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.

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

  • #91
    Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread.

    Originally posted by spazzxb View Post
    Your somewhat right, however he did move Paul George to SF.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
    In the Philly game, George played SF for the 2nd unit. So you could argue he was okay with it because he needs to know the plays for the SF as well.
    Time for a new sig.

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread.

      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
      I mean there is no debating that DC off the bench is still a work in progress. Hopefully due to injury but possibly not (I'm starting to think).
      I like DC, and think he gets too much crap on here.

      But I'd like to see Lance getting backup PG minutes behind George Hill next year.
      This space for rent.

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread.

        Originally posted by Anthem View Post
        I like DC, and think he gets too much crap on here.

        But I'd like to see Lance getting backup PG minutes behind George Hill next year.
        Are you saying you think we should move Collison or that we should have Lance play as the "point guard" while Collison plays as the "shooting guard?"
        Time for a new sig.

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread.

          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
          I mean there is no debating that DC off the bench is still a work in progress. Hopefully due to injury but possibly not (I'm starting to think).
          I said it in the "Hill Is Keeping the Starting Job thread". DC's already shakey confidence was shook too much by losing his starting position. His poor play off the bench is not due to the injury or rust, he only missed what? 6-7 games I think? No his problem now is he has no confidence in himself.

          I was not as critical as DC as others here, I thought he showed a lot of potential. But I could tell all year that he was playing in fear of losing his starting job. Now that his fear has come true, I think DC has lost all confidence in himself. I fear he might never be the same with this team again.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread.

            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
            I like DC, and think he gets too much crap on here.

            But I'd like to see Lance getting backup PG minutes behind George Hill next year.
            :shakehead

            Lance plays defense off screens exactly like DC but worse. That'd be "no" from me unless something changes drastically.
            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


            • #96
              Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread.

              Originally posted by Sookie View Post
              Frank had to go with simple though. No real preseason and no real time for practice.

              It's also a different game with Barbosa and Granger playing. On defense and offense.

              We can beat those teams in a 7 game series. We're just unlikely to. That's how it's always been.
              Yeah, and to the points you and Gummy are making, I don't disagree with the reasons but that doesn't change the fact that this year Chicago and SAS are the best coached teams. They have talent like other teams do, but the QUALITY of the team basketball they play is just at a higher level.

              Just like Pop and Tibs can't be faulted for not having lower team expectations since it's not their fault. Meaning that Frank has an advantage over them in that regard and they have an advantage of a vet team that knows the plays better.

              Bottom line is that to me Vogel as #3 COY makes sense behind those 2 because those teams aren't just leaning on talent to be good. The Pacers aren't either, but until Frank can get them to that next level of play (unknown if he can yet) he can't be COY and they can't be elite title contenders.

              However in the mold of the 90's team (to 2000) they are structured in a way to be headed toward being that time of team oriented group who develops and works well together.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread.

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                Yeah, and to the points you and Gummy are making, I don't disagree with the reasons but that doesn't change the fact that this year Chicago and SAS are the best coached teams. They have talent like other teams do, but the QUALITY of the team basketball they play is just at a higher level.

                Just like Pop and Tibs can't be faulted for not having lower team expectations since it's not their fault. Meaning that Frank has an advantage over them in that regard and they have an advantage of a vet team that knows the plays better.

                Bottom line is that to me Vogel as #3 COY makes sense behind those 2 because those teams aren't just leaning on talent to be good. The Pacers aren't either, but until Frank can get them to that next level of play (unknown if he can yet) he can't be COY and they can't be elite title contenders.

                However in the mold of the 90's team (to 2000) they are structured in a way to be headed toward being that time of team oriented group who develops and works well together.
                But COY doesn't necessarily mean best coach just like MVP doesn't necessarily mean best player, otherwise the same few players and coaches would win it every year. I don't have any hard facts but I would imagine COY typically goes to coaches more like Vogel who takes a team from being bad/mediocre to one of the top teams in the league than established coaches on established teams.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread.

