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

Stephen Jackson is pointing fingers. TNT covered the best

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

  • #46
    Re: Stephen Jackson is pointing fingers. TNT covered the best

    I had no problem with Jamaal's threes, except they didn't go in. He had good shots but he just had no legs. He's trying, and I can't ask more of him.

    On the Jax three, we could have spent the clock, but I'm not sure we'd have gotten a better shot. Jax got a good look, and at that point a quick score would have been the best thing in the world. We'd have liked the extra time. Better a quick miss than a miss at the end of the shot clock.
    This space for rent.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Stephen Jackson is pointing fingers. TNT covered the best

      Jackson says teammates blame him for Game 6 loss

      Indy star article

      By Jeff Rabjohns
      jeff.rabjohns@indystar.com


      Stephen Jackson lashed out after the Pacers' overtime loss Thursday, saying someone on the team blamed him for the 92-89 defeat.

      "It's my fault they said. We lost, and it's my fault. It's my fault. That's the word," Jackson said.

      Reached after leaving Conseco Fieldhouse, Jackson was asked if he got into it with Pacers forward Jermaine O'Neal during the game.

      "We talked. We didn't argue," Jackson said.

      But in two separate exchanges with the media after the Game 6 loss that tied the first-round series at three games apiece, Jackson said he was singled out. Jackson declined to name the source of the blame, saying only that it was "more than one" person associated with the team.

      "It's not my place to say who said what, but they know what they said," Jackson said. "I'll take the blame for it. If you all feel it's my fault, then you all should agree with them. I don't agree, but hey, that's basketball."

      Veteran forward Dale Davis said he didn't make the comments to Jackson, but he heard them.

      "There were some words said, but that's neither here nor there," Davis said.

      Davis later added, "Our main purpose is to go out there and play together and win. Stephen has to accept the fact of his role and the position that he's in. The most important thing is just focusing on basketball."

      In Thursday's loss, Jackson was 5-for-15 from the field, including 1-for-6 from the 3-point line, for 14 points. He also had five rebounds, two assists and four turnovers in 47 minutes. He took more shots than anyone except O'Neal (6-for-19), even though the Pacers didn't run many plays specifically for him.

      Jackson said he'll be able to put the incident behind him for Saturday's series-deciding game in Boston.

      "If I don't put it behind me, then everything people's been saying about me is going to be true," he said. "You know everything they say, 'I shouldn't be here. . . . I'm a nut. I don't know how to play. My emotions hurt the team."

      The comments could be another distraction in a season that has been marred by suspensions and injuries.

      "I am taking this personal because I feel if you all come out and watch me play, I come out and give 110 percent every night," Jackson said. "Whether some times I get technical fouls, I'm human. But I go out and give 100 percent.

      "I'm for my team. I got fined $2 million (lost salary from his 30-game suspension) because I went to war for my team. I will always be there. More than me taking it personally, it hurt because I do everything I can. I felt disrespected by hearing that.

      "I am hurt because I will do anything for anybody on this team or in this organization."

      Jackson, in his first year with the Pacers and fifth in the NBA, is the only player on the team with a championship ring, that coming in 2003 with San Antonio.

      He said he doesn't care if the issue gets settled.

      "I'm cool with it. I have to come to work, play basketball and help win games and take care of my family. That's all I have to do," he said. "Resolving this is not important to me."

      "I don't really know at what point what really ticked everyone off," Davis
      So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

      If you've done 6 impossible things today?
      Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Stephen Jackson is pointing fingers. TNT covered the best

        It most likely is not just this game, it is constant taking shots out of the offense, not finishing the play, being a knucklehead.

        His shooting percentage are even for the year woeful at best, him coming out with this is very very bad, him not seeing it is even worse, certainly if you can accept the idea that these things most likely fly through the lockerroom and the coaching staff will certainly have discussed his behaviour as well.

        He may be a "warrior" (though I see him more as a burning stick of dynamite) but there are things you do and things you don't. Breaking up offense and then complaining about others in the press is both dead wrong.

