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 reserves anger NY fans by blocking their view. + 2 other articles

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

  • #31
    Re: Pacers reserves anger NY fans by blocking their view. + 2 other articles

    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
    Really? I'm immature because I am extremely annoyed by a fan that calls players "stupid" for cheering on their teammates?
    I think he's annoyed because you attacked my opinion. You can disagree with an opinion, but it doesn't make it wrong.

    I understand that both of you are long time regulars, but then that's exactly why I would hold you to a higher standard. I stand by my view that you must be extremely sour to look at Armstrong cheering at the 11:20 mark of the 1st (because that's about when it started) and take the Knicks' fans side of it. I'm betting DA wasn't the one she had in mind when she said it, but he has been the most active "cheerleader" so far this season.
    I look at our relationship with the Pacers as a marriage. In my case I'm the bitter divorcee who has cut ties and moved on. Keboy (as far as I can tell) is the one who stays in a marriage even though he is getting very little if anything out of it.

    What bugs me more is that it seemed pretty clear to me that she thought this was a KnicksdivorcéeKegboy-game-only thing.
    Did I say anywhere that it was only about the Knicks? I commented on it because the Knicks game is the only game I've watched this year.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Pacers reserves anger NY fans by blocking their view. + 2 other articles

      Originally posted by grace View Post
      I have a list for that? What's on it?
      Off the top of my head. Booing, cheering, standing up, anything Rasheed does, I believe chanting "one more year" at a retirement celebration (though I'm not sure on that one). Are you kidding? You are in here all the time saying some fan or player at some game looked stupid for one thing or another.

      I do think it got a bit hard on you in this thread. If I'd have known it would go beyond quips, I wouldn't have added mine.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Pacers reserves anger NY fans by blocking their view. + 2 other articles

        All I want to know is does Will still think the Knicks will make the playoffs?



        Isiah is a good draft talent evaluator and that's pretty much it. If the Knicks win over 30 games this year, he should win Coach of The Year!

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Pacers reserves anger NY fans by blocking their view. + 2 other articles

          Coming into this season I was/am hanging on by a thread as a Pacers fan. I have enjoyed watching players pulling for their teammates so far. Anyone who doesn't understand the importance of this clearly doesn't understand team sports in general. In basketball . . . .

          teammates pulling for one another and the team to succeed = good.
          teammates concerned only about themselves and looking cool = bad.

          We're only 3 games in but that is one positive change I've seen so far. It's one step closer to the focus of this team being back to where it should be, winning games, and away from where it has been with all the BS that's gone on the past couple of years.
          Can we get a new color commentator please?

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Pacers reserves anger NY fans by blocking their view. + 2 other articles

            Well, this'll take a while.

            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
            Really? I'm immature because I am extremely annoyed by a fan that calls players "stupid" for cheering on their teammates?

            Defend the point instead of telling me to grow up. I sincerely want to hear how this makes the players stupid, what is it about them standing and cheering on their teammates that's wrong? Go ahead, convince me. I'm happy to own up to being wrong.
            Grace didn't call the players stupid. She said what they did "looked a little stupid", especially against such a crappy team.

            But the logic has to go beyond "grow up". I actually put reasoning behind my post, I didn't just snipe and run.
            Well, I'd had a crappy day at work, topped off by my sister calling me to say "everybody hates me", and she couldn't even respond because her internet went down (along with a number of my clients on the westside, btw. Stupid AT&T/SBC/Ameritech).

            Imagine my surprise to see a respected poster attacking her for something she didn't even say. She didn't call our players stupid. I highly doubt either one of us ever complained about the players previous apathetic behavior, considering we spent most of our last year with tickets with her looking at her watch and me looking at the Pacemates. Well, there was the Phoenix game last year, but that was because it was embarrassing on the night Reggie's jersey was retired.

            I understand that both of you are long time regulars, but then that's exactly why I would hold you to a higher standard.
            It doesn't matter if someone has made 10 posts or 10,000, there's disagreeing with one's opinion, and attacking them because you disagree with said opinion. It reminded me of the Sassan-esque "You're not a real fan if you don't support the players 150%" line of thinking, hence the doppleganger reference. That's the difference between us and RATS.