                  True, but both SAS and CHI have OKC and MIA for expectation comparisons and honestly most people saw SAS as too old for the short season and unable to make this kind of elite team run. Tibs has the loss of the MVP to injury.

                  So even by perception standards those 2 are the leading candidates.


                  I mean think about this, the team improved this year. Was it due to adding players at an Executive of the Year level or was it due to coaching blah players at a COY level?

                  The two contradict each other slightly. The less Larry did to improve the team the more Vogel is COY, and vice versa.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread.

                    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                    The Bulls were hot (well, Boozer and Korver just couldn't miss), but the Pacers got their a****s handed to them ala the Spurs. I mean the games were identical. Both SAS and CHI kept the Pacers at a safe distance the entire time and both teams showed plays that just go deeper and deeper until they find their shot.

                    The Pacers would cover the first 5... stages of a Bulls play well, switching, rotating and closing out, and yet there was always another progression in the play for the Bulls to go to....just like the Spurs.

                    Last night showed why Pop and Tibs are better coaches than Vogel and better COY candidates.
                    Frank has been a great rah-rah guy and a good basic plan of attack/consistancy guy, and this allows the guys to excel.

                    But Frank, Shaw, et al need to expand the plays next season and the players need to step up and match that need by proving they can execute a more sophisticated playbook. At least if they want to compete for a title.
                    Is it because the Bulls and Spurs offense and defense are based more around a "system" that is excellently executed no both ends?

                    I'm not sure if that is the right way to put it....but when I look at the how well both Teams play...it's more akin to playing a certain way ( how Pop and Thibs wants them to play on both end of the court ) that....as long as it is executed the proper way....both the Spurs and Bulls will continue to either keep up with your Team or dominate over the course of 4 QTRs on both ends of the floor until your Team simply makes mistakes while they simply advantage at the right time.

                    To me..that is the sharp contrast between the way the Bulls and Spurs play...compared to the Heat. Their offense is pretty much centered around....give the ball to Wade or LeDecision...and let them go to work by scoring on their own...or trying to create for others.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread.

                      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                      Yeah, and to the points you and Gummy are making, I don't disagree with the reasons but that doesn't change the fact that this year Chicago and SAS are the best coached teams. They have talent like other teams do, but the QUALITY of the team basketball they play is just at a higher level.

                      Just like Pop and Tibs can't be faulted for not having lower team expectations since it's not their fault. Meaning that Frank has an advantage over them in that regard and they have an advantage of a vet team that knows the plays better.

                      Bottom line is that to me Vogel as #3 COY makes sense behind those 2 because those teams aren't just leaning on talent to be good. The Pacers aren't either, but until Frank can get them to that next level of play (unknown if he can yet) he can't be COY and they can't be elite title contenders.

                      However in the mold of the 90's team (to 2000) they are structured in a way to be headed toward being that time of team oriented group who develops and works well together.
                      But there's a huge advantage in having veteran players who know how to play YOUR system. Meaning, yea, they're probably the "best coached" teams, but that doesn't mean those coaches did the best job this year. They just happen to have the best systems with veteran players who know how to run those systems.

                      Vogel hasn't even had a real opportunity to implement his offensive system. What Frank has done this season is honestly remarkable. And before anyone says I'm exaggerating, who thought the Pacers would have the fifth best record in the league, and the third best team in the East?

                      I think Frank has done the best job coaching this season. Not because we have the team that runs most like a machine in the league. We don't. But it would have been impossible to expect that from this team.

                      That said, I have no issues with Pop getting it. But, it seems like it'll be more like Kobe's MVP - a career achievement award, instead of what actually occurred this season.

                      executive of the year? Our biggest aquisition was West (supposedly) - an aging PF who had torn his ACL. Hill was a good trade, but the player drafted has been pretty good for Sass. Barbosa..once again, nice trade, but our second unit was doing darn well without him anyway. All positive acquisitions, but this doesn't take a team from 8th to 3rd without a heck of a coaching job.
                      Last edited by Sookie; 04-27-2012, 07:14 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread.

