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

11/03/2006 Game Thread 2: Pacers vs Hornets

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

  • Re: 11/03/2006 Game Thread 2: Pacers vs Hornets

    Originally posted by Pitons View Post
    Ok turning to watch Lebron's show. He plays absolutely magnificent till moment.

    Here I come.. CANNONBALL!

    Comment


    • Re: 11/03/2006 Game Thread 2: Pacers vs Hornets

      Originally posted by Dat Dude View Post
      80 games left guys, take a deep breath.
      I know, I know but it pisses me off we blew this ****.

      2-0 down the damn drain....

      Jeez. I know I shouldn't get all worked up, it's only the second game but...jeez....
      Super Bowl XLI Champions
      2000 Eastern Conference Champions




      Comment


      • Re: 11/03/2006 Game Thread 2: Pacers vs Hornets

        It seemed like every time I looked we'd play solid defense only to have them hit shot after shot after shot.

        While good in burts, we had too many dreadful stretches on offense. We have very low bball IQ players compared to the Reggie teams on offense.

        Comment


        • Re: 11/03/2006 Game Thread 2: Pacers vs Hornets

          Moses's what lost us the game list:
          Shot to many 3's
          Got outrebounded like crazy
          Not feeding JO when he was hot

          Comment


          • Re: 11/03/2006 Game Thread 2: Pacers vs Hornets

            Originally posted by Moses View Post
            Moses's what lost us the game list:
            Shot to many 3's
            Got outrebounded like crazy
            Not feeding JO when he was hot
            What about Rasual Butler? You don't agree with the psychic?
            You Got The Tony!!!!!!

            Comment


            • Re: 11/03/2006 Game Thread 2: Pacers vs Hornets

              Originally posted by AesopRockOn View Post
              What about Rasual Butler? You don't agree with the psychic?
              If you would have paid attention you would have seen me call it out, look at page 4

              Comment


              • Re: 11/03/2006 Game Thread 2: Pacers vs Hornets

                Originally posted by Dat Dude View Post
                80 games left guys, take a deep breath.
                I will, but if we didn't start off by having another dissapointing home opener I would feel much better.

                My expression during the 4th:

                Comment


                • Re: 11/03/2006 Game Thread 2: Pacers vs Hornets

                  I seriously don't care.


                  Some good things that happened: decent defense with seven steals and seven blocks; only twelve turnovers. JO scored well; DA played a better nineteen minutes than anyone. We were 20-24 on free throws though we should have taken at least ten more at home. Feel free to add more; obviously, there were more negatives than positives but we should try to be hopeful. I'm optimistic....we're playing New York next .
                  You Got The Tony!!!!!!

                  Comment


                  • Re: 11/03/2006 Game Thread 2: Pacers vs Hornets

                    McKeyFan's list of reasons:

                    1. No creator's on offense who can shoot well from outside (Quis and Tins can't hit the outside shot, Saras can't create as well and, tonight, couldn't hit an outside shot.)

                    2. They hit a lot of outside shots against good defense. Props to them for tonight.

                    3. Chris Paul is the real deal.

                    4. Al had another rough night with the refs. I very rarely complain about officiating, but Al got defrauded on both sides of the court. (But less so on offense, where he missed a few and forced a few).

                    5. Saras and Harrison never got a chance to work together much.
                    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                    Comment


                    • Re: 11/03/2006 Game Thread 2: Pacers vs Hornets

                      I think that Sarunas has the same problem as SJax......when neither of them can hit the side of a barn.....they like to shoot their way out of a slump. Half the time, they figure out how to draw a foul to get to the FT Line...the other half they forget to even try to draw a foul.

                      At what point did Carlisle figure out that Sarunas couldn't hit the side of a barn and finally put in DA?

                      Also....after the 7th missed 3pt Attempt....did Carlisle tell him to stop making those shots?

                      BTW...WTF happened with Harrington? 4 points? That was terrible.

                      Why wasn't Marquis given the ball on offense? Were we pretty much watching a JONeal / SJax / Tinsley shooting fest?

                      Oyyy....
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 11/03/2006 Game Thread 2: Pacers vs Hornets

                        Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                        Why wasn't Marquis given the ball on offense? Were we pretty much watching a JONeal / SJax / Tinsley shooting fest?
                        I agree with you for the most part, except for this particular point. You don't exactly feed Marquis the ball, he's not much of a primary scorer and shouldn't be relied on as a go-to guy in essentially any situation. More touches would have been nice, but it would have been a mistake to force the ball into his hands and run specific plays for him.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 11/03/2006 Game Thread 2: Pacers vs Hornets

                          I forgot to say this. LMAO @ The Hornets, you may have won. But you still have that 62 million dollar Austin Croshere on your team. I swear I rather have Cro, at least Cro tries to play D every now and then.

                          Comment


                          • Re: 11/03/2006 Game Thread 2: Pacers vs Hornets

                            Alright, I was at this game and well it was a mixed bag, but believe it or not, I am not HORRIBLY disappointed in the lost. There was a lot to be learned there. There was good and bad, so let me get through the bad first so we can end on a good note.

