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/Bulls Postgame Thread 2/4/13

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

  • Re: Pacers/Bulls Postgame Thread 2/4/13

    Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
    Help me out here. I listened to Mark and Slick on the League Pass last night during my commute home, so I didn't watch the game.

    Read the article on the Tribune, which I know is only a slight improvement over Bleacher Report, and the entire article consisted of whining about the officiating but how the WonderBulls themselves would never stoop to actually using that as an excuse.

    Were there bad calls? I didn't get that impression from Mark or Slick, and Mark certainly is the type to acknowledge when the team gets the benefit of a bad whistle, and Slick certainly isn't afraid to voice his opinion of officiating...
    There was that out of bounds play at the end where Hibbert clearly through it out of bounds and they gave it back to us instead. But then again, that only happened because Gibson hit him in the back of the head so it could have been free throws for us instead of just possession.

    there was a FT discrepancy, but that had a lot to do with the Bulls playing undersized. They couldn't defend West, George, or Hansbrough without fouling.
    Time for a new sig.

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers/Bulls Postgame Thread 2/4/13

      Please tell me there is a gif or a picture somewhere on the internets of Lance screaming in Taj's face after his dunk.


      Comment


      • Re: Pacers/Bulls Postgame Thread 2/4/13

        Originally posted by Anthem View Post
        Why? You think he'd have a harder time guarding Belli than Deng?

        You say "travesty'" but I think it would be awesome.
        it would be awesome. Danny is both offensive and defensively better than Lance. The size of Pacer wings would make it a nightmare matchup for the other side. For example, how could Belinelli have guarded Paul George. Nor would be have been able to get shots as easily vs Paul as he did vs Lance. Even better when Paul learns to post guys up.

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers/Bulls Postgame Thread 2/4/13

          Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
          Really? You want your best defender guarding Marco Bellinelli instead of holding their best player to 4-18 shooting?
          Sure. Would Deng score more points on Danny? Maybe, although Danny generally guards him well. But they got 34 points out of their SG spot. Paul George cuts that in half, Deng scores an extra 3 buckets on Danny, and we're still coming out ahead by 12 points.
          This space for rent.

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers/Bulls Postgame Thread 2/4/13

            One thing that has to be addressed is the way we defend the pick and roll. Wile it's easy to throw blame at lance because it was his man the big man also has to recognize who the shooter is. When a player gets hot the big man has to take a step out so lance has a second to fit through the screen.

            I would rather force the pass inside and have them take thier chances against a shifting Hibbert than make lance over work though screens only to be torched time and time again. It's team defense.....

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers/Bulls Postgame Thread 2/4/13

              Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
              Even better when Paul learns to post guys up.
              The Jazz tried putting Lowry on Paul for one possession. He went right down to the block and put him on skates. They then brought in Carroll. Paul getting guarded by 2s when Danny gets back will only be a good thing.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers/Bulls Postgame Thread 2/4/13

                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                The Jazz tried putting Lowry on Paul for one possession. He went right down to the block and put him on skates. They then brought in Carroll. Paul getting guarded by 2s when Danny gets back will only be a good thing.
                You meant Foye?! Lol get your husky Villanova guys right 86!!

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers/Bulls Postgame Thread 2/4/13

                  Those worrying about Paul going from 3 to 2 or whatever, I don't think you need to. Paul just passes the eye test in regards to being a different player than he was at the start of this year. You can call him a 2, a 3, or a goalie for all I care, he's going to get us his numbers wherever we play him. He knows how to take 2s or 3s to the rim right now. Wade could barely stick with Lance in our last Heat game, now imagine if Wade is being asked to guard Paul and then guard Lance coming off the bench. Holy moley that is only a good thing


                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers/Bulls Postgame Thread 2/4/13

                    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                    Please tell me there is a gif or a picture somewhere on the internets of Lance screaming in Taj's face after his dunk.
                    Did you see Taj IMMEDIATELY ask for the ref to T up Lance?! Lol it's like he was so hurt that Lance screamed at him that he wanted the Ref to do something about it.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers/Bulls Postgame Thread 2/4/13

                      Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                      I personally feel it's kind of funny lol but I'm somewhat of an ***.

                      In fact I too was at last nights game, and sat behind the bulls bench and constantly yelled "hey Rose, how's the knee".

                      While it's cold to make fun of someone's injury, it's not the worst thing ever said or commented on by a fan towards a player. Rose will be playing in a few weeks anyways and it'll all be a moot point.

                      But I can promise you "he will NEVER FORGET the way you wore that shirt"...ever
                      So if you were out in public and saw someone with an injury that was keeping them away from their job, would you mock them, too? Think about what you're doing. You're getting enjoyment out of another human being's suffering. Take Bankers Life Fieldhouse out of the equation and your behavior is despicable. Would you sit behind an injured person on the bus and yell, "hey, hows the knee," at them?

                      Fans need to stop acting this way. I don't mean to single you out, because its fans at all sporting events. Just because you're at a game doesn't mean you check your class and dignity at the door. This is a problem with society. We need to be better to each other as humans.

                      Edit: I just want to know what's so wrong with just cheering when your team does well? Why does it have to descend into mockery towards a player not even in the game? Arent we better than that?
                      Last edited by Indra; 02-05-2013, 12:49 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers/Bulls Postgame Thread 2/4/13

                        Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                        Did you see Taj IMMEDIATELY ask for the ref to T up Lance?! Lol it's like he was so hurt that Lance screamed at him that he wanted the Ref to do something about it.
                        They are friends I think.
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers/Bulls Postgame Thread 2/4/13

                          According to Wells on 1070 the fan Paul George will play SF when Danny gets back.
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers/Bulls Postgame Thread 2/4/13

                            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                            According to Wells on 1070 the fan Paul George will play SF when Danny gets back.
                            Lance will stay as starter for the rest of the year?


                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers/Bulls Postgame Thread 2/4/13

                              And according to Wells he think Danny could be back against the Bobcats.
                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers/Bulls Postgame Thread 2/4/13

                                Originally posted by Indra View Post
                                So if you were out in public and saw someone with an injury that was keeping them away from their job, would you mock them, too? Think about what you're doing. You're getting enjoyment out of another human being's suffering. Take Bankers Life Fieldhouse out of the equation and your behavior is despicable. Would you sit behind an injured person on the bus and yell, "hey, hows the knee," at them?

                                Fans need to stop acting this way. I don't mean to single you out, because its fans at all sporting events. Just because you're at a game doesn't mean you check your class and dignity at the door. This is a problem with society. We need to be better to each other as humans.
                                I know you said you didn't mean to single me out, but I do wanna say that I do not receive enjoyment out of another human beings suffering. This wasn't said at the time of injury, this wasn't said during a rehab session, this was said to a player who is up running, jumping, shooting around and will be back to playing in the NBA within a few weeks. So you should try looking a little deeper into a circumstance before saying one's behavior is "despicable"

                                At the end of the day, Derrick Rose is a big boy (a handsomely paid big boy at that) and I'm sure he's heard much worse at various sporting events. No it may not make what I said "okay" but at the same time, I'm QUITE SURE he didn't go home too worried about what I said nor too worried about Steagles t-shirt. When you're a public figure, professional athlete, etc--negativity from those that see you perform comes with the territory imo. Is there a sensitivity line that shouldn't be crossed? Sure. But neither me nor Steagles crossed it. But thanks for your opinion anyway

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X