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

Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

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

  • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

    Originally posted by hoosierguy View Post
    A "steady diet of being upset"? What?

    IU lost to tue #1 overall seed last year in the tourney. That is not an upset. They lost to Syracuse this year, an upset if you went by seeding only.

    Your entire argument about Crean Bball is based on future hypotheticals.
    Most people knew that Syracuse was going to give us a tough game, but it's the way they completely manhandled us that is the problem. Had they beat us by just a couple points in a tightly contested game, then it would be completely different. That is one of the most embarrassing defeats I've ever seen from a team I've followed. I don't think I've felt so bad about a team's effort since the Colts put up three points in Foxboro in that playoff game. Lack of hustle, lack of effort, lack of toughness, lack of coaching, lack of everything. We were never in that game.

    Last year's team gave a great effort against Kentucky and maxed out it's opportunity. You could be content knowing they got as far as they could. But getting knocked in the Sweet 16 this season is a complete failure after being ranked number 1 for such a large portion of the year. At the very least, we should have gotten to the Elite 8. Who knows if Crean will ever have a team this talented again? It needs to be said that he has never made it past the Sweet 16 without Dwyane Wade.

    Last night confirmed what I thought about Zeller all year, which is that he is not ready to be a contributor to an NBA team. He just wilts against physical teams that smack him around.

    Comment


    • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
      Also, after all the reactions it's good to see IU fans haven't changed when we have a good team. Still national title or bust.

      I agree that it's good the fanbase has high expectations. The uncomfortable truth is that we live off of past glory more than any team in college basketball. As far as tournament success is concerned, we haven't been an elite program in a long long time. Since 1993, we have made just the Elite 8 just one time, which was 2002 when we went to the championship game. Think about that - one Elite 8 in 20 seasons. That's pretty saddening. Other programs have passed us by over the last two decades.

      Comment


      • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

        Who knows if Crean will ever have a roster with this much talent again?

        Next year's team will have MORE raw talent than this year's team, I mean good Lord guys, I love this team, but our starting backcourt were both 5'11" ish and one of them was a complete and utter liability when his jumper wasn't falling which was pretty much the case for the last six weeks.

        Our third best player, Watford, who I also really enjoy, has self professed effort issues, he said it in his senior night speech for crying out loud!

        This team was billed at the start of the year by the media as "the team that wasn't missing anything" and that was just completely untrue to put it lightly. We never had a consistent backup for Cody or Watford. Oladipo while great for a lot of the season, showed a lot of his flaws also over the past month or so, including the fact that he still takes way too many risks with the ball. This just wasn't a perfect team.

        I love this roster. I appreciate what they did for IU, but we need to take about 10 steps back and realize that the talent wasn't all here yet.


        Comment


        • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

          Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
          I agree that it's good the fanbase has high expectations. The uncomfortable truth is that we live off of past glory more than any team in college basketball. As far as tournament success is concerned, we haven't been an elite program in a long long time. Since 1993, we have made just the Elite 8 just one time, which was 2002 when we went to the championship game. Think about that - one Elite 8 in 20 seasons. That's pretty saddening. Other programs have passed us by over the last two decades.
          We are still a top 10 job, and I think having high expectations is fine, but I think everyone needs to take a couple deep breaths. The world is not ending. Back to back sweet 16s while not ideal considering the start of the season is still incredible considering where we were just 4 years ago.

          Remember and this is important, when the Zeller class and the Ferrell class were being put together, they were never supposed to compete for a title right away. The Movement was supposed to maybe get us to the sweet 16 their freshman year, and yes Oladipo ended up being better than expected at that point in time and so did Zeller to an extent as a freshman, but there were also some pieces that didn't exactly pan out right away as expected. Remember most people thought that Perea and Holloweel would be immediate impact guys and they were not. So the talent level was just never that of a national title team. Zeller and Oladipo had to play nearly flawless in our big wins this year and to do that with just two players 6 times in the tournament is tough. You need 6-7 guys capable of having those kind of performances and we just didn't. Olaidpo and Zeller could. Watford could. But after that? Maybe Sheehey, but even he is still wildly inconsistent.

          Nothing is built or won in a day or without learning and growing, this was IU's first real year of being the hunted, I think it honestly wore us out. I don't think the players totally anticipated the change in going from being the underdog team that is overachieving to the team everyone wants to beat. Sure they talked like they did, but they learned there is more than just talking.

          There is stuff like actually throwing passes people can catch.

          I know we lost in the sweet 16, but we lost to a really good Syracuse team and that does lessen the blow for me. We lost to a final four caliber team. A team that could conceivably win the title and probably would be seeded much higher if Southerland hadn't been academically ineligible. No it's not ideal, but it's really not that surprising that a team of Cuse's talent level would beat us especially with their defense. Remember in mid January before Southerland had to sit for a while, they were a 1 seed, they beat Louisville at Louisville. They are not a crappy team. And we weren't quite as good as we thoguht. LIke I said I felt like I was watching two 2 seeds go out at it and Cuse just landed the first big upper cut and in those matchups that can be all the staggering you need. IU did make adjustmnets in the second half and actually played much better especially on D. In the second half we only gave up 27 points. Defense is not an end of the court Crean gets much credit for but I think he did a great job making us better on that end of the court this year.
          Last edited by Trader Joe; 03-29-2013, 10:38 AM.