                            THE BAD:
                            Al just looks horrible right now. There is no cutting corners. He had 7 boards but he should have had 11 or 12 and just go outworked for them. His offensive game is well, one dimensional at the moment. It seems to consist of a standard bump or two followed by a fade away jumper. He needs to get his kiester in the paint a lot deeper and use his size and quickness to get to the line and get layups. His defense was just horrible. West lit him up like a Christmas tree in the first half. Second half wasn't much better on D.

                            Sarunas fell back to earth tonight, but I think he serves a purpose, he just needs to stick to it. Tonight he was way too trigger happy. He forced it when it wasn't there. He needs to focus on creating from the two spot. When he does that it gives us the advantage of two good passers on the floor.

                            Foster was also bad tonight IMO. When Foster is not rebounding well he is just about useless and tonight he was useless. Only 3 boards and wasn't exactly a force defensively either.

                            DH only played three minutes, but he was extremely unimpressive IMO. Took a couple steps back from the Charlotte game and just never really looked into it.

                            Our defense and rebounding need work. Outside of Jack, Quis, JO, Tins, and DA our defense was downright horrible. Nobody could stop anyone on the hornets. I mean seriously Janero Pargo was torching us for a while there against Sarunas and DA. (I'll get to my opinion of DA's game in a second)

                            Danny struggled tonight, he still seems to be trying to find his place on the team. He needs to put the ball on the floor. He get to the rack almost at will already. He seems to get the ball a lot of the time and just look lost.

                            As long as we are talking about the bad, lets address Violet Palmer. EASILY the worst ref in the NBA right now. She is downright horrible. Her calls were horribly inconsistent and she made several blatantly contradictory calls against us tonight. On top of that she gave the ball back to the Hornets when it obviously went of Chandler's hand. (Oh BTW is over the back no longer a foul in the NBA?) How Palmer still has a job in this league is beyond me really I am just dumbfounded.

                            THE OK:
                            Rick, was ok tonight, but I thought he made one mistake. To me that was making DA go for too long tonight. DA was obviously gassed and needed to come out, Rick left him in and Pargo went right at him and probably 6 or 8 quick points that really got the Hornets rolling in the 4th.

                            Now to DA, yes I am saying his game was OK. His effort and spark he gave us in the 3rd was amazing, but I thought he lost his cool in the 4th just a bit. IDK if anyone else caught it, but he looked frustrated. I caught him yelling at teammates a couple times and I was not impressed. He just seemed to get a little too overhyped late in the 4th when we still had a chance and that upset me a little bit.

                            THE GOOD:

                            JO was on tonight his jumper was falling and he probably didn't get enough touches. Plus his defense was absolutely spectacular. His rebounding was subpar, but considering how well he played in every other facet of the game and considering how bad our rebounding was in general he gets a slight mulligan. But if he only grabs 5 or 6 boards against the Knicks he is gonna start hearing it from me. His offense and defense tho were spectacular.

                            Jack was very good tonight if you asked me. He kicked Peja's butt all around the court defensively and wasn't horrible offensively. Plus I am liking his passing and rebounding so far plus he has cut back significantly on his barking at the officials, so I am happy.

                            Tins to me played very well til the fouls caught up to him. The assists weren't there but he was scoring and on top of that I thought he played fantastic D on Paul particularly in the first half. I can't remember Paul's first half stats but they were not impressive and Tins deserves all the credit in the world for that.

                            Finally Quis was great tonight IMO. Good d, drove to the hoop and rebounded well too. He needs more touches, he is extremely smooth and has great body control in the lane. Plus he has a very nice floater in the lane. I want to see more of him going to the hoop.

                            Now the crowd was great tonight. Really got behind the team and I thought they were kind of wasted, but oh well. Hopefully we can get things on track and consistently have crowds like the one we had tonight. It was fun to be part of that crowd during the 3rd quarter.

                            OVERALL:

                            Lots can be learned from tonight's loss. Rebounding needs to be worked on and Al needs to get his butt in gear. Danny needs to lose the deer in headlights look and Sarunas needs to look more to create than score from the two. If those 4 things happen we have a very good team IMO. If nothing else Al just needs to start getting 17-18 ppg and we would have won this game. I am not horribly upset about this loss and probably would actually be happy to have the learning experience if it wasn't for one thing, it was a home loss. If this was a road loss I would be happy we could learn from it, but when you have 13 of your first 19 at home every game at home becomes that much more important. In fact I'd go as far as to say we cannot lose at home again during this stretch. Hopefully we take care of these deficiencies and go forward.

                            I am actually very optimistic and think are fixes are doable and on top of that it is obvious to me this team likes one another. Lets go out and bounce back and get the Knicks tomorrow night. GO PACERS!!

                            Oh and Peja is bad really bad. I dunno why they paid him that money. I mean he just looks awful.


                            Comment


                            • Re: 11/03/2006 Game Thread 2: Pacers vs Hornets

                              Holy crap!!! We are not a good shooting team?!?! How could we not see this coming?!?!?
                              2010 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champion Baltimore Bulldogs

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X