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

2016 Western Conference Finals: (1) Golden State vs. (3) Oklahoma City

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

  • Re: 2016 Western Conference Finals: (1) Golden State vs. (3) Oklahoma City

    Originally posted by Kstat View Post
    Draymond green might get finals MVP by virtue of Kevin love guarding him.
    Needs to rediscover how to hit layups first

    Comment


    • Re: 2016 Western Conference Finals: (1) Golden State vs. (3) Oklahoma City

      Originally posted by CableKC View Post
      Awesome; more nba2k16 jacking up a million 3pt shooting, attacking the basket with no rim protectors and super small ball with 8 guards and SFs and 2 PFs for 7 more games.



      Go Warriors!
      I hope the Warriors take the first three games, then spend the fourth game shooting nothing but threes with a 5 guard lineup just as an experiment.

      Comment


      • Re: 2016 Western Conference Finals: (1) Golden State vs. (3) Oklahoma City

        Originally posted by Kstat View Post
        It's going to be really, really hard to hide Love, JR and Irving on defense against golden state. The Warriors play defense. The Cavs not so much.

        All the Warriors have to do is force the Cavs to take one of their guys off floor and all of a sudden they aren't as deadly offensively.
        Smith's defense has surprisingly been better in the postseason. I imagine we'll see more Dellavedova and Shumpert though. Love's defense I don't see really being that big of an issue, as the Cavs can probably live with Draymond Green beating them offensively.

        Last year's Finals went to 6 games, and that was with LeBron playing without Irving or Love and with little else. Have to think this year's series will at least go to 6 games with LeBron alone.

        Comment


        • Re: 2016 Western Conference Finals: (1) Golden State vs. (3) Oklahoma City

          Originally posted by Kstat View Post
          Draymond green might get finals MVP by virtue of Kevin love guarding him.
          No they tend to give MVP to whoever gives LeBron the Hardest time last year it was Iggy

          The year before Kawhi

          Comment


          • Re: 2016 Western Conference Finals: (1) Golden State vs. (3) Oklahoma City

            Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
            Needs to rediscover how to hit layups first
            He won't be guarded by guys 7 feet tall anymore. The Cavs have zero rim protection in addition to their porous perimeter D.

            It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

            Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
            Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
            NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

            Comment


            • Re: 2016 Western Conference Finals: (1) Golden State vs. (3) Oklahoma City

              I wonder if Durant believe the Lil B curse is real at this point

              Comment


              • Re: 2016 Western Conference Finals: (1) Golden State vs. (3) Oklahoma City

                I would say GS in 5 but I don't know how the refs will officiate this series. I think there's more pressure on LeBron to avoid a 2-6 Finals record.

                Comment


                • Re: 2016 Western Conference Finals: (1) Golden State vs. (3) Oklahoma City

                  Does anyone think Durant will actually leave? I mean is he going to find someone who's better than Russell Westbrook long-term and from a team that can pay him?

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2016 Western Conference Finals: (1) Golden State vs. (3) Oklahoma City

                    Great series. It was weird seeing OKC surrender at the end....no attempt at fouling or anything and usually theyr ed the most fie hard team in the league.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2016 Western Conference Finals: (1) Golden State vs. (3) Oklahoma City

                      Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                      Does anyone think Durant will actually leave? I mean is he going to find someone who's better than Russell Westbrook long-term and from a team that can pay him?
                      I agree, his best chance, outside of signing with Cavs, Warriors or Spurs somehow, is still with the Thunder. Really, they could come back and just iron out their poor habits, and be right back here.

                      Or they could get injured like previous years.

                      The Thunder changed for a supremely talented two man club with too many hero ball tendencies and not enough serious defense into a team that almost beat both a 67 win and 73 win team seemingly overnight. It was incredible. But old habits creep up at the worst times and against these Warriors, you need to be perfect.

                      All time great series.
                      Last edited by Ransom; 05-31-2016, 12:11 AM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2016 Western Conference Finals: (1) Golden State vs. (3) Oklahoma City

                        Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                        Does anyone think Durant will actually leave? I mean is he going to find someone who's better than Russell Westbrook long-term and from a team that can pay him?
                        Paul George. Would be killer and kind of like Lebron going Wade in Miami. And then they have Turner who is young and already a beast.

                        Sent from my Nexus 5X

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2016 Western Conference Finals: (1) Golden State vs. (3) Oklahoma City

                          Originally posted by BornIndy07 View Post
                          Paul George. Would be killer and kind of like Lebron going Wade in Miami. And then they have Turner who is young and already a beast.

                          Sent from my Nexus 5X
                          Paul George is not better than Westbrook. Plus, the Thunder already have a MUCH more talented roster than the Pacers. Only way I see Durant leaving is if it's a recent championship pedigree team. I don't see him going to the Lakers or something.
                          Last edited by presto123; 05-31-2016, 01:30 AM.

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2016 Western Conference Finals: (1) Golden State vs. (3) Oklahoma City

                            This game reminded me just how emotionally devastating it is to play hard defense against the Warriors, only to have Steph Curry cross and juke just enough to nail a 27-footer with 5 seconds left on the shot clock. It takes a ton of psychological strength and focus to handle that multiple times a game. Dellavedova's going to have to be tough in these Finals.
                            You Got The Tony!!!!!!