            I understand that many of you don't appreciate Grace's sour attitude, though I wouldn't be surprised if it's really because deep down you fear she speaks for many of the "casual" fans. But she has the right to her opinion. If you disagree, that's fine. If it "pisses you off", Ignore her. Don't worry, it won't offend her, she's probably already Ignored you. But don't mock and denigrate her and then expect not to **** me off.

            I stand by my view that you must be extremely sour to look at Armstrong cheering at the 11:20 mark of the 1st (because that's about when it started) and take the Knicks' fans side of it. I'm betting DA wasn't the one she had in mind when she said it, but he has been the most active "cheerleader" so far this season.
            Are we both extremely sour? You bet. I'll write up my Reasons Why list right after Hicks does that Pacers Digest Glossary. But, once again, for the newbies, the showstoppers were:

            - TPTB not only fiddling while Rome burned, but then having the temerity to raise our ticket prices 60% the same week Reggie announced his retirement.
            - David Stern literally lying to our faces (yes, in person), saying that Ron was "such a nice young man, such a caring person", then after throwing our franchise under the bus admitting he'd never met him.

            What bugs me more is that it seemed pretty clear to me that she thought this was a Knicks-game-only thing. It had NOTHING to do with beating the Knicks and everything to do with supporting teammates that were playing well (just the effort is even being cheered).

            If they had been pouting away for 20 games and then all of the sudden started cheering late in a rout of the lowly Knicks, THEN I wouldn't have responded like I did.
            As she herself said, it wasn't about the Knicks. She said it "looked" stupid against such a lowly team, especially coming from a fan of another team.

            Originally posted by grace View Post
            I look at our relationship with the Pacers as a marriage. In my case I'm the bitter divorcee who has cut ties and moved on. Keboy (as far as I can tell) is the one who stays in a marriage even though he is getting very little if anything out of it.
            Well, that's the most insulting thing I've read. The difference between us is I grew up with the Pacers, it's in my blood, I can't cut those ties as easily. However, the whole "loveless marriage" is as good a metaphor as any. Maybe I'm just sticking it out for the kids, and only make it through the days by fantasizing about that girl from Cleveland.
            Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Pacers reserves anger NY fans by blocking their view. + 2 other articles

              Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
              All I want to know is does Will still think the Knicks will make the playoffs?
              Yeah. I didn't think they would get off to a good start.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Pacers reserves anger NY fans by blocking their view. + 2 other articles

                Wow... those people sure like to boooo their knicks... they had their boo machine on when they played the Spurs too...
                12/27/2005 at Spurs - SamBear - 3

                1/2/2008 vs Memphis - SamBear - 19


                4/9/2014 - Luis Scola also recorded a season high with 24 points and Evan Turner added 23 for Indiana.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Pacers reserves anger NY fans by blocking their view. + 2 other articles

                  How mad could Grace be... Didn't Tony win Sunday?

                  -Bball
                  Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                  ------

                  "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                  -John Wooden

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Pacers reserves anger NY fans by blocking their view. + 2 other articles

                    Originally posted by Bball View Post
                    How mad could Grace be... Didn't Tony win Sunday?

                    -Bball
                    One hardly has anything to do with the other. Besides the Bulls lost to the Kings.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Pacers reserves anger NY fans by blocking their view. + 2 other articles

                      Originally posted by grace View Post
                      Did I say anywhere that it was only about the Knicks? I commented on it because the Knicks game is the only game I've watched this year.
                      Actually, that's exactly what you did. That was the ONLY reason I responded like that.
                      Originally posted by grace
                      Personally, I thought they looked a little stupid getting so excited about beating the Knicks. I mean they're the Knicks. Big friggin' deal.
                      Kegboy, is it okay then if I say Grace "looked a little stupid" making her comment? Yeah, I didn't think so. Everyone sees this defense as splitting hairs and the mods would tear me a new one if I used that phrase and then defended it by saying that I didn't actually say she was stupid.


                      For the sake of peace I'm letting it go at that because I feel comfortable that I expressed my reasoning well enough. There is nothing more to be gained except pushing on a fight that is senseless. I didn't respond to Grace's post or yours specifically because it was either of you, other than in the sense that she's a longtime poster rather than a troll or newbie that I would just brush aside as intentionally stirring the pot.


