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

Game report from Oakland

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Game report from Oakland

    Not a play by play recap, just some thoughts from the game

    Tonight was the first night we took the train to the game. Figured it was a good idea because girl doesn't like driving at night and I could avoid driving and have a few beers at the game which I normally wouldn't do. Round trip train tickets were $12. It's $15 to park at the arena. There's not really parking lots around except for at the Arena itself unless you're feeling lucky enough to leave your car in a part of Oakland you're not that familiar with. So far so good.

    We got to the Arena early. Over an hour before tip. The two Pacers on the floor shooting were Bender and Artest. Ron looked like all that shooting in the cast paid off because his shot looked pretty normal. I'll try not to make fun of Bender's reputed shooting skills again after watching him drain three after three after three after three. The kid can shoot. Good rotation on the ball, comes off his fingertips nicely.

    Tins JO and Al came out and shot around as well for a bit. No autographs signed by Pacers after the early shoot around.

    Got some of those great garlic fries and some Gorden Biersch brew, good times. Nice jumbo dog too. Love eating junk like that and a basketball game is the perfect excuse.

    The Pacers came out for the official warm up and to my horror it was the Gold. The Gold unis. We're going to lose. I wore a new Pacers shirt that I recieved from a relative for Xmas. There goes that shirt; we're going to lose and I'll never be able to wear it in good faith during a game again. Crap.

    Lots of Pacers gear visible in the crowd tonight. Many people filing in really close to tip off or later. It's a work day, traffic, etc. During intros Ron was introduced first. A few cheers, mostly boos. JO got cheers. Not much reaction one way or another for Foster or Tins. I expected Reggie to get booed, he usually does here. To my surprise there was scattered applause for the legend.

    Some game observations:

    If the Warriors were going to have a chance in hell of winning this it would have to be by feeding Dampier. They started off good there but didn't continue to just pound the ball in there.

    Reggie looked really good in the first half.

    Ron played great defense on Richardson as expected. I suppose he had an off night otherwise.

    Bender. Hmm. I guess I'm almost on the bandwagon now. That dunk he had made the crowd "oooh". It was amazing, he was by the three point line and literally took one step, two steps and was throwing it down. He made two more really nice shots right after that too. Freakish. Maybe he is as good as advertised.

    The Pacers just suffocated the Warriors in the 2nd quarter. Lots of running going on. They made it evident that they simply were a much better team (at that point in the game anyway). Simply outclassed the Warriors.

    In the third quarter the Pacers got complacent. Just lazy, weren't working for good shots, just throwing it up there. That would be okay I guess if the shots went in. They didn't. W's played really good team ball in the 3rd. Awful third quarter for the P's.

    Mike Dunleavy: How ya like me now?

    Seriously, this kid can be a player. He didn't get to play much last year so you sort of have to look at this season as his rookie year on the floor. Inconsistent but that should come around the more he plays.

    Not real suprised that Musselman went with Dunleavy as a point forward. Surprised that the Pacers didn't make him work to bring the ball up more though.

    Robinson and JO were at it all night. I saw three projectiles thrown after the 2nd double technical was called. One almost hit Reggie in the huddle, another landed in the key, and another hit someone sitting courtside on the baseline. These were all thrown from somewhere behind me. Welcome to Oakland.

    How about Mickael Pietrus? Guarding the point?!? His stat line will not reflect this but once he get the experience under his belt this kid will be a player. I strongly advocate giving all of Cheaney's minutes to MP at this point because the playoffs are out of the question and it's time to develop the talent that will be around; not Cheaney who likely will be gone after this season. Those of you who saw the game know what I'm talking about. Pietrus was a pest on defense; he was working as hard if not harder than anyone else on the floor. Offensive decision making needs work though. I'm really high on this kid.

    Al was great. Just great. Played within the flow of the game and made the Warriors pay.

    I'm sure I'll think of some other things later but for now, that's what immediately comes to mind.

    We left the Arena and it was warm. Almost spring-like here tonight. As we walked across the pedestrian walkway to the BART station there was a saxophone player playing for change. He started playing something from 'Giant Steps'. The Pacers won, the Warriors didn't roll over and die thanks to that "bust" Dunleavy and some good luck rubbed off my new shirt. It was a beautiful night.
    Mickael Pietrus Le site officiel
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Game report from Oakland

    Oh yeah, there were just under 400 people who recieved the buzz cut treatment tonight. Not only were they given tickets to the game, but lower bowl tickets.

    We saw Mullin as we were lingering outside before going into the Arena. Were about 15 feet from him but I don't want to bother the guy so what am I gonna go say? Make him press the flesh and gush over his hall of fame career? Nah. He's not very tall in person btw.
    Mickael Pietrus Le site officiel

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Game report from Oakland

      Thanks for the report.

      AL was very good last night even though he did not shoot well, but he was very active, and your words used to describe Bender, "freakish" is right on. I havbe said for 5 years the guy has unusual talent and a freakish game that is hard to describe.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Game report from Oakland

        Great report, Kerosene. Life is good in the Bay area.

        I, too, am a Michael Pietrus fan. I think he will eventually be able to put up some points, and he is a young Euro who knows how to defend. Love his size, athleticism, and attitude. Plus, I read he has a Reggie Miller type work ethic.

        Glad you are moving closer to joining the Bender bandwagon. Honestly, as a Bender believer from the git go, the Bender bashing of the past year, which almost grew to the status of being politically correct, got real old.

        Wear your new game shirt proudly and may it see many more victories.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Game report from Oakland

          I rode on a plane with Mullin and his family about 3 weeks after the the 2000 finals loss. They were coming back from vacation and got stuck on my flight because theirs got cancelled so they rode coach. I was lucky enough to be seated next to he and his wife.

          Just an outstanding guy. Very nice, polite, his wife was very talkative and nice too(and quite attractive). Their kids and the nanny were seated right in front of us. The kids were unbelieveablely well behaved. Had some great conversation with him and his wife. Just great people. I didn't ask for his autograph because I thought it would be rude of me to do so why he was vactioning with his family, but I did enjoy the conversation.

          I was kind of disappointed when he went back to GS and and ended up workingin the front office there but understood the need and reasons behind the pacers not holding on to him. I thought he would have been a nice addition to the pacers staff instead

          And you are right, he's not as tall as I thought he would be.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Game report from Oakland

            It's $15 to park at the arena.
            Ugh. The parking just keeps getting higher and higher. When I go watch the A's my tickets cost half as much as parking. That's crazy. I guess they just want more people to take BART.

            Comment

            Previous template Next
            Working...
            X