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

Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

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

  • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
    See, I think the pacers did exactly that after the 200 Finals appearance.
    If they would have traded Reggie I would agree. They let Jackson go to where God wanted him to be, traded DD for JO and IIRC gave Croshere that ridiculous contract. They had no control of rick retiring and if he didn't, I don't think they let the other things occur. IMO, it is several levels below what the Colts have done - cutting one of the best that has ever played and many more important pieces. Regardless, you are correct that it was a makeover. Coincidentally it is one of the things I agreed with the TPTB on. It didn't work, but you will never see me criticize them for it. IMO, it was the closest the Pacers came to a title - before it blew up in everyone's faces. Yes, even closer than the actual finals team. I do criticize TPTB for their response to that teams failures, but that is a whole different discussion.

    Comment


    • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

      Originally posted by rm1369 View Post
      If they would have traded Reggie I would agree. They let Jackson go to where God wanted him to be, traded DD for JO and IIRC gave Croshere that ridiculous contract. They had no control of rick retiring and if he didn't, I don't think they let the other things occur. IMO, it is several levels below what the Colts have done - cutting one of the best that has ever played and many more important pieces. Regardless, you are correct that it was a makeover. Coincidentally it is one of the things I agreed with the TPTB on. It didn't work, but you will never see me criticize them for it. IMO, it was the closest the Pacers came to a title - before it blew up in everyone's faces. Yes, even closer than the actual finals team. I do criticize TPTB for their response to that teams failures, but that is a whole different discussion.
      It was a hell of a lot easier to cut Peyton after his injury, the fact that they got the number one pick, and the fact that Andrew Luck was available in the draft. If you change just one of those instances, and chances are, 18 is still on the Colts. Like most things in sports, It's all a matter of circumstance.

      Comment


      • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
        Great now we have some stats that prove that West is a lock down defender

        I don't think anybody is saying that Battie killed West on offense, everybody knows Battie is not an offensive player so those numbers don't mean anything.
        The West numbers certainly mean something. You claimed multiple times, emphatically, that Battier "shut down" West in the series. Here are the numbers. After seeing them, are you standing by your claim?

        Comment


        • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
          ........But yes they are always trying to upgrade the starters. I mean do we really have to state that.......
          To add a bit of evidence to what Unclebuck is saying, just take a look at last year. Was the acquisition of David West not an upgrade to the starting five? You bet your bippy it was.

          Comment


          • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

            Originally posted by BillS View Post
            I never NEV ER NEVER said these showed West was a "lock down" defenser.

            You said:



            These stats seem to indicate West was not shut down, and that his "poor defense" didn't help Battier do better.

            You are really going to have to come up with something better to support your claim that West was helpless against Battier.

            I don't need to somehow show West as DPOY or MVP to refute that Battier had his number.
            I don't think Battie was the one guarding West in the first 2 or 3 games remember that Miami was adjusting to the lost of Bosh, they had a combination of Anthony, Turiaf, Battie and Lebron on him, once they figured out that Battie was doing a good job on him it was game over,(see West numbers in his last games)

            I also remember games(I remember Seth talking about this) were West would be unstopable in the first half and then in the second half he would dissapear and what was the common denominator? Battie on him.

            I am also trying to remember when Battie was put in the starting unit to guard West, 2nd or 3rd game?
            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

            Comment


            • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

              Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
              I wish we had an owner like Mike Ilitch of the Tigers who is like 85 and all he wants to do is win. Blank checks for his gm and just wants to win a WS before he dies. Maybe with Mel it could of happen the dude actually loved basketball but with Herb I fell he just wants to be ok and stay under the tax and doesn't care about winning.

              PS. Donnie the goal shouldnt be a good team it should be a great team and almost the only way to do that is have a known name guy or "the names you hear" on your team.


              I just hate this pretty much confirms all my fears of the franchise
              Who the heck did you expect for him to get? If you answer Nash or Williamsor such, I've got news for you.........no, wait, it isn't news. People have been trying to get it through the heads of others for a couple months.......They were not coming here, no matter what was done. So, who are your "name guys" that the team so easily could have gotten?

              Comment


              • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                It was reported that Vogel told Walsh and Pritchard to bring the same starters back so the goal was never to upgrade or trade either one of the starters.
                Actually I believe Vogel said that he really wanted to bring them all back, not that he "told them to do it", as in ordered it to happen. The way you said it makes it sound as though Vogel was giving Walsh and Pritchard orders. You and I both know that isn't going to be the case.

