are lot of situations where it applies in my opinion.
            Player A gets the ball at the 3pt line, dribbles around a bunch of screens and forces a tough contested shot. While never passing the ball.
            Player A gets the ball in a close game and chucks a quick shot early in the shot clock cause he was feeling it. While never passing the ball.
            Player A gets the ball at the end of a game and waives everyone off so he can go one on one for the contested stept back fadeaway (which is a terribly inefficient shot).

            But its called Hero ball because only a handful of players in the league actually excel at it.
            You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

              Originally posted by daschysta View Post
              6 minutes is not really useful, what do you call final 2 minutes, the final minute? Evan got us shots he's perfectly capable of making off the dribble with minimal possibility of a turnover. In alot of instances that is better than what our offense manages to generate. Having it as an option is a Good thing. Evan also finds a guy on the pick and pop frequently when his own shot isn't there.
              I call it all crunch time if its in the final 6 minutes of the game, or the 2nd half of the 4th quarter. If its a close game then its crunch time. Again I say just cause he is capable of making them doesn't make them good shots. I mean hell that is what Granger was criticized for around here for years. Taking shots that he is capable of making.
              Last edited by graphic-er; 03-02-2014, 01:45 AM.
              You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

                Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                So excited that ET is playing well! After 2 plus years, Larry Bird finally has his "instant offense" guy off the bench.
                Nice to have a guy that can come off the bench and get his own shot at will, big Danny fan, but he couldn't do it

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

                  Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                  Not true. Singling out graphic-er is unfair even though I disagree with him on Turner. People fight over little things every day in this forum. We have an "Evan or Lance" thread that was started right after Evan played his first game here and has somehow devolved into a Granger vs Bosh debate (I don't know why). The "Danny Granger signs with the Clippers" thread devolved quickly into a Granger bashing thread. In every game thread we have people that question this team and say that they are not true championship contenders and whine about not beating the other team by 20 points night in and night out.

                  We're fighting about almost everything lately while there is no reason at all for infighting.
                  It's human instinct to not be happy, and always look for small things to complain about. I laughed out loud at your Granger Bosh comment, it shifted with a comment about Wade, and then just shifted toward the Heat. People are obsessed with beating the Heat, rightfully so, and know the Pacers will have to play their best to beat the Heat. They see errors(sometimes overdramatized) and point them out. I don't think its fair to complain about people who don't want to just heap praise upon the team. People want their opinions to be known, which is fine. I guess I don't see the issue with people posting thoughts about a player. The forum was clearly split over Granger, and the people who were happy to see him traded are considered haters, and I don't think that is fair. You don't have to like every player on your roster.

                  I agree it's unfair to pick and choose who you criticize when players make the same mistakes. However, it happens, and it's usually specific posters who you can choose to ignore if they bother you. I'm sure some people ignore me, but that doesn't really bother me.

                  This forum will only be truly happy when the Pacers win the championship. I promise no one will be negative when that happens.
                  There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

                    If you have a problem with the way Turner played at the end don't be mad at Turner. He was doing exactly what Vogel said/called plays to do.

                    Face it Vogel's offense is not built around having a PG direct and create for others. It is about having 2-3 ball handlers that can create for themselves or others (along with pounding it inside). With the players we have on our roster this is absolutely the way we should play anyway... main thing we need more of/ more consistency of doing is more off the ball movement. You really can not fault a guy for taking certain shots when no one is moving and there isn't easy pass to a team mate (see it when Hibbert posts up, Turner gets into the lane, among others).
                    "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

                      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                      Attempting to guard three aggressive wings at the same time will be a challenge for anyone. I really like Turner running the point.
                      I think this is probably one of the best points made in this thread. That's really why Vogel went with Turner and not Watson. Well that and Turner being a better, bigger defender.

                      Although it was Turner who controlled the ball down the stretch, it just as easily could have been Lance. I think Vogel realized that Boston did not have the personnel to adequately guard both players. I would imagine that both players were encouraged to work the ball, depending on Boston's matchup. It just worked out that Boston didn't switch off, so we worked through Turner and not Lance.

                      What I liked about Turner is that he seems to know his limitations. No matter how open he was at the 3-point line, and it was a lot, he only took the one three point attempt. Instead, he repeatedly went to his preferred spots, getting a 8 to 10 foot shots about anytime he wanted them.

                      Having Turner and Lance, both very capable slashers, on the floor together will prove to be a huge advantage for us. Paul can take advantage of some match ups, but just isn't nearly as good as the other two at handling the ball in traffic. With Turner and Lance on the court together, trying to create their own opportunities, it should result in a lot of open looks for Paul and West/Scola.

                      I've long been a fan of Danny Granger, but like everyone else I did see the handwriting on the wall. I think most would concede that a player with Turner strengths does provide a better fit with the needs of the team. We will miss Granger's post defense, but Turner's midrange game, slashing/creating abilities, along with an overall equivalent to better defensive presence, provides dynamics that are more valuable to us. I think Turner's fit will only get better at both ends of the floor as he plays more and more minutes with the team.