          Comment


          • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

            Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
            I meant he lost money already by staying for another season, this year. He would have been a higher pick last year, than he will be this year.
            I'm not sold on that. Last year the highest I would of drafted him was PHX at 13. That is where I had him on my board before I took him off. But that is just me scouts may see it very different than me. I think he gets drafted higher this year than last JMO.

            Comment


            • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

              Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
              Who knows if Crean will ever have a roster with this much talent again?

              Next year's team will have MORE raw talent than this year's team, I mean good Lord guys, I love this team, but our starting backcourt were both 5'11" ish and one of them was a complete and utter liability when his jumper wasn't falling which was pretty much the case for the last six weeks.
              It's very hard for me to believe a team, that isn't Kentucky at least, can lose both the preseason player of the year and a possible the national player of the year and have better talent the next year.
              "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

              -Lance Stephenson

              Comment


              • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

                Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                It's very hard for me to believe a team, that isn't Kentucky at least, can lose both the preseason player of the year and a possible the national player of the year and have better talent the next year.
                I'm still assuming Zeller is coming back. If he doesn't that changes things.

                Vonleh is really good.


                Comment


                • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

                  I'm trying to decide if I even want to venture over to the dumpster fire that is probably Peegs today.


                  Comment


                  • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

                    Here is my question

                    If we start either Hulls or Yogi and then Vic, Sheehey, Watford, Zeller last night does that change the complexion of the game? I think it does. Like I said I think sticking with the small backcourt is my biggest head scratcher from last night.

                    We spotted them an 18 point lead and then from then on at least played them even or maybe slightly better, but that small lineup simply set us back too far. Bilas basically said the same thing this morning. They picked on our small guards, especially Triche on Hulls early and then we let them get ahead and stay ahead.

                    **** happens, Cuse's zone was a bad matchup and we couldn't hit our 3s either, which you know you need to hit at least 5 or 6 against Cuse to make them bring that zone out a bit and we didn't.

                    Perfect storm, perfect storm, but I certinaly think the program is in a great spot and we are going to be competitive every year. I am excited for the future and I think we all should be. Disappointed in last night, but excited for what the future can hold. Vonleh is great. Troy Williams is a really exciting commit for a lot of reasons. I heard something last night that surprised me, but I guess it shouldn't Ohio State has the longest streak in the nation right now at 4 straight sweet 16 appearances everybody else is at 3 or less at the moment.
                    Last edited by Trader Joe; 03-29-2013, 11:13 AM.


                    Comment


                    • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

                      I'm going to say exactly what I said last year. Selfishly, I really hope Cody Zeller stays. But he should absolutely go pro. No question.
                      "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                      -Lance Stephenson

                      Comment


                      • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

                        Eh I think he's going 10-13 whether it's this year or next. But I won't begrudge him one bit if he declares.


                        Comment


                        • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

                          Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                          Brad Stevens. Obviously, they're not going to fire Crean yet but I have hard time believing Brad would pass up a huge pay raise to go 60 some odd miles down the road to Bloomington.
                          Maybe 2 years ago, but not now. IU may be able to pay him more (although Butler's move to the Big East means Stevens is likely due for a raise), but I can't see him jumping ship. It should be Duke or bust for Stevens if he leaves at all.

                          I'd say on a 10 point scale, Crean is an 8.5...he's an excellent recruiter and his enthusiasm for the game is contagious, but as far as an X's and O's coach, he's probably above average at best. He's done enough for IU's program to get the benefit of the doubt for at least the next 5 years or so.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

                            If IU wanted to make the move to get Brad Stevens they could, but there is no reason for them to.


                            Comment


                            • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

                              Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                              It's very hard for me to believe a team, that isn't Kentucky at least, can lose both the preseason player of the year and a possible the national player of the year and have better talent the next year.
                              If you go by recruit rankings IU will have better talent next year. Vonleh is the highest ranked recruit Crean has ever landed at IU and the 2013 class is ranked #4 in the country by ESPN.

                              Next year's team will have more talent but won't be as good due to the loss of upperclassmen and possibly Zeller. I think IU will be back in the top 10 in 2014-15 though.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2012-2013

                                Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                                Maybe 2 years ago, but not now. IU may be able to pay him more (although Butler's move to the Big East means Stevens is likely due for a raise), but I can't see him jumping ship. It should be Duke or bust for Stevens if he leaves at all.

                                I'd say on a 10 point scale, Crean is an 8.5...he's an excellent recruiter and his enthusiasm for the game is contagious, but as far as an X's and O's coach, he's probably above average at best. He's done enough for IU's program to get the benefit of the doubt for at least the next 5 years or so.
                                Stevens would come to IU in a heartbeat. His father went to IU and it wouldn't be a culture shock going 50 miles south.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X