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

I don't mean to start another O'Brien thread but from today's Philly news.

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

  • #16
    Re: I don't mean to start another O'Brien thread but from today's Philly news.

    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
    People might be absolutely embarrassed to be a Pacers fan - but I'm embarrassed by the lack of fan support and the overall attitude of the city towards this team, this season, right now. I don't think it is right.
    Given our team's history, and what we've done to remedy the problems, you'd think the fans would give the Pacers a second chance. I agree with you 100%.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: I don't mean to start another O'Brien thread but from today's Philly news.

      I think it's overall a good thing.

      Bad short term. But some of the mistakes by management were so egregious--such a break of trust, several in a row, over a long period of time--that the only way the fan base could "save" the franchise was by making their point known by voting with their feet.

      Yes, it will take time to get back on track. But, early results are showing that the new course will be in line with Indiana standards.

      Another option would have been to watch Larry and Walsh get us back to a decent winning record with the same bad principles, rebellious characters, and lack of discipline that the last few years have brought.

      I think without the protest of the fans this could have happened. And it would have been unacceptable. And it would never have led, long term, to a successful franchise or a championship.

      Thank God for the fans. Thank God it looks like we're headed back on the right road.
      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: I don't mean to start another O'Brien thread but from today's Philly news.

        I think JO'B is great. He is everything RC was not. I like to see our coach fired up. He has got this team playing very well and I think if we can get a few more pieces in here we might just compete for a title. Maybe not this year, but soon enough.

        As for the Indiana Pacer fans that live in the area and are able to go to the games but don't. I BOOO them. Wake up and see that you have a competitive and fun team to watch. I know there have been off the court problems, but you have to support your team. I live here in Oakland CA. And I go to Warriors games from time to time. The Warriors fan base is way more supportive of the Warriors then the Pacers fans are of Pacers, at least it seems that way. The fans get up and cheer for their team. I watch 95% of the Pacers games, and I swear the fans sit on there hands for most of the time. God bless Indiana, but the fans need to wake up and get off their conservative butts.
        Last edited by odeez; 12-20-2007, 11:49 AM.
        Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: I don't mean to start another O'Brien thread but from today's Philly news.

          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
          Those are all good points, and I think you are correct. My guess is people don't like the pacers like they used to for the reasons you cite, but they often don't say all of that, they more often will say they don't like them because the team is terrible.

          People might be absolutely embarrassed to be a Pacers fan - but I'm embarrassed by the lack of fan support and the overall attitude of the city towards this team, this season, right now. I don't think it is right.
          I think it's most that, but as far as people coming back the fact that IU, Purdue, and Butler are all worth watching right now probably doesn't help the Pacers. I am a huge Pacer fan, but right now, given the choice, I would much rather watch Butler. BTW, Buck, I know you don't like college basketball, but you should catch a Butler game sometime. They are all available online on HLN. They play beautiful basketball.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: I don't mean to start another O'Brien thread but from today's Philly news.

            Originally posted by Doug View Post
            But it wasn't just about wins and losses.

            The Pacers did their damage with the brawl, then continued with off-court incident after off-court incident. Ron's trade demands, etc.

            IMO, the drop in attendance has much, much more to do with that than with the record.

            People were (and still are, I guess) absolutely embarrassed to be a Pacer fan.

            Trust was broken, and that takes time to earn back.

            At what point in time did you perform a Vulcan mind meld on me?

            That is two post in a row in this thread that you have said word for word what I was thinking.

            Great minds think alike.

            Before long I guess I'll be humming "straight up" buy Puala Abdul. (inside joke for you outsiders)


            Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: I don't mean to start another O'Brien thread but from today's Philly news.

              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
              Those are all good points, and I think you are correct. My guess is people don't like the pacers like they used to for the reasons you cite, but they often don't say all of that, they more often will say they don't like them because the team is terrible.

              People might be absolutely embarrassed to be a Pacers fan - but I'm embarrassed by the lack of fan support and the overall attitude of the city towards this team, this season, right now. I don't think it is right.
              Doug is right UB. This hasn't been a wins and losses issue. People see that we had a legitimate contender until the brawl. That contending would have stood for several years. But player attitudes ripped the heart right out of everything.

              This isn't the time of the year to be passing judgement on the crowds. There is a lot going on with the holidays, etc.

              One thing is interesting. Even here in Iraq, I wouldn't wear my Pacer gear last season because I was embarrassed by the actions of the team - not the record. As a lifelong fan I can deal with the record. But what it took over a three-year period to destroy what the Pacers stood for might take as long to recover.
              The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: I don't mean to start another O'Brien thread but from today's Philly news.

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                Those are all good points, and I think you are correct. My guess is people don't like the pacers like they used to for the reasons you cite, but they often don't say all of that, they more often will say they don't like them because the team is terrible.

                People might be absolutely embarrassed to be a Pacers fan - but I'm embarrassed by the lack of fan support and the overall attitude of the city towards this team, this season, right now. I don't think it is right.
                A guy I work with was offered a free ticket to the Bulls game last week from a friend of his (great seats that his company owns) and he turned him down, because "I'm not gonna go watch a bunch of thugs. That's all that team is, a bunch of thugs. Dunleavy's the only guy I like at all."
                Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: I don't mean to start another O'Brien thread but from today's Philly news.

                  Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                  A guy I work with was offered a free ticket to the Bulls game last week from a friend of his (great seats that his company owns) and he turned him down, because "I'm not gonna go watch a bunch of thugs. That's all that team is, a bunch of thugs. Dunleavy's the only guy I like at all."


                  I'm not attacking you, Kegboy, but that is a lame excuse from that guy. If you asked him to back up that point with a lot of evidence based on players on our CURRENT team there's not a whole lot he could give you other than Tinsley's misgivings.