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2016 Western Conference Finals: (1) Golden State vs. (3) Oklahoma City

                              http://nba.nbcsports.com/2016/05/31/...from-down-3-1/

                              In-flight meeting helped spark Warriors rally from down 3-1

                              OAKLAND, Calif. (AP) A heart-to-heart was in order.

                              As the Golden State Warriors made the long, frustrating flight home from Oklahoma City last week suddenly facing elimination, Draymond Green gathered with a few fellow starters at a table in the front of the plane to discuss how to get the defending champions back to winning – and fast.

                              No other choice to avoid a premature end to this record-setting season.

                              “We just kept talking about what we needed to do and what we were going to do,” Green said.

                              Somehow, six days later, the Warriors had won Game 7 with a third straight victory against the Thunder after falling behind 3-1 in the best-of-seven series. And they are headed back to the NBA Finals for a rematch with LeBron James and the Cleveland Cavaliers, the title defense still very much within reach. Game 1 is Thursday night on Golden State’s Oracle Arena home floor.

                              “We never lost confidence, and every game just played with fearlessness and that confidence that we could get back to the Finals however we had to get it done,” MVP Stephen Curry said after his 36-point performance in Monday night’s 96-88 clincher of the Western Conference finals.

                              “I knew we were ready for the moment. We were a mature basketball team that tried our best not to listen to the noise outside when six, seven days ago, we’re down 3-1, everybody thought the wheels were falling off and it was kind of the end of our run,” Curry said. “But in that locker room, the talk was positive. It was, `Let’s figure this out, let’s go out and take it one game at a time and claw our way back into the series and see what happens.’ We followed that kind of mindset these last three games.”

                              In the airplane sit-down, Klay Thompson was clear he could only focus as far ahead as winning Game 5 before shifting to think about how to win another one on the Thunder’s court. Golden State’s most steady player this postseason, he hit an NBA-postseason record 11 3-pointers for 41 points in a thrilling 108-101 Game 6 comeback, then another six on Monday night on the way to 21 points.

                              Even after two embarrassing, lopsided road losses at Oklahoma City that put the Warriors in a big hole, Green counted on them finding a way to come back. He believed it would happen, “Because once we figured something out, we can get it rolling.”

                              Those two defeats were by 52 combined points.

                              “We were not just down 3-1, we had gotten blown out two straight games,” coach Steve Kerr said. “So obviously everything started with Game 5, kind of rediscovering ourselves and our style. Then Game 6 was kind of magical. What Klay did that night, basically putting us on his shoulders and allowing us to have this opportunity tonight at home, it’s a pretty remarkable comeback and it shows a lot about our guys and their will and their grit.”

                              Green is the one who made it clear to Kerr the Warriors wanted to go for the regular-season wins record rather than resting down the stretch, and they topped the 1995-96 Chicago Bulls’ 72-wins mark.

                              This time, the animated, emotional swingman helped Golden State become the 10th team to win a postseason series after falling behind 3-1, and it did it against Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook and the powerful Thunder.

                              “I think everybody will look at 73 wins and say, `Wow, this team never hit any adversity,’ but there is adversity in every season. It all comes in different forms,” said Green, who had 11 points, nine rebounds, four assists and two blocks. “But when you’re talking down 3-1, and everything’s on the line, that makes it 10 times worse. So it’s definitely the biggest thing that this team has had to overcome, and it took a great, tremendous effort and fight to overcome it.”

                              The Warriors now must figure out a way to pull off four more wins against James and the Cavs, who will be eager to change their fortunes following that 4-2 Finals defeat last June when Golden State captured its first championship in 40 years.

                              Kerr made the spot-on decision to move Andre Iguodala into the starting lineup for Game 7 to defend Durant, just as the Coach of the Year did during the NBA Finals last year when Iguodala earned Finals MVP honors.

                              “To have our back against the wall and do it three straight games is tough,” Iguodala said. “I’ll probably forget about it tomorrow morning because we really want to get another one. But it was good for us to have to battle like that. Hopefully it carries over and we can continue with that intensity we’ve had the last three games.”

                              Reserve center Marreese Speights offered his postgame insight on Twitter.

                              “Y’all never seen a 73 win team .. Y’all never seen a player win unanimous mvp… Hahha this story not over!! (hash)history (hash)believe.”

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2016 Western Conference Finals: (1) Golden State vs. (3) Oklahoma City

                                Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                                Does anyone think Durant will actually leave? I mean is he going to find someone who's better than Russell Westbrook long-term and from a team that can pay him?
                                For all the hype about his free agency, i think he's gonna stay.

                                First is the money. He stands to gain a huge increase in salary by taking a 2 year deal with opt out of the 2nd year as the cap will rise again in 2017.

                                So he'll take that deal and go at it again with a team that outclassed what was Gregg Popovich's best regular season tram ever. Then they nearly did it again to a 73 win team. OKC might just be a decent SG away from getting over the hump. I mean, they'll be a threat again to beat GS and SA next year if they just stand pat.

                                I just don't see how Bradley Beal, John Wall et al. are better than the crew he's currently with. And it's not as if he doesn't like OKC. He loves the area and the organizatan he' looking for reasons to stay.

                                I think Durant will do the whole FA tour and enjoy being wooed and pampered, but I'd be pretty surprised if he actually left (this year, anyways).
                                Last edited by d_c; 05-31-2016, 03:41 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X