                Comment


                • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                  Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                  He is not in an "all star level form".


                  And to Mattie's and Speed's comments, I expect the Pacers to run Dwest until the ground the same way they did with Foster, the Pacers overvalue leadership over production big time.
                  Yes, David is an all-star. Towards the end of the regular season and the Orlando series, David was playing at an all-star level. Is anybody going to argue that Blake Griffin, who is an all star, played better than David during that time frame?
                  Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                  Comment


                  • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                    I don't think Battie was the one guarding West in the first 2 or 3 games remember that Miami was adjusting to the lost of Bosh, they had a combination of Anthony, Turiaf, Battie and Lebron on him, once they figured out that Battie was doing a good job on him it was game over,(see West numbers in his last games)
                    Game 6? 10-16 is stopped? Or are you contending he got all his points in garbage time?

                    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                    I also remember games(I remember Seth talking about this) were West would be unstopable in the first half and then in the second half he would dissapear and what was the common denominator? Battie on him.

                    I am also trying to remember when Battie was put in the starting unit to guard West, 2nd or 3rd game?
                    Essentially West's scoring %age stayed the same, his number of shots varied by playing time, and he was effective in 4 out of 6 games. He wasn't our #1 offensive weapon but he wasn't somehow knocked out of his normal game because Battier owned him.
                    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: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                      Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                      Yes, David is an all-star. Towards the end of the regular season and the Orlando series, David was playing at an all-star level. Is anybody going to argue that Blake Griffin, who is an all star, played better than David during that time frame?
                      D.West is probably the 4th best PF in the East (behind Bosh, J. Smith and KG) so while he's not exactly an "all-star"; he is one of the top PF's in the East.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                        David West didn't win s*** in his prime when he played with CP3 and Tyson Chandler, what makes you think this time around he is going to help the pacers win a title?

                        Give me Dwill, Howard or Melo any day.
                        If you think those three are coming, I don't know what to tell you. Well, I DO know what to tell you, but there may be children reading this. Also...you just mentioned Josh Smith. What the heck has that knucklehead ever done?

                        Comment


                        • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                          =BillS;1487711]Game 6? 10-16 is stopped? Or are you contending he got all his points in garbage time?
                          Probably, that game was over in the 2nd quarter.

                          Essentially West's scoring %age stayed the same, his number of shots varied by playing time, and he was effective in 4 out of 6 games. He wasn't our #1 offensive weapon but he wasn't somehow knocked out of his normal game because Battier owned him.
                          You don't think that losing Bosh and Miami adjusting to his lost had anything to do with this? it's not a coincidence that when Spoeltra decided to play Battie on West must of the time his numbers when down, was "shut down" and strong word? maybe? my bad then, but the fact is the Battie(an small forward) made it really difficult for West to do anything and to me if West is not scoring he is worthless, the Pacers need him to score.
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                            Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                            D.West is probably the 4th best PF in the East (behind Bosh, J. Smith and KG) so while he's not exactly an "all-star"; he is one of the top PF's in the East.
                            4th best? let's see, Josh Smith, Bosh, Boozer, KG, Amare, Humpries, Ryan Anderson, Ersan and probably Bass? all those guys are more efficient than West and have better numbers, Bass is the only one less efficient, West is 7th best maybe?


                            http://www.nba.com/statistics/player...xp=-1&splitDD=

                            Note: Brand was also more efficient and had similar numbers 11 and 7.


                            edit: I even forgot to ad Andre B and his 19 and 5.5 per game.
                            Last edited by vnzla81; 07-25-2012, 11:41 AM.
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • Re: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                              Probably, that game was over in the 2nd quarter.
                              The Pacers were leading 53-51 at the half.

                              That game started to break open for Miami with just over a minute left in the 3rd. West had 16 pts and 4 rebounds at that point, which pretty well matched his other full games.

                              So when was it that he was shut down by Battier?
                              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: Donnie Walsh: "We have to go up a level"

                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                4th best? let's see, Josh Smith, Bosh, Boozer, KG, Amare, Humpries, Ryan Anderson, Ersan and probably Bass? all those guys are more efficient than West and have better numbers, Bass is the only one less efficient, West is 7th best maybe?


                                http://www.nba.com/statistics/player...xp=-1&splitDD=

                                Note: Brand was also more efficient and had similar numbers 11 and 7.


                                edit: I even forgot to ad Andre B and his 19 and 5.5 per game.
                                I can listen to an argument about Boozer, but that's about it. You can't be serious having Ryan Anderson ahead of him
                                Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X