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

1/28/16 Game Thread #46: Pacers vs. Hawks

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

  • 1/28/16 Game Thread #46: Pacers vs. Hawks

    RED BLAND SOCIETY



    -VS-



    Game Time Start: 7:00 PM EST
    Where: The Fieldhouse, Indianapolis, IN
    Officials: Danny Crawford, Marat Kogut, Eric Lewis

    Media Notes: Indiana Notes, Atlanta Notes
    Television: FOX Sports Indiana / FOX Sports Southeast
    Radio: WFNI 1070 AM, 107.5 FM / WQXI 790 AM, WZGC 92.9 FM
    NBA Feeds: NBA Audio & Broadband League Pass (subscription req'd)


    REMINDER: Per PD policy, please do not share a link to, describe how to search for, request a link to, or request a PM about streaming video of a NBA game that is not coming directly through the NBA. Not even in a "wink-wink, nudge-nudge, know-what-I-mean" round-about sort of way. Thank you


    23-22
    Home: 13-7
    East: 8-12
    27-20
    Away: 11-12
    East: 16-11
    Jan 30
    Feb 02
    Feb 03
    Feb 05
    7:00pm
    7:00pm
    7:30pm
    7:00pm

    MAHINMI
    ALLEN
    GEORGE
    ELLIS
    HILL
    HORFORD
    MILLSAP
    BAZEMORE
    KORVER
    TEAGUE


    PACERS
    Rodney Stuckey - Right Foot (out)


    HAWKS
    None reported






    Atlanta Hawks work to promote diversity after divisive scandal
    Max Blau


    From panel talks to pride parades, the Hawks have worked to become a more inclusive
    franchise since racial remarks came to light.


    It would be understandable if the Atlanta Hawks would rather forget September 2014. Five
    months after the NBA handed down a lifetime ban to former Clippers owner Donald Sterling
    for making racist remarks, Hawks majority owner Bruce Levenson preemptively announced he
    would put the team up for sale in part because of a 2012 email in which he attributed low ticket
    sales to African American fans scaring away white fans, music that was too urban, and a kiss
    cam that was “too black.” Hawks GM Danny Ferry didn’t help: That same week, a recording of
    a 2014 team call leaked in which he was heard describing former NBA player Luol Deng, a
    Sudanese native, as having “a little African in him.” It was a bad a month, indeed.

    In response to the fallout, the Hawks’s then-new CEO, Steve Koonin, indefinitely suspended
    Ferry, hired law firm Alston & Bird to conduct an investigation, and embarked on an apology
    tour with local media outlets. He even used the phrase “fo shizzle” in a PSA with Atlanta rapper
    T.I. After that, Koonin created the NBA’s first-ever “chief diversity and inclusion officer” position
    in an effort to undo the damage done by Levenson’s and Ferry’s remarks. To help distract from
    the fallout, the Hawks unexpectedly played their best season ever, and the franchise was
    subsequently sold for $850 million. Life seemingly went on.

    And yet, team managers didn’t forget about their promises. This past Thursday morning, the
    Atlanta Hawks took another step toward righting past wrongs as the team by hosting the
    inaugural MOSAIC—Model of Shaping Atlanta through Inclusive Conversations—a series of
    panels discussions about sports and culture through the prism of, you guessed it, diversity and
    inclusion. Held inside the Center for Civil and Human Rights, the conversations included
    participants such as Koonin; Grant Hill, a seven-time NBA all-star and new minority Hawks
    owner; Nzinga Shaw, the team’s chief diversity and inclusion officer; and Kevin Powell, an
    activist and author from New York. Moderated by Rohit Malhotra, founder of the Center for
    Civic Innovation, the discussions covered topics from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. to life as a
    minority in America today to the ways sports can foster acceptance.

    Shaw, hired in December 2014, spent her much of her first year on the job organizing MOSAIC,
    an event she would like to see happen annually. But she believes her biggest success so far has
    been the creation of a 20-member “diversity council” comprised of Hawks employees and
    community partners tasked with shaping “what diversity and inclusion looks like” for the
    franchise. The group meets regularly to discuss how the Hawks can better serve all kinds of
    audiences. Out of that effort, she said, the Hawks decided to become more engaged with the
    LGBT community. Last fall the team was the only pro sports team to march in the Atlanta Pride
    parade.

    “This function [of this job] is real,” Shaw said. “There are a lot of people that think my job
    might be window dressing or a bandage to cover a wound. … What we are doing can start from
    a moment and turn into a movement. Getting everyone to understand has been my greatest
    challenge.”

    From Koonin’s perspective, MOSAIC shows that the franchise is following through on its pledge
    to “look at the world differently” following the scandal. He believes the organization has grown
    more conscious about creating an inclusive culture under its new ownership. That effort has
    included traditional philanthropy efforts like the ongoing construction of basketball courts in
    poor Atlanta neighborhoods...CONTINUE READING ATLANTA MAGAZINE


    Pacers
    Candace Buckner @CandaceDBuckner
    Nate Taylor @ByNateTaylor
    Jared Wade @8pts9secs
    Tim Donahue @TimDonahue8p9s
    Tom Lewis @indycornrows
    Whitney @its_whitney

    Hawks
    Chris Vivlamore @CVivlamoreAJC
    Jason Walker @JasonWalkerSBN
    Kris Willis @Kris_Willis
    Bo Churney @bochurney
    Raj Prashad @RajPrashad
    Co Co @cocoqt81

    This is the darkest timeline.

