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

Spurs to be punished for resting players

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

  • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

    Originally posted by Kstat View Post
    Except one is expected at the end of the season and the other isn't. That wouldn't be consistent.
    I know it has probably been commented on, but what about the fans that buy tickets for that one game, say its your kid's birthday, to see the Heat at the end of the season and they don't play his favorite player because they don't have to? last time I checked those teams are still on prime time with no real competition for viewers? Those fans and the integrity of the game do not matter? What if a team makes the playoffs by one game because they play one of these teams laying down? To say one is ok and the other is not is totally bogus.

    Looks like the rating were ok.

    http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2012...with-a-caveat/
    Last edited by SycamoreKen; 12-01-2012, 12:23 AM.

    Comment


    • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

      Originally posted by shags View Post
      And risked losing two games instead of one. That doesn't make sense.

      Gregg Popovich said he made this decision when the schedule came out. And I believe him. He probably looked at the schedule, saw that they were most likely going to lose that game anyway (scheduling loss), so he figured it was a great opportunity to give his starters some rest. Popovich should have told Stern he was going to do it then.

      I think the fact that he was so arrogant about it probably pissed Stern off. Nobody is more arrogant than David Stern. Nobody.
      Maybe he didn't realize Stern was going to get his panties in a bunch and didn't think it was a big deal? Heck, had they played the Heat may have gotten beaten down by 20 the way they played. How would that have been good?

      Comment


      • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

        Originally posted by kent beckley View Post
        I will answer your question with another question.

        Would the league be better off having the Wizards and Cavaliers or the Celtics and Heat play on Christmas Day?
        Easy....Celtics and Heat on Christmas day. I get that business-wise...it's better to play the Starters cuz its good for business ( as in an more sponsors and more $$$ ).....but as BillS said.......where is the line drawn between the Sports ( the NBA ) and Sports Entertainment ( WWE )?
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

          It's true what somebody was saying on twitter, why the Spurs are getting punished by doing this while teams that are tanking don't get punished?
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
            It's true what somebody was saying on twitter, why the Spurs are getting punished by doing this while teams that are tanking don't get punished?
            Cuz Stern doesn't answer to sponsors that don't care about those Teams or games.

            I just hope that Stern is consistent with this later in the season when the Playoff Teams that are locked into their playoff spots start resting their Starters.
            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment


            • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

              It's probably been mentioned already but Popovich screwed up by sending those guys back to San Antonio. He could have kept them on the bench and decided not to play them. I don't have a problem with resting guys but doing it the way he did was bush-league, IMO.

              Comment


              • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

                Originally posted by LuckSwagger View Post
                It's probably been mentioned already but Popovich screwed up by sending those guys back to San Antonio. He could have kept them on the bench and decided not to play them. I don't have a problem with resting guys but doing it the way he did was bush-league, IMO.
                What difference does it make if they are at home on the couch, in a suit on the bench, or in uniform make if they don't play? I thought the issue was that the viewing public didn't get to see them play?

                Comment


                • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

                  I guess if you take then to the game and sit them on the bench in street clothes the fans at least get to see them in person?

                  Comment


                  • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

                    Originally posted by LuckSwagger View Post
                    It's probably been mentioned already but Popovich screwed up by sending those guys back to San Antonio. He could have kept them on the bench and decided not to play them. I don't have a problem with resting guys but doing it the way he did was bush-league, IMO.
                    I think that's what probably pushed it over the top. That and Danny Green being involved.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

                      Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
                      For everyone complaining about the Heat somehow getting a favorable schedule or the league helping them out.

                      In early November, the Heat had a 4 game in 5 night road trip against Memphis, Houston, LAC and Denver, the Denver game being the second night of a back to back, on TNT.

                      So please quit with the conspiracy theories. Every team has to do this.
                      The poster who mentioned that specific trip was pointing out it is the Heat's ONLY one.

                      Me, I just pointed out that the number of bad trips and/or b2b2... has nothing to do with standings in previous years.