                  The unlikable players were Artest (obviously) and arguably Jackson. I wish people would just get the **** over it and go back to the games. It's not like that guy is perfect either.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: I don't mean to start another O'Brien thread but from today's Philly news.

                    Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                    A guy I work with was offered a free ticket to the Bulls game last week from a friend of his (great seats that his company owns) and he turned him down, because "I'm not gonna go watch a bunch of thugs. That's all that team is, a bunch of thugs. Dunleavy's the only guy I like at all."
                    I've heard the same thing from a lot of people. I just consider them ignorant because they really have no idea what they are talking about. But I never challange them when I talk to them - because it obvious they aren't up for a discussion about it. The really sad thing is there are often racial overtones. (I don't know your co-worker, so I don't know about him, but whenever the thug comment is made, more often than not it is racial).

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: I don't mean to start another O'Brien thread but from today's Philly news.

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      I've heard the same thing from a lot of people. I just consider them ignorant because they really have no idea what they are talking about. But I never challange them when I talk to them - because it obvious they aren't up for a discussion about it. The really sad thing is there are often racial overtones. (I don't know your co-worker, so I don't know about him, but whenever the thug comment is made, more often than not it is racial).

                      That's mean-spirited. You have no proof of that statement. Even overlooking the "racial" allegation, you can't judge what criteria people use to decide what they approve of or not.

                      I don't mean to pick a fight, but it is unreasonable of you to say people are ignorant or "not up to a discussion" because they have decided they can live without the Pacers. Sure, many of the people you are talking about couldn't name this year's line-up. But it is unreasonable to expect them to know. They stopped paying attention months ago for what seemed to them very good reasons, and when they are not paying attention they don't keep up with changes. That is not ignorance on the part of the public.



                      Suppose we were kids planning to play ball on a Sunday afternoon, and I really wanted to play but you were indifferent to it. Now suppose it starts raining hard just a while before we were going to start, and you think, "Screw it" and go down in your basement and start playing x-box. (Or, given that it's you and me, let's say you start playing "Rock 'em, Sock 'em Robots"). Anyway, I'm sitting there watching out the window and after a while, the rain stops and I'm thinking, "OK, lets play!" So I call you. What would your answer be? You would say, "We can't play. It's raining." I wouldn't call you ignorant or a racist at that point. The burden would be on me to convince you to go upstairs and look out a window and see for yourself that the rain had stopped.



                      The Indianapolis public have no duty or obligation to spend their money in Conseco Fieldhouse. The burden is entirely on the part of PS&E, to 1) present a product that is attractive to a public that has a lot of options, and b) promote than product so convincingly that people will forget what they "know" and begin to choose a night at Conseco over their other options.
                      Last edited by Putnam; 12-20-2007, 01:47 PM.
                      And I won't be here to see the day
                      It all dries up and blows away
                      I'd hang around just to see
                      But they never had much use for me
                      In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: I don't mean to start another O'Brien thread but from today's Philly news.

                        Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                        That's mean. You have no proof of that statement.
                        Re-read the last sentence.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: I don't mean to start another O'Brien thread but from today's Philly news.

                          Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                          Dunleavy's the only guy I like at all."
                          Let me provide reasons to explain the response of Kegboy's coworker (not that I agree with him, but some sympathy has to be offered for understanding the casual observer):

                          Three of our top players have been involved in "thuggish" appearing behavior.
                          - JO slugged a guy on National TV
                          - Tins was involved in two nightclub altercations
                          - Quis was involved in a nightclub altercation

                          In terms of a "likeable" character, the guy has a decent argument except he left out Granger.

                          A plausible argument can be made that Dunleavy and Granger are the only two likeable non-thugs getting serious minutes for the Pacers.
                          - Murphy is not very good, thus not very likeable.
                          - JO's selfish-appearing slogball adds to his non-likeability.
                          - Foster's lack of offense takes him out of the running in a "likeability" contest.
                          - Ike is injured
                          - Shawne is getting DNP-cds (and has his own "incident")



                          I'm not saying I agree. I'm just saying, put yourself in the casual fan's shoes. Dunleavy is a likeable player. This particular casual fan messed up by not including Danny, who has absolutely no thuggish behavior on his record.

                          Other than that excluding Danny, the casual fan can provide reasons for his opinion (even though you may disagree).
                          Last edited by McKeyFan; 12-20-2007, 02:08 PM.
                          "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: I don't mean to start another O'Brien thread but from today's Philly news.

                            Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                            That's mean-spirited. You have no proof of that statement. Even overlooking the "racial" allegation, you can't judge what criteria people use to decide what they approve of or not.

                            I don't mean to pick a fight, but it is unreasonable of you to say people are ignorant or "not up to a discussion" because they have decided they can live without the Pacers. Sure, many of the people you are talking about couldn't name this year's line-up. But it is unreasonable to expect them to know. They stopped paying attention months ago for what seemed to them very good reasons, and when they are not paying attention they don't keep up with changes. That is not ignorance on the part of the public.


                            I don't understand your point. When someone tells me they don't go to games and they don't follow the Pacers because they are a bunch of thugs - why can't I judge that.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: I don't mean to start another O'Brien thread but from today's Philly news.

                              Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                              .

                              - Foster's lack of offense takes him out of the running in a "likeability" contest.

                              If that is true, then that is just sad. I thought Indiana fans were supposed to be better than that

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: I don't mean to start another O'Brien thread but from today's Philly news.

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                                If that is true, then that is just sad. I thought Indiana fans were supposed to be better than that
                                I think it's not true for a core of fans (and a larger core than other cities), but the majority still have an All-Star game mentality.

                                But I agree with your sentiment, UB.
                                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X