  • #2
    Re: 1/28/16 Game Thread #46: Pacers vs. Hawks

    A loss tonight and there should be a change somewhere tomorrow. There's no excuse to lose this game tonight. Atlanta has lost 3 out of their last 4 games and played a close game last night at home vs LAC losing by 2.

    When the Pacers win they'll gain a little breathing room on the 9-seeded Hornets who trail right now by 1.5 games. Would move 2.5 up on New York and Washington who are currently 2 back.But Washington is at home vs Denver tonight -7. New York is in Toronto +10.
    Last edited by I Love P; 01-28-2016, 03:23 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 1/28/16 Game Thread #46: Pacers vs. Hawks

      Supposedly Teague is on the block with talks between Atlanta and NY so Teague is going to want to showcase his value tonight.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 1/28/16 Game Thread #46: Pacers vs. Hawks

        Whatever happens tonight I will blame George Hill, unless we win of coarse. Because if we win there is absolutely no reason to think GHILL will have had contributed ANYTHING positive. He is SO BAD that if we win we will win in spite of him. Hopefully the powers that be take care of this lazy, good for nothing basketball impersonator. I mean come on, this team would be SO MUCH better with the likes of MARKIEF ****ING MORRIS or SHAGGY MOTHER ****ING P! Now there are some players that know how to BALL. I mean look at how good the Suns and Lakers are because of these players. If Larry doesn't get both of these players here then the Pacers will be doomed for eternity...

        Thanks for reading...

        Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: 1/28/16 Game Thread #46: Pacers vs. Hawks

          Myles Turner starting at the four position tonight.

          Our bench is gonna suck with Myles out.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: 1/28/16 Game Thread #46: Pacers vs. Hawks

            I mean, it's a positive thing if Myles starts. That HAS to be the longterm plan if we have any sense at all.

            Might as well start now. Hopefully he can adjust. We need confidence and some W's, ASAP.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: 1/28/16 Game Thread #46: Pacers vs. Hawks

              MAHINMI
              TURNER
              GEORGE
              ELLIS
              HILL
              HORFORD
              MILLSAP
              BAZEMORE
              KORVER
              TEAGUE
              Updated
              This is the darkest timeline.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: 1/28/16 Game Thread #46: Pacers vs. Hawks

                New bench:

                Young
                Miles
                Solo
                Allen
                Hill

                Is that it?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: 1/28/16 Game Thread #46: Pacers vs. Hawks

                  Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
                  MAHINMI
                  TURNER
                  GEORGE
                  ELLIS
                  HILL
                  HORFORD
                  MILLSAP
                  BAZEMORE
                  KORVER
                  TEAGUE
                  Updated
                  Love the move. Hope we stick with this starting five and Young, Stuckey, Miles, J Hill, Lavoy, Bud, Solo, GR3 bench. Still a very good bench and that starting line up is balanced and lethal.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: 1/28/16 Game Thread #46: Pacers vs. Hawks

                    Love that starting 5

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: 1/28/16 Game Thread #46: Pacers vs. Hawks

                      Originally posted by PaulGeorgeForPresident View Post
                      New bench:

                      Young
                      Miles
                      Solo
                      Allen
                      Hill

                      Is that it?


                      Or......

                      Allen
                      GRIII
                      Jordan Hill
                      CJ Miles
                      Joe Young

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: 1/28/16 Game Thread #46: Pacers vs. Hawks

                        Originally posted by brownjake43 View Post
                        Love the move. Hope we stick with this starting five and Young, Stuckey, Miles, J Hill, Lavoy, Bud, Solo, GR3 bench. Still a very good bench and that starting line up is balanced and lethal.
                        Well it's about time. Still wish they'd start Ellis at the 1 and CJ at the 2. George Hill is just so unreliable.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: 1/28/16 Game Thread #46: Pacers vs. Hawks

                          I gotta say, I'm not entirely sure that Turner's future in the league is at the 4, but learning how to deal with smaller and quicker guys should be an education for him.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: 1/28/16 Game Thread #46: Pacers vs. Hawks

                            Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                            I gotta say, I'm not entirely sure that Turner's future in the league is at the 4, but learning how to deal with smaller and quicker guys should be an education for him.
                            I agree. Turner will have the advantage most games matching up with centers. It will also help create court spacing IMO

                            Sent from my Nexus 5X

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: 1/28/16 Game Thread #46: Pacers vs. Hawks

                              Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                              Well it's about time. Still wish they'd start Ellis at the 1 and CJ at the 2. George Hill is just so unreliable.
                              Dear Lord the starters would give up 50 points in the first quarter.

                              Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk
                              BillS

                              A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                              Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X