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

Post Game Thread 04/01/15 - Pacers at Celtics lose 87-100

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

  • #31
    Re: Post Game Thread 04/01/15 - Pacers at Celtics lose 87-100

    Originally posted by CableKC View Post
    19 for 23

    That is the combined shooting of Olynk / Zeller / Bass ...scoring a combined 38 points.

    The entire Frontcourt ( NOT JUST HIBBERT ) did a terrible job of defending them.
    For all the **** Roy gets, its funny how nobody brings up the crap defense from Ian, Scola and West tonight. And that's without mentioning the number of missed layups by our PFs

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Post Game Thread 04/01/15 - Pacers at Celtics lose 87-100

      Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
      For all the **** Roy gets, its funny how nobody brings up the crap defense from Ian, Scola and West tonight. And that's without mentioning the number of missed layups by our PFs
      To be fair, our Starting Center should be playing more than 19 minutes. I really would like for Vogel to explain why he didn't play that many minutes.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Post Game Thread 04/01/15 - Pacers at Celtics lose 87-100

        Roy's per minute #s are actually up this year over the last couple years. the problem is he's playing the least minutes since his 2nd year. he's not even playing 26mpg. just in sheer terms of asset management you can't pay a guy the max to barely play half a game, it's just poor ROI. I'm a big fan of Roy, but we pretty simply aren't getting our money's worth. that's no one's "fault," just is what it is.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Post Game Thread 04/01/15 - Pacers at Celtics lose 87-100

          This game was brutal. The only promising thing was that for the half of the game that we were actually fighting, we were going to the rim, posting up hard, and playing solid defense. It looked like Vogel lit into them, but it doesn't look like the team cares about fighting this season. They've punched their vacation tickets already.
          Time for a new sig.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Post Game Thread 04/01/15 - Pacers at Celtics lose 87-100

            I REALLY do not want a 3-4 year college guy. I want a young guy with a lot of potential.

            We have a coach who can mold a player, as we've seen with George, Stephenson, ect.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Post Game Thread 04/01/15 - Pacers at Celtics lose 87-100

              2-9 Since Paul George didn't want to ruin the chemistry. Then suddenly the team loses momentum did the fact the cavalry was not coming to save the day, mean the others gave up? Just seems odd Paul makes the comment and even the overall effort seemed to drop.

              With 7 games left what is lost letting Paul George play now?

              I agree with Dr. Awesome I'd prefer to draft potential over a 3-4 year player who has little upside.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Post Game Thread 04/01/15 - Pacers at Celtics lose 87-100

                Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                I REALLY do not want a 3-4 year college guy. I want a young guy with a lot of potential.
                Not to single you out, but PDers need to keep in mind that college juniors and seniors are still only 22 or 23 years old usually. A great recent example is Draymond Green, who spent all four years at Michigan State but has since gotten better at the pro level. There's still plenty of room for growth from these players, if you chose the right ones.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Post Game Thread 04/01/15 - Pacers at Celtics lose 87-100

                  Roy's strengths just aren't good enough anymore compared to his weaknesses; more and more 4 and 5 players are outside shooters and they just can't be ignored as has been shown by the results tonight. It isn't worth completely bogging down the offense so Roy might go 50% on all 2 point attempts, but it isn't all Roy's fault, all the big guys didn't play well at all on either side.
                  "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

                  ----------------- Reggie Miller

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Post Game Thread 04/01/15 - Pacers at Celtics lose 87-100

                    I was very disappointed with Frank in the second half for going back to Ian when he took out Roy. Once again Allen had done a decent job of bottling up their centers on defense (not stopping them but doing more then either Roy or Ian combined). I love the guy but I swear to God he takes after his old boss at times when it comes to stubbornness. Our defensive scheme has been cracked like the Enigma code and every team has been given a copy of it. Running their wings into our big men is now a liability and it is costing us games.

                    However with this season, I guess it doesn't matter. I just was disappointed to not see Allen get some more time when I thought he played well enough to get some.

                    I know it sounds crazy but I could just tell in the first quarter our team's body language looked bad. It could certainly have been because they were tired from the back to back but it really just didn't look like they had much fight in them.

                    Honestly unless you are completely a rah-rah fan who refuses to give up I think most of us have just accepted that this is pretty much the end of the line for this season. I know it goes against the grain but at this point I would like to see how high we could drop/climb (depending on your point of view) in the draft. If we are pretty much where we are going to pick then I'd still be for going all out but if we could climb to say 7th or 8th in the lottery, man at this point in time it would be tempting.