        Dale's comments speak loud in that sense.
        So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

        If you've done 6 impossible things today?
        Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Stephen Jackson is pointing fingers. TNT covered the best

          Weak sauce. Unless Jackson is breaking plays to "get his" a la Jalen Rose, (which I've not seen happen), I don't see what the problem is. He's a knucklehead. He's turnover prone, and very streaky. He's not a great decision-maker, and is best utilized as a 3rd banana guy on a title contender. We knew all this going into this season, so what's the problem? He's delivered exactly what we expected. Essentially, it's like moving Al Harrington's stats to the perimeter.

          I think it's been a rough situation for Jax, and he's responded admirably. With Tinsley as rusty as an 80 year old boat, JO hurt, and Reggie being highly inconsistent, I would lay blame on the coaching staff for not going to Jax more, ESPECIALLY when he wasn't being guarded by Pierce.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Stephen Jackson is pointing fingers. TNT covered the best

            Originally posted by able
            It most likely is not just this game, it is constant taking shots out of the offense, not finishing the play, being a knucklehead.
            This is the point, I think.

            Now, I was watching the game on a 13-inch TV, but it seemed to me that the second quarter was broken offense time, with the team taking ill-advised quick perimeter shots instead of sticking to the offense that got us the first quarter lead.

            It seems to me that Jackson was leading the way in that.

            If there is blame for Jackson, it is that he continued to try to be the hero with outside shot attempts instead of working the clock and playing the offense as designed. That series of lapses is directly responsible for the Pacers losing the lead and ultimately the game.

            While it is true that no one player wins or loses a game, I agree that if Jackson is going to make the pious "I need to put this team on my shoulders" statements he has to be able to deal with the "what the F were you doing? You lost the game for us!" statements.
            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


            • #51
              Re: Stephen Jackson is pointing fingers. TNT covered the best

              From what I've seen Jax is the one guy who's given 100% all the time, every game - even in the blowouts (didn't see game 2). Dunno what he might have done tonight - he may have blown an assignment somewhere but the Pacers offense was a symposium on blown assignments. And he certainly played very solid D.

              As others have said, if you tried to single out one player it'd probably be Tinsley. The 3 missed 3's in a row were bad. The two missed floaters in the lane - which I absolutely KNEW he would hit when he put them up - those shots have been money for him - were worse.

              But putting it on any one player's weak. The entire team got out of their offense the 2nd half. They weren't cutting, setting screens - the PG looked bad just dribbling the ball up high but when nobody does anything to get open they didn't have a lot of options.
              The poster formerly known as Rimfire

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Stephen Jackson is pointing fingers. TNT covered the best

                It was J.O who got on Jax after the game.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Stephen Jackson is pointing fingers. TNT covered the best

                  IS writer pointed out how many shots SJax took even tho very few plays were called for him. IOW, the wrtier was "hinting" that Jax was breaking off plays and going off on his own.


                  Nope, I don't have a link, I have a hardcopy.
                  Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Stephen Jackson is pointing fingers. TNT covered the best

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck
                    I like Jax. He played 47 minutes tonight on a bad ankle, he plays hard and I believe he tries to do the right thing to help the team win. He has mental and physical thoughness that I like. But all the negatives about him we all knew last summer, so I'm willing to live with a little turmoil, hell who am I to talk, seeing as how I love Ron. Give me warriors any day of the week

                    Very true UB! Give me 12 SJax and Artests. If JO were more like them he would actually be able to win a championship. Instead he is the latest Kevin Garnett - Great talent but too soft and incapable of leading a team to a championship.

                    This team can win a title in the very near future, but as Tim Legler said on ESPN radio this morning - the problem w/Jermaine O'Neal is that he often isn't the best player on his team - Ron Artest is. IMHO, what Artest and Jackson have that JO is missing is that warrior mentality.
                    "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
                    - Benjamin Franklin

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Stephen Jackson is pointing fingers. Watch WTHR 13 at 11:20 tonight

                      Originally posted by _PD_
                      It is time to reiterate as someone said a few weeks ago. NBA players are not paid to play basketball, they are paid to win basketball games.
                      THIS is what needs to be posted above the door of the locker room.....

                      I've thought this for years, but it is obvious the players don't agree...



