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

Post Game Thread:Pacers @ Bobacts

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

  • #76
    Re: Post Game Thread:Pacers @ Bobacts

    Originally posted by Jermaniac
    Last season I actually though about switching my username to Action Jackson, Jack last year was a very good player. Maybe losing Mike Brown had a huge effect on him.
    Okay here is my theory in a nutshell:

    SJax has been forced into playing a much more prominent role on the team the past 2 seasons due to suspensions/injuries. In those games before the brawl, he seemed to fit in fine with our team concept with our full team (minus Reggie) on the floor.

    In the aftermath of that mess, he comes back to a team that needs his scoring A LOT more so he does what he can. Last season was not so bad, he seemed under control much more than this season. I think what we've seen lately is just the cumulative effect of all the instability eating away at the heart & soul of this team and SJax trying way too hard.

    I think he is the ultimate teammate which perhaps sounds strange given his play this season but I'll leave it at that rather than drag people back into the day we'd all rather forget.

    Nutshell version closed, nothing more to say about that!

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Post Game Thread:Pacers @ Bobacts

      Originally posted by Hicks
      Coming from you, that means...... almost nothing.
      Well if the guy is bulletproof, I guess that means something.








      LOL!

      Sorry, just trying to ease the mood here.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Post Game Thread:Pacers @ Bobacts

        I love u Jerm, i just want u to change a bit (hmm, kinda feel that way about JO to), also we come from same country and culture! Act like it!

        Peace

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Post Game Thread:Pacers @ Bobacts

          Originally posted by Hicks
          By the way, I thought this was always around, but to my surprise it was not, so I just went in and added it.

          From now on, ignoring a user is very easy. Click on his name, and the last option on the menu that drops down is to add him/her to your ignore list. Click that, and you'll be taken directly to the screen where with the click of a confirmation button, that person is ignored. Enjoy!
          Yes, indeed. I found it to be a very enjoyable experience! Very refreshing.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Post Game Thread:Pacers @ Bobacts

            Originally posted by #31
            I love u Jerm, i just want u to change a bit (hmm, kinda feel that way about JO to), also we come from same country and culture! Act like it!

            Peace
            I'm not going to change anything there isnt anything wrong with me. We are talking basketball and I like to criticize players when the play bad. Is it my fault that a player sucks, nope I had nothing to do with that. I'm not insutling any of you or calling any of you out. There is nothing to change.

            Hate it or Love it, thats up to you.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Post Game Thread:Pacers @ Bobacts

              On a more positive note, I had a great night out at the bars after the game with some friends.

              I'm leaning towards avoiding the forums after losses like this. It's aggravating but at the very same time, hilarious. You have guys like Jermaniac who really have no idea what they are talking about and are being biased towards different players and then you've got guys like PacerFan241 (Generic name, Not really a person just a generalization of people) saying to fire Carlisle..Or that it was Carlisles fault that Jack and AJ choked on free throws.

              The fact of the matter is, there should have been no OT. AJ should have made an extra free throw. Jack should have made at least one. Or if neither of those, someone should have been called for a foul on that final play where Primo rebounded it. Someone just threw a bow right into JO and knocked him out of the play. This team had so many chances to win and blew it. We are the worst team in the league when it comes to the final 2 minutes of a close game.

              No need to get upset about it. Not like we will make it beyond the first or second round anyways.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Post Game Thread:Pacers @ Bobacts

                Please write me a story about how Jack and Peja had good games tonight. Let me see how biased I'm.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Post Game Thread:Pacers @ Bobacts

                  Originally posted by Jermaniac
                  I'm not going to change anything there isnt anything wrong with me.
                  We are talking basketball and I like to criticize players when the play bad.
                  Is it my fault that a player sucks, nope I had nothing to do with that.
                  I'm not insutling any of you or calling any of you out. There is nothing to change.

                  Hate it or Love it, thats up to you.
                  Is it just me or does this text look like lyrics straight out from a gangsta rap song? J/K jerm

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Post Game Thread:Pacers @ Bobacts

                    If you actually saw the game, you would have easily seen who was leading that Pacers comeback in the 3rd qtr. And why they where in the game after that horrible 2nd qtr. If Jack hit those FT's we would talking about how Jermaine played great tonight instead of all this other BS.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Post Game Thread:Pacers @ Bobacts

                      Originally posted by Jermaniac
                      Please write me a story about how Jack and Peja had good games tonight. Let me see how biased I'm.
                      JO shot 61% 8 rebounds 2 ast with 6 turnovers
                      Peja shot 40% 7 rebounds 1 ast with 2 turnovers
                      Jax shot 43% 6 rebounds 5 ast with 2 turnovers

                      JO should have a better %, he shoots from 10 feet in.

                      Originally posted by Jermaniac
                      If he got the ball earlier he wouldnt have need to make a game winning basket. He got the ball twice in OT, he once got to the FT line. Second time he passed it and they turned it over. If dominating the game the way he did tonight was worth just 2 shots in OT. Then God Bless Rick's system.
                      If JO had a dominating game tonight, then Jackson and Peja had atleast a good game.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Post Game Thread:Pacers @ Bobacts

                        lol Jermaine shoots from 10 feet in? Who says Jack and Peja cant drive to the bucket more, no one is forcing them to settle for jumpshots.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Post Game Thread:Pacers @ Bobacts

                          Originally posted by Jermaniac
                          lol Jermaine shoots from 10 feet in? Who says Jack and Peja cant drive to the bucket more, no one is forcing them to settle for jumpshots.
                          If no one took jumpshots, and if we had no perimeter game, JO would not have the room to work with down low. They need to take those shots every once in awhile to spread the floor.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Post Game Thread:Pacers @ Bobacts

                            Originally posted by Jermaniac
                            there isnt anything wrong with me.
                            I'm not sure you're qualified to make that statement. That's not an insult... I wouldn't be qualified to make that statement about myself.

                            But if a bunch of people who have no ulterior motive all told me I was acting like an immature jerk, I would listen.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Post Game Thread:Pacers @ Bobacts

                              That would have been nice tonight, 2 for 8 from 3. If their job is to open space for JO then they didnt do their job tonight. And if their shots are not falling maybe they should do what JO does and shoot from 10 feet in.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Post Game Thread:Pacers @ Bobacts

                                Originally posted by Jermaniac
                                That would have been nice tonight, 2 for 8 from 3. If their job is to open space for JO then they didnt do their job tonight. And if their shots are not falling maybe they should do what JO does and shoot from 10 feet in.
                                If they make the shots or not, teams are still going to go out and cover them. You don't leave a shooter like Peja open on the perimeter.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X