                    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Post Game Thread 04/01/15 - Pacers at Celtics lose 87-100

                      9th draft position is where the Pacers are at, and probably where they will be at unless they let Detroit go above them, there is 1 game left in Detroit.

                      They could get up to 11th pick with bad luck from Charlotte and Utah.

                      I honestly feel they only took advantage of the easy part of their schedule to move up from the 6th pick, they weren't that dreadful, maybe if they don't win 7 in a row they're fighting with Denver and Detroit for 7th and 8th picks, but the luck still needs to be on the Pacers side to move up to a top 3 pick.
                      "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

                      ----------------- Reggie Miller

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Post Game Thread 04/01/15 - Pacers at Celtics lose 87-100

                        Originally posted by Tom White View Post
                        Compared to what we have now, Frank is a gazelle!
                        You said that right. Plus he's smart and can shoot. He may not have the potential that the Kentucky bigs have, but I would take Frank over Hibbert right now.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Post Game Thread 04/01/15 - Pacers at Celtics lose 87-100

                          Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                          It sucks, but I would rather have a lottery pick to go next to PG next season than to watch our team get swept by the Hawks.
                          unfortunately we sucked at that. the worst thing that can happen to a team just happened to us. missed the playoffs and didn't suck enough to get a high draft pick.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Post Game Thread 04/01/15 - Pacers at Celtics lose 87-100

                            Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                            It sucks, but I would rather have a lottery pick to go next to PG next season than to watch our team get swept by the Hawks.
                            True, but lets change the above a bit too:

                            It sucks, but I would rather have hade say a top-8 lottery pick to go next to PG next season then to watch our team not make the playoffs at all or get swept by the Hawks...

                            Wow! That's exactly as I have been saying for months now... I hope everyone who wanted to win as many (meaningless) games as possible is extremely happy, you got your wish, congrats...

                            I could say something along the lines of this quote below taken from the Lance Stephenson thread:

                            Originally posted by mattie View Post
                            I know, I know... I know what you're thinking. Why did all these fans continually insist George Hill wasn't a point guard, when he played relatively well at the point, but struggled mightily off the ball? Well son. Some people are stupid as ****. No other way around it.
                            But, I won't.
                            Last edited by Mourning; 04-02-2015, 04:00 AM.
                            2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                            2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                            2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Post Game Thread 04/01/15 - Pacers at Celtics lose 87-100

                              Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                              In hindsight, this was the most predictable outcome - a horrible season in which we by no means were a playoff team, yet didn't get a high consolation draft pick for losing our superstar. By far the worst scenario imaginable. But at least we can someday tell our grandkids that we fought hard. That'll be a good bedtime story since the details of this wretched season would put even the most tortured of souls to sleep.
                              It was indeed very predictable. I don't know about you guys, but I definitely don't tell bedtime stories with regards to the end of the seasons when JOB was here and we always missed the playoffs pretty much just. I'm keeping it at: this outcome was very predictable and trying to get into the postseason was IMHO a strategic blunder for trying to get a tactical outcome.

                              IOW we had the opportunity and good motivation for getting a potential valuable asset or building block for the future and we waisted it on trying to be cannon fodder for one of the topseeds in one postseason.

                              I just see it as trying to get the team to play as many games as they can and get as many paying customers in seats. Profit maximalization in just a few lousy games where the chances are stacked solidly against us. I will NEVER get why we ALWAYS do that and refuse to look at the bigger longterm picture here.

                              Sure, you're not guaranteed to get a good player at say 5 or 7, offcourse you aren't guarenteed and you can always fail, but neither are you guaranteed to get such a player at say 14, no, your chances are actually a LOT worse to get a good quality player at such a spot. Yeah, holla me with Granger and Roy @17. Yeah, lets then also just forget about the Hansbrough's and Rush's and all.

                              I also don't believe at all that one bad season immediately and radically installs a culture of losing in our franchise, which IMO definitely has had a winning tradition for a longtime. Also PG's return alone should be a big reeinforcement and game changer for our team next year.

                              I dunno, it just all seems so shortsighted to me what we have been doing this season. The ONLY bright spots for me where: Hill asserting himself and grabbing his chance, Luis showing he's still alive, Stuckey playing emphatically (but, lets not forget it's a contract year for him), and Solo's play in say december and parts of january, which gives me hope he can be a nice piece of the bench next season with improved conditioning and the experience he gained by just being on the court. That IMHO is a pretty **** poor amount of positives on a complete season.

                              Just my
                              2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                              2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                              2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Post Game Thread 04/01/15 - Pacers at Celtics lose 87-100

                                It's not where you pick, it's who you pick.

                                EDIT: and it also depends on the situation/organization doing the development, but that's too long to fit in one sound bite, haha

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X