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

First Pacers loss that I'm not pissed

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

  • #31
    Re: First Pacers loss that I'm not pissed

    I'm not all that upset. It was the last game of a western road trip and we came out of it 3-2. Doesn't matter if the teams had losing records - west coast trips have always been tough on teams from the east. I thought we responded well after the Phoenix loss which is something I wanted to see. Tonight we just got outplayed. Not a bad trip though.
    The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: First Pacers loss that I'm not pissed

      I can't believe how down you guys are on Carlisle! Think about the style that has won the Championships most recently (i.e. Popp and LB!)! Carlisle runs the system most effective towards winning a Championship in this era!

      The coach rarely ever wins ballgames DURING the game, he wins games before and after the game and Rick does that better than just about any other coach in the league right now. Our team came out ready to play tonight, and I credit THAT to Rick..decision making about lineups has a lot to do with practice and only some to do with the hot-hand-factor. AJ is decent and perhaps he runs the particular set of guys Carlisle also wanted on the floor better than Saras.

      AJ plays better with bigs and Saras plays better with small lineups. AJ has been around the system longer and Carlisle likes him because AJ plays what Rick calls rather than the broken-play-type-stuff you see from JT and complain about.

      If we lose, the last person that needs to be questioned is the coach, and I thought we played pretty well tonight regardless!

      Stop w/ the Carlisle hatin', yo!

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: First Pacers loss that I'm not pissed

        http://scores.nba.com/games/20051204.../boxscore.html

        Saras 9 assists. Koool!

        JS
        Wait a minute, whoa! Whoa! You don’t actually believe this crap! Do you? Dummy! Brain washed alien souls? E-meter and thetan levels? Those people out there buy that crap. But I thought you were smart enough to see what’s really going on!
        What's better than telling people a stupid story and having them believe you? Having them pay you for it, stupid!

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: First Pacers loss that I'm not pissed

          Originally posted by Ragnar
          Can anyone tell me why Rick likes AJ so much?
          I'll tell you the answer you probably don't want to hear.

          I could sum it up cryptically: "Because AJ doesn't suffer recurring bouts of sinusitis".

          I bet AJ is a good teammate. I bet he -talks with- the coaching staff about his concerns. I bet he doesn't miss practice. I bet he doesn't bring petty issues to the practice court or the game. I bet he is one of the more mature team members.

          I think it is clear some Pacers (not just Tinsley) carry baggage and have other questionable issues. Surely nobody could argue that.

          Maybe AJ doesn't. At least and especially not in comparison to some others.

          When/If this team starts making some (player) moves it won't be because of talent, it will be because of attitude. IMHO.

          Saying all that still doesn't explain why AJ played extra minutes in the 4th, let alone didn't play shorter minutes than the regular Carlisle rotation when it was clear the scoreboard and clock were slipping away.

          I had a feeling we could see an issue like this when AJ started over Sarunas in Charlotte. By that point I thought it should've been clear than Saras would start when Tinsley didn't (no matter where anyone fell on the Tinsley vs Saras debate).

          Carlisle always seems to do the obvious thing... it just takes him several games to do it.

          -Bball
          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

          ------

          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

          -John Wooden

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: First Pacers loss that I'm not pissed

            Looking at the box score....SJax had a 50% FG percentage from the field and scored 15 points in the game. But how was his shot selection? Did he play smart on the defensive end?

            I'm not blamining SJax here for the loss......I'm more curious as to whether he played a good game or not....cuz we know that stats don't tell the whole story when it comes to players performance.
            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: First Pacers loss that I'm not pissed

              I just saw the SportsCenter highlights....they mentioned that we hit 53% from the field as a team.....that's pretty impressive.

              Now if we could play some defense....
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: First Pacers loss that I'm not pissed

                Originally posted by CableKC
                I just saw the SportsCenter highlights....they mentioned that we hit 53% from the field as a team.....that's pretty impressive.

                Now if we could play some defense....
                Actually, it was the rebounding that killed us.
                This space for rent.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: First Pacers loss that I'm not pissed

                  Originally posted by Anthem
                  Actually, it was the rebounding that killed us.
                  again...

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: First Pacers loss that I'm not pissed

                    I'll agree that Sarunas should have been in sooner. Mike Davis did something similar recently by giving Marco Killingsworth a blow. By the time he came in the game, it was too far out of reach and sometimes when you sit, it just takes you awhile to get back in the flow.

                    However.... I don't think we were going to win the game last night no matter what. Teams have a tendency to play to their level of competition, and I think Seattle was somewhat toying with us late in the game. I'm not saying we can't beat Seattle, but I don't think we were beating them last night.

                    Ray allen was tough and he hit some pretty amazing shots. I thought he was defended well, but Seattle just seemed to have all cylinders firing. We could have done better, but I to am not as worried about this loss. It isn't surprising that a defensive minded coach would like a defensive minded player. I thought AJ was playing great defense when I watched him.

                    When Danny Fortson is converting a 3-pt play in the 4th quarter on a line drive jumper... it just ain't in the cards for you that night.

                    I didn't watch the whole game, primarily the 4th quarter. Did anybody think JO was too unselfish last night? He was a more efficient scorer than Artest, but he put the ball up less.
                    “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
                    motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
                    Reggie Miller

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: First Pacers loss that I'm not pissed

                      I was really surprised when I looked at the box score and saw that our FG% was higher than the Sonics. It seemed like they were making everything. As someone else said, this is a team of shooters! The FT differential and rebounds were the key points, I thought. BTW, how did they shoot more free throws with so many jump shots?
                      I think this game WAS winnable, we didn't jump the hurdle....