                        Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                        executive of the year? Our biggest aquisition was West (supposedly) - an aging PF who had torn his ACL. Hill was a good trade, but the player drafted has been pretty good for Sass. Barbosa..once again, nice trade, but our second unit was doing darn well without him anyway. All positive acquisitions, but this doesn't take a team from 8th to 3rd without a heck of a coaching job.
                        How dare you leave out the MVP of our team, sweet Lou! Not to mention the locker room all star Fez!
                        Did you know Antonio and Dale aren’t actually brothers?

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread.

                          Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                          But there's a huge advantage in having veteran players who know how to play YOUR system. Meaning, yea, they're probably the "best coached" teams, but that doesn't mean those coaches did the best job this year. They just happen to have the best systems with veteran players who know how to run those systems.

                          Vogel hasn't even had a real opportunity to implement his offensive system. What Frank has done this season is honestly remarkable. And before anyone says I'm exaggerating, who thought the Pacers would have the fifth best record in the league, and the third best team in the East?

                          I think Frank has done the best job coaching this season. Not because we have the team that runs most like a machine in the league. We don't. But it would have been impossible to expect that from this team.

                          That said, I have no issues with Pop getting it. But, it seems like it'll be more like Kobe's MVP - a career achievement award, instead of what actually occurred this season.

                          executive of the year? Our biggest aquisition was West (supposedly) - an aging PF who had torn his ACL. Hill was a good trade, but the player drafted has been pretty good for Sass. Barbosa..once again, nice trade, but our second unit was doing darn well without him anyway. All positive acquisitions, but this doesn't take a team from 8th to 3rd without a heck of a coaching job.
                          Well who hired Frank to be the head coach? What about all the guys Larry has drafted that are showing how good they can be? I don't view executive of the year as just a year thing, but rather how the team got to where it is. Larry has done a tremendous job to get this team from where we were not long ago to be the 3 seed in the East.

                          Bird and Vogel both have very strong cases to be executive/coach of the year.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread.

                            Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                            Well who hired Frank to be the head coach? What about all the guys Larry has drafted that are showing how good they can be? I don't view executive of the year as just a year thing, but rather how the team got to where it is. Larry has done a tremendous job to get this team from where we were not long ago to be the 3 seed in the East.

                            Bird and Vogel both have very strong cases to be executive/coach of the year.
                            I'm not saying anything negative about Bird, he's obviously done an excellent job.

                            I'm just saying the talent we acquired doesn't scream "fifth best record in the NBA"...which is where the credit to Vogel (and the players who bought in) go.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread.

                              Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                              I'm not saying anything negative about Bird, he's obviously done an excellent job.

                              I'm just saying the talent we acquired doesn't scream "fifth best record in the NBA"...which is where the credit to Vogel (and the players who bought in) go.
                              this offseason alone? No, but I think thats the case for most teams. Its more of a culmination of what Larry has done the past few years coming to fruition. For that I think Larry deserves executive of the year.

                              What team pulled off great moves in FA and trades that greatly improved their team? West was the second biggest name in FA. Nene was first, and Denver traded him after resigning him. The only team that comes to mind is the Clippers with CP3 and they only got him because the Hornets are owned by the league. Also the Pacers are better than the Clippers.

                              A lot of teams this year stood pat when it comes to their roster. Only 4 teams have a better record than the Pacers, all 4 didn't make any major changes to their roster. I think you are underselling Bird a bit on his moves this season as well. Describing West as an injured aging PF, when you know the impact he has had on this club on and off the court.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread.

                                Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                                Are you saying you think we should move Collison or that we should have Lance play as the "point guard" while Collison plays as the "shooting guard?"
                                When Lance and Collison were on the court together last night, Lance played as much point as Collison did.

                                If you're going to put Lance on the court, you might as well give him the ball and let him run the offense. And if you're going to do that, you might as well upgrade the SG position.
                                This space for rent.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X