                      Obviously, most of us are absolutely giddy about the future possibilities. It appears to me that Turner may prove to be a player that gives the Pacers a lot of options this summer if the Pacers are forced to choose between Lance and Turner, or even GHill.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

                        Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                        Why? Why do we need someone to be the devil's advocate? Why do we need to constantly argue? Why do we need to constantly seperate ourselves in "Lance camp" / "Turner camp" / "Granger camp" / "X camp"?

                        Man, I just don't get it.
                        Whoa, there man. I think he was merely interjecting a little humor to deflect some of the tension of the discussion.

                        And, wink-wink, I think he also realizes that V was wrong just as often as he was right.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

                          Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
                          It's human instinct to not be happy, and always look for small things to complain about.
                          No, I don't think that this is the case. I don't believe that this tendency is human instinct. If it is then apparently I'm not human and I'd like to believe that this is not the case

                          Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
                          I don't think its fair to complain about people who don't want to just heap praise upon the team. People want their opinions to be known, which is fine. I guess I don't see the issue with people posting thoughts about a player. The forum was clearly split over Granger, and the people who were happy to see him traded are considered haters, and I don't think that is fair. You don't have to like every player on your roster.

                          I agree it's unfair to pick and choose who you criticize when players make the same mistakes. However, it happens, and it's usually specific posters who you can choose to ignore if they bother you. I'm sure some people ignore me, but that doesn't really bother me.
                          I've said it a lot of times and I'll say it again. Everyone has the right to voice their opinion. Different opinions are natural and I believe that disagreement is good for the board as a whole.

                          I just don't believe that we're using our disagreements the right way. Instead of discussing about them we end up arguing. There is a difference between discussion and arguing.

                          About your Granger point now. Some people have proved over time that they dislike Granger, no matter what. Others have proved that they dislike Lance. I don't get why anyone would dislike any current or former Pacer but that's just me. Everyone has the right to like or dislike a certain player. I just don't get why we have to argue about one's personal likes and dislikes. That's the issue here.

                          Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
                          This forum will only be truly happy when the Pacers win the championship. I promise no one will be negative when that happens.
                          I really don't believe this, my friend. This day will come soon and I'm almost certain that we'll still see someone complain about something.
                          Originally posted by IrishPacer
                          Empty vessels make the most noise.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

                            I DIDN'T WATCH A SECOND OF THE GAME BUT **** THIS TEAM THEY ARE DONE ONLY WINNING BY 5 AGAINST THE ****ING CELTICS? GET REAL!!!!! TITLE CONTENDING TEAMS DON'T DO TURNOVERS EVER THEY HAVE NOTHING BEST RECORD IS A FARCE SOJFSFWFJWS;LFSO B ALLS!

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

                              Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                              No, I don't think that this is the case. I don't believe that this tendency is human instinct. If it is then apparently I'm not human and I'd like to believe that this is not the case



                              I've said it a lot of times and I'll say it again. Everyone has the right to voice their opinion. Different opinions are natural and I believe that disagreement is good for the board as a whole.

                              I just don't believe that we're using our disagreements the right way. Instead of discussing about them we end up arguing. There is a difference between discussion and arguing.

                              About your Granger point now. Some people have proved over time that they dislike Granger, no matter what. Others have proved that they dislike Lance. I don't get why anyone would dislike any current or former Pacer but that's just me. Everyone has the right to like or dislike a certain player. I just don't get why we have to argue about one's personal likes and dislikes. That's the issue here.



                              I really don't believe this, my friend. This day will come soon and I'm almost certain that we'll still see someone complain about something.
                              Agree on all accounts. When people feel they are disrespected, they get confrontational. It escalates from there. I'm sure I'm guilty of it as well.
                              Couple phrases that get people going are, "Did you even watch the game?" "I don't think you understand basketball." "You are crazy" Ganging up on people generally brings out hostile emotions as well. (I know I am guilty of this as well)

                              Calling someone a homer, a pessimist, or any other thing that isn't considered a perfect poster gets people going as well. I do wish conversations were generally more civil.

                              I really don't think RealGm is all that much better. The over-moderation there helps a little bit I guess, but the General NBA thread gets heated quite consistently. Obviously, you are a mod there. What are your opinions on it?
                              There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers / Celtics Post Game Thread - 3/1

                                Originally posted by cdash View Post
                                I DIDN'T WATCH A SECOND OF THE GAME BUT **** THIS TEAM THEY ARE DONE ONLY WINNING BY 5 AGAINST THE ****ING CELTICS? GET REAL!!!!! TITLE CONTENDING TEAMS DON'T DO TURNOVERS EVER THEY HAVE NOTHING BEST RECORD IS A FARCE SOJFSFWFJWS;LFSO B ALLS!
                                Lol.

                                You didn't realize there was haberno in your salsa?

                                Or, maybe the Ben-gay crept a little north of your knees?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X