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: First Pacers loss that I'm not pissed

                        Is Saras needed for those minutes in the fourth if we take care of our free throws?

                        Is Saras needed for those minutes in the fourth if we don't keep jacking up outside jumpers that brick?

                        Is Saras needed for those minutes in the fourth if every one of those missed jumpers doesn't lead to a Sonics rebound?

                        And, to defend UB's perspective that the Sonics would have beaten almost anybody last night, if every shot the Sonics launched weren't seeming to find the basket would we have needed Saras for those minutes in the fourth?

                        There has been one CLEAR thing that we have seen over and over again. Comebacks are fuelled by defensive stops. Like it or not, AJ is still seen as a better defender than Saras, and getting some kind of break in the Sonic's momentum was critical to a comeback. Saras' defense looks MUCH better than it did a few games ago, but I still cringed every time he was left isolated because the Sonics' ball movement took advantage of any and every help on defense we threw.

                        Yep, hindsight is 20/20, but in my opinion the only fault Carlisle has at this point is not running a 4 hour practice on contested jump shots and free throws where every miss means a bleacher lap.
                        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


                        • #42
                          Re: First Pacers loss that I'm not pissed

                          Originally posted by Bball
                          I'll tell you the answer you probably don't want to hear.

                          I could sum it up cryptically: "Because AJ doesn't suffer recurring bouts of sinusitis".

                          I bet AJ is a good teammate. I bet he -talks with- the coaching staff about his concerns. I bet he doesn't miss practice. I bet he doesn't bring petty issues to the practice court or the game. I bet he is one of the more mature team members.

                          I think it is clear some Pacers (not just Tinsley) carry baggage and have other questionable issues. Surely nobody could argue that.

                          Maybe AJ doesn't. At least and especially not in comparison to some others.

                          When/If this team starts making some (player) moves it won't be because of talent, it will be because of attitude. IMHO.

                          Saying all that still doesn't explain why AJ played extra minutes in the 4th, let alone didn't play shorter minutes than the regular Carlisle rotation when it was clear the scoreboard and clock were slipping away.

                          I had a feeling we could see an issue like this when AJ started over Sarunas in Charlotte. By that point I thought it should've been clear than Saras would start when Tinsley didn't (no matter where anyone fell on the Tinsley vs Saras debate).

                          Carlisle always seems to do the obvious thing... it just takes him several games to do it.

                          -Bball
                          Some very good points.

                          On the last point, I think you may be on to something.

                          Since I have the luxury of being just a fan and a homer, I also have the luxury to engage in kneejerk reactions without any consequences. Rick doesn't.

                          It would be so easy as a coach, as I now think about (prompted by your comment) to make those kneejerk reactions and substitutions without looking at the big picture. We are all so much wanting to win that game last night, but Rick is thinking about the entire season and longterm chemistry and rotation issues.

                          If he made such a boneheaded substitution snafu in a playoff game, then perhaps all our criticisms are valid. But, as a coach, he has some bigger issues to resolve at this point:

                          1. Should AJ be used at all late in the game? (Remember, AJ often has flashes of brilliance. Rick needs a number of tests before he can make a definitive evaluation of this.

                          2. Is AJ's defense more important than Saras's offense?

                          3. Will AJ at the 1 and Saras at the 2 be an effective combination?

                          I'm sure there are several others. But these questions probably cannot be answered with one anecdotal game situations. It probably takes four or five. During one game, AJ may be brilliant. In another, he will suck. But if the total becomes 1-5, then you can make your decision.

                          I'm sure there's an easier way to say all this. But to make the point from another angle, Rick may also be aware, as we are, that AJ's play at the end lost the game. But he may think he has to watch a number of those anecdotes before he makes a definitive evaluation.
                          "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: First Pacers loss that I'm not pissed

                            Originally posted by McKeyFan
                            Since I have the luxury of being just a fan and a homer, I also have the luxury to engage in kneejerk reactions without any consequences. Rick doesn't.
                            I love this statement. It sums up so much about 20/20 hindsight.
                            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


                            • #44
                              Re: First Pacers loss that I'm not pissed

                              I'm actually starting to see a very positive trend with JO. Obviously we can't really tell who is the vocal leader in the lockerroom and such, and can only see who leads the team by example and plays the right way. But I've been VERY impressed with the level of play by Jermaine. He's taking the ball strong to the front of the rim instead of that played out turn around, and him diving for the loose ball and tapping it to Sjax was one hell of an effort from him.


                              I thought it did take way too long to get Saras back in the game, but there was also a long stretch at the end of the first until the middle of the second quarter where the lead went from 11 to down by 2 before he came back in as well. RC definately has goofy rotations. Also, why wasn't Ron playing Ray Allen? I think Lewis plays a type of game that Sjax plays, and defends well. Ron should always be on best of the two Sgs/Sfs, especially when the better one is a dribble shooter like Ray.
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: First Pacers loss that I'm not pissed

                                Question for those in the know....is the 53% FG shooting as result of Sarunas and AJ handling the point?

                                or

                                Was it because of the Sonics lack of defense at home?
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X