                      Yes, every team has these scheduling things (which needs to be fixed). However, they are NOT evenly distributed in a given season (and how the heck could they possibly be?), so each team needs the leeway to handle them the way THEY see fit. NOT the way the league dictates.
                      BillS

                      A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                      Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                      Comment


                      • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

                        Originally posted by BillS View Post
                        The poster who mentioned that specific trip was pointing out it is the Heat's ONLY one.

                        Me, I just pointed out that the number of bad trips and/or b2b2... has nothing to do with standings in previous years.

                        Yes, every team has these scheduling things (which needs to be fixed). However, they are NOT evenly distributed in a given season (and how the heck could they possibly be?), so each team needs the leeway to handle them the way THEY see fit. NOT the way the league dictates.
                        Like you said, how could they be evenly distributed? It's one of the hazards of an 82 game season. There's no problem with Pop resting players in 70 or so of those games. However there's clearly an unwritten rule that for the good of the league you take the marquee match ups seriously and give the nationally televised games your full effort.

                        I'm kind of surprised at how blown away people are that the league wants nationally televised games to be better. This seems like an exceedingly obvious part of life. When my boss is in the office I sit up a little straighter and really focus on that computer screen so it looks like I'm working hard. When I have lunch with my girlfriend's parents I maybe comb my hair and wear a nice shirt. I'm sure I won't get fired if I work like I normally do and my girlfriend won't break up with my because I dress like I usually do, but I understand the game being played here and I act accordingly. Pop understood it as well, he acted up on purpose to make a point to Stern and Stern's reaction was, in my opinion, justifiable.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

                          Originally posted by Doddage View Post
                          But how is it fair to the fans that are paying money to see a game? The fans are the ones who are putting money into the NBA product. If the players aren't injured or have some other personal matter to attend to, they need to play.
                          I absolutely hate this argument. So is it fair to run the old Spurs players ragged and with huge potential ramifications on the year. Or more accurately, is it fair to Spurs fans, who are putting money into the NBA product, to run Spurs players ragged with large potential ramifications on the team they want to support? Of course not. 4 away games in 5 days, old players, way to many games in the schedule, it all adds up to logically sitting players, especially since the coach's responsibility isn't to Stern but to his fans.

                          It also doesn't help that Stern comes across as an unintelligent petulant child.
                          Danger Zone

                          Comment


                          • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

                            Originally posted by rm1369 View Post
                            What difference does it make if they are at home on the couch, in a suit on the bench, or in uniform make if they don't play? I thought the issue was that the viewing public didn't get to see them play?
                            It makes no difference, furthermore, the point is to rest the players. Travelling and late schedules is probably just as tiring as the game itself. Makes absolutely no sense to rest them and make them be present.
                            Danger Zone

                            Comment


                            • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

                              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                              It's true what somebody was saying on twitter, why the Spurs are getting punished by doing this while teams that are tanking don't get punished?
                              Excellent point. Also, couldn't an argument be made that playing fresh players gave the Spurs a better chance of winning? Not only did they cover the final spread, but they covered the initial spread as well, indicating that the idea to rest the older players and play fresh players actually improved the Spurs chances of winning.
                              Danger Zone

                              Comment


                              • Re: Spurs to be punished for resting players

                                Originally posted by Rogco View Post
                                Excellent point. Also, couldn't an argument be made that playing fresh players gave the Spurs a better chance of winning? Not only did they cover the final spread, but they covered the initial spread as well, indicating that the idea to rest the older players and play fresh players actually improved the Spurs chances of winning.
                                That is a logical fallacy. No matter how good oddsmakers are, they aren't perfect. And teams "beat the odds" all the time, even if it happens less often than not. But you didn't see the Spurs play with their guys, so you can't make that assessment.

                                Furthermore, if in fact the stars DID play and the backups were doing so much better, they would have played more and the old guys still would have had the chance to rest. Personally, I would take a tired Duncan and Parker over anybody on their team almost 100% of the time and you are lying if you say you wouldn't.

                                Also, since the odds are only a prediction, you cannot treat them as if they actually happened.
                                Last edited by aamcguy; 12-01-2012, 01:46 PM.
                                Time for a new sig.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X