                      RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Stephen Jackson is pointing fingers. TNT covered the best

                        Originally posted by fwpacerfan
                        Very true UB! Give me 12 SJax and Artests. If JO were more like them he would actually be able to win a championship. Instead he is the latest Kevin Garnett - Great talent but too soft and incapable of leading a team to a championship.

                        This team can win a title in the very near future, but as Tim Legler said on ESPN radio this morning - the problem w/Jermaine O'Neal is that he often isn't the best player on his team - Ron Artest is. IMHO, what Artest and Jackson have that JO is missing is that warrior mentality.
                        I think you need to re-evaluate what a leader is. While Jax and Artest play with an amazing amount of heart, i really don't think they have the focus that JO does. Granted, JO still needs to grow up and mature, but he is much more poised, vocal, and focused than jax and artest. After Reg is gone, it will be Jermaines team, and he will step up.
                        :thepacers

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Stephen Jackson is pointing fingers. TNT covered the best

                          Originally posted by BluBlood
                          I think you need to re-evaluate what a leader is. While Jax and Artest play with an amazing amount of heart, i really don't think they have the focus that JO does. Granted, JO still needs to grow up and mature, but he is much more poised, vocal, and focused than jax and artest. After Reg is gone, it will be Jermaines team, and he will step up.
                          I understand what a leader is. Just because someone is the most talented that in no way makes him a leader. It seems to me JO has been appointed the role of leader when Reggie leaves. You aren't appointed a leader, you earn the role of leader. I have no idea if he has earned this or not. My biggest question is will the team listen to JO? I have no idea what goes on behind closed doors. Maybe the team does rally around JO, but I've seen him make some questionable comments publicly. JO also has to earn the respect of Artest and Jackson if he doesn't have it. As for focus - that is up for debate. I've seen JO lose his head and concentrate more on complaining to the officials more often than I would like. He needs to learn that the best way to get calls is to be aggressive and keep your mouth shut.
                          "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
                          - Benjamin Franklin

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Stephen Jackson is pointing fingers. TNT covered the best

                            Originally posted by fwpacerfan
                            I understand what a leader is. Just because someone is the most talented that in no way makes him a leader. It seems to me JO has been appointed the role of leader when Reggie leaves. You aren't appointed a leader, you earn the role of leader. I have no idea if he has earned this or not. My biggest question is will the team listen to JO? I have no idea what goes on behind closed doors. Maybe the team does rally around JO, but I've seen him make some questionable comments publicly. JO also has to earn the respect of Artest and Jackson if he doesn't have it. As for focus - that is up for debate. I've seen JO lose his head and concentrate more on complaining to the officials more often than I would like. He needs to learn that the best way to get calls is to be aggressive and keep your mouth shut.
                            I think it is a fair assesment to say that all of our key players have alot of growing up to do. As for who the team leader will be, i agree, it needs to be earned. Have Jax and Artest shown what it takes? no. Has JO? not really. i guess it comes down to me wanting JO to step into the role as i think he is a bit (albeit not much) more mentally stable person than artest and jax.
                            :thepacers

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Stephen Jackson is pointing fingers. TNT covered the best

                              Originally posted by BluBlood
                              I think it is a fair assesment to say that all of our key players have alot of growing up to do. As for who the team leader will be, i agree, it needs to be earned. Have Jax and Artest shown what it takes? no. Has JO? not really. i guess it comes down to me wanting JO to step into the role as i think he is a bit (albeit not much) more mentally stable person than artest and jax.
                              I think people grow into leaders. I never really thought Reggie was the leader of the 90's teams. I always thought Mark Jackson was. Reggie always seemed to take a backseat on the leadership role until this new group came around.
                              "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
                              - Benjamin Franklin

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Stephen Jackson is pointing fingers. TNT covered the best

                                Well, jeeeez. I was going to wait until after the season was over, but here goes a tickler.

                                This is where this team is headed. WIthout leadership, with 2-3 guys getting into each others' faces, we will have a lackluster season next year. Lack of team chemistry is more of a killer than injuries. It's what busts teams up.

                                There is a place on this team for emotional warrior knuckleheads who know what their job is. That said, just one of them can kill a team or a season.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X