                      However, I did jump back on specifically to talk about the incident itself and the TV commentary, which I just got to tonight via Tivo (still have the Philly game to watch most of too). This is not really meant to pile on, but some of it will make my original point. It's meant to be more about the original posts before Grace or I commented.


                      First, knowing about this discussion I'm watching the NY game from about the end of the 1st onward. As I said, Armstrong is up most of the game. Foster, Cabbages and Daniels are often up with them. This goes on in various forms all game long.

                      BUT IT CHANGES. In the 4th as the Knicks close the game up tight and the crowd gets into it (and note that the crowd is pretty excited to be beating the lowly Pacers, including the fans that are going to complain in just a bit). This really gets the bench into it.

                      So I notice that by the 6-7 minute mark the ENTIRE bench is up. I mean Jack, Tins, Baston, Foster, Daniels, Harrison, Marshall, Williams and Powell (the last 2 in suits of course). They have a wall blocking the first few rows and every time the ball comes to that end (Knicks offensive end no less) you can see the fans behind them standing up so they can actually see the play.

                      On some closer shots it looks like the bench is laughing and apparently hearing the fans yelling at them about this, which seems to have enhanced their enjoyment of standing. Again it started before this, but my bet is that the more the fans yelled at them to sit down, the more they stayed standing.

                      Anyway, after Granger pulls down a tough O-board and scores it to put them up by 11 (4:56) there is a cut to the bench. Jack is screaming, Tins clapping, Powell and Marshall high 5. Dudes are into it and the big energy play by DG.

                      So Denari and Clark notice this (as has the director since he cut to the shot during the game, and then runs it as a replay) and say the following...

                      DEN - "And look at that Pacers bench, Clark."
                      KEL - "Yeah. I watched it the last time... "
                      DEN - "I mean.."
                      KEL - "...we got a good look at 'em. Everybody up..."
                      DEN - "I mean we haven't seen a bench like that...in a while."
                      KEL - "Yeah. Great sight."

                      discuss play replay, then cut to replay of bench

                      KEL - "And there's (ha) the (ha ha) bench's reaction. They want this road win."

                      A minute later Denari mentions the intensity you can feel down on the floor. Then coming out of the Knicks out of bounds the Pacers bench is sitting (4:00), so they actually didn't stay standing in the fans way every second of the game just to be jerks or something.

                      Harrington O-board and score at 3:11 - bench back up. JO blocked shot, bench more rowdy. Knicks fans more PO'd and yelling at bench players out of game frustration more than anything. Wasn't just the fans because Curry picked up a tech on the play too.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Pacers reserves anger NY fans by blocking their view. + 2 other articles

                        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                        Kegboy, is it okay then if I say Grace "looked a little stupid" making her comment? Yeah, I didn't think so. Everyone sees this defense as splitting hairs and the mods would tear me a new one if I used that phrase and then defended it by saying that I didn't actually say she was stupid..
                        Actually, I see a big difference between saying "someone said something stupid" or "someone looked stupid doing something" and saying "someone is stupid." Someone saying or doing something stupid doesn't make them so, or else I'm a ****ing idiot.
                        Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Pacers reserves anger NY fans by blocking their view. + 2 other articles

                          Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                          I'm a ****ing idiot.
                          Well heck, Kegboy, I could have told you that!
                          This space for rent.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Pacers reserves anger NY fans by blocking their view. + 2 other articles

                            Let me just add that I wasn't trying to make it a personal attack on Grace, and if she was hurt by it I apologize for the misunderstanding.

                            My focus is to rip on the idea, and more specifically I get worked up if I think someone is taking a hardline opinion (ie, harsh, angry, bitter, etc) without all the facts on the table (see "JO doesn't take charges" or "Rick doesn't play young players/deep rotations"). It has nothing to do with Grace or my opinion of her or her postings. I can't think of another posting by her that has put me off in the least.

                            I hope she understands that and doesn't take this as a commentary on herself as a forum member. Grace and Kegboy are obviously very active and interested PD regulars, which is appreciated.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Pacers reserves anger NY fans by blocking their view. + 2 other articles

                              Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                              Someone saying or doing something stupid doesn't make them so, or else I'm a ****ing idiot.
                              Come on, can't we at least be mature enough not to spontaneously brag about our sexual lives.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X