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

Magic post game thread

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

  • #31
    Re: Magic post game thread

    Originally posted by Bball View Post
    I'm still not thrilled with Tinsley's inconsistency and lack of direction/leadership from the PG spot.

    It also seems to me he never just makes a pass to initiate the offense early enough... there's only an early pass if he has a sure dime.

    Maybe it's the 'hate' in my heart (I'm saving Dat Dude the trouble of mentioning that ). I'll grant the Tinsley fans he has his moments. And he has the capability to be a very good PG. But he needs to find some consistency on both sides of the court. I'd start Darrell Armstrong myself... tho I like him off the bench for that shot of energy. But maybe we could use that shot of energy to start the game?

    What happens when Orien Greene comes back?

    JO is better for the Pacers when the world doesn't revolve around him. He's not a power player. He's not Shaquille O Neal. He's not a one man wrecking crew. ...And he's not God.... tho he makes more money than God.

    But he is a fine player and he has to be accounted for. Harrington is a benefactor of that. I wonder what happens once teams scout us better and gameplan for us more, how much that balance will shift? The thing is, Al's more aggressive in the first place.

    l
    What can shift? Start doubling AL and Jermaine will kill you. Help on both and Granger gets wide open looks all night. It's a win/win.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Magic post game thread

      Originally posted by Bball View Post
      Nope... Because we've went away from pretending JO is something that he is not AND he's letting the game come to him.

      Those were high on the list of things JO and the team needed to do (IMHO).

      Now they just need to keep it up and let the rest of the pieces fall into place.

      -Bball
      Jermaine didnt need to do ****, he was asked to play in that offense so he played in it. He was asked to play in this offense and he is doing it. And its not my fault you cant see that. I feel bad for you though, maybe if something goes wrong the Pacers will lose a couple of games and you can be happy again.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Magic post game thread

        Originally posted by indy0731 View Post
        Sorry my post game report was delayed. I was at the game and then got distracted at home.

        First half was well it was ok our d could have been better and we could have taken care of the ball, but Al and Danny were dominant so we survived.

        No bad tonight cause I'm being kind some players could have probably fallen in here.

        THE OK
        Tins had a rough night offensively and defensively, but he did get 6 rebounds and I'll take that tonight. Like I said I am being kind. Tins probably could have had the bad category, but he didn't really hurt us either so no harm done.

        Runi struggled tonight too. 1/5 of shooting and some sketchy D, but he made some FTs and actually ran the offense decently IMO so again no harm no foul on Runi tonight. He does need to get a little more consistent with his jumper tho. (Please?)

        Quis is still not really impressive to me. Hopefully he is just still getting into the flow. His defense is what saves him from really catching scorn from me. At times he looks very lost offensively and then at times he makes a nice place. We just need it consistently.

        THE GOOD

        Jack's shooting looks awful, but his passing is just spectacular. I mean really he was the best passer on the court tonight and he tightened up his D significantly in the second half and plus the effort is there and he didn't ***** at the refs. So as usual Jack has yet to get really hot and be spectacular for a game or two, but he is keeping me happy.

        JO STRUGGLED offensively 4/15. Hit some open shots early on then got in foul trouble and then never got back into the flow. However he altered shots and played good D and pulled down 11 rebounds. Not to mention his presence obviously just makes everyone better in terms of confidence.

        DA was pretty good tonight. Not his best performance, but he got in Arroyo's head (which granted doesn't appear to be that hard to me) and really hustled his kiester off as usual. No complaints.

        THE GREAT

        Feisty was very good tonight 8 boards, 3 blocks and just an all around solid Feisty performance. If he could bring stuff like that every night I'd be thrilled.

        THE FANTASTIC

        Granger finally did what I had been hoping he would do, be aggresive. Don't shy from the spotlight and don't be afraid to step confidently into an open shot. He did that tonight in a big way and was HUGE for us. If he were to play like that every night we would have by far and away the best 3,4,5 combo in the NBA PERIOD. It wouldn't even be a debate IMO. His D on Hill was very good, he crashed the boards, and was aggresive on offense. Tonight he established his identity which was something my dad and I were talking about before the game. That he just didn't seem to have an offensive identity. He found it tonight now he needs to keep it.

        How bout that Al Harrington? The fact we got this guy for a trade exception and a lotto protected first boggles the mind. He is sooooo much better than his six man days. Better jump shot, better effort wise, and he appreciates every possesion and win from his struggles on the Hawks. 32 and 8 tonight and made it look effortless at times on offense. Really any night where he starts out with a guy like Tony Battie guarding him I expect him to have a HUGE night, its just a total mismatch in every way.

        EVERBODY ELSE
        didn't play enough for me to give an opinion tonight.

        SOME THOUGHTS ON THE MAGIC

        Man, do I dislike Carlos Arroyo and his game. He played the Magic out of 5-7 possesions on offense tonight by getting into some pissing match with DA, unfortunately for him DA wasn't reciprocating and while he was busy bogging down the Magic offense with pointless fancy dribbling our offense was running as smooth as it did all game. Really he just has a horrible bball IQ IMO and on top of that I think he is just a shoot first PG who is going to have big night every once and a while, but more than likely he isn't going to help that much, and if he is like this all season when he has a quick PG getting on him in the backcourt, then God help the Magic fans that have to watch him run that offense. Sorry about the random Arroyo rant, but he is easily one of my top 5 least favorite players.

        D12 is pretty much an athletic beast. Just an awesome athlete to watch. I enjoy watching him play.

        The crowd was very good tonight too. Fun game to be at.

        As always,

        GO PACERS!!!!
        How in the hell could you put Jax in the good category? Jax and good should never be in the same sentence.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Magic post game thread

          Originally posted by Whiteone View Post
          How in the hell could you put Jax in the good category? Jax and good should never be in the same sentence.
          He had 6 assists last night to lead the team and that is the third time in 6 games that he has lead the team in assists. His defense this season has been outstanding, his passing has been great, his on court attitude is much improved.

          So I too agree with indy0731

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Magic post game thread

            Without Jack we would have lost by 10 last night. He was a huge part of that group that came back from 10 down in the 3rd.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Magic post game thread

              You go, Indy 0731. Bottom line: Jack has been good through the first 6 games. True, his shooting has been atrocious. But, overall, a major factor in our good start to the year.

              I can understand why people dislike Jack due to his already well-documented actions. However, any semi-objective assessment of his performance to this point this year has to give credit where credit is due. Keep in mind, I dont' see people suggesting Jack is GREAT. Good seems like a reasonable description. If not that, how about solid?
              I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

              -Emiliano Zapata

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Magic post game thread

                I don't understand what some people want from Jack. If he continues to Jack up shots to try to break a slump, hes a chucker. If he actually plays within the offense and leads the team in offense he sucks. This guy is just some peoples punching boy.


                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Magic post game thread

                  Originally posted by indy0731 View Post
                  I don't understand what some people want from Jack. If he continues to Jack up shots to try to break a slump, hes a chucker. If he actually plays within the offense and leads the team in offense he sucks. This guy is just some peoples punching boy.
                  Precisely.

                  Besides from our fanatical Pacers fans, every other NBA fan I talk to never understands how Pacers fans could hate him so much. He's a good player, period. He's playing within himself and his shots per game average is down, because he doesn't want to be selfish when his shot isn't falling. When he is shooting well, then he's a viable primary scorer.

                  What else can he possibly do to please some of you?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Magic post game thread

                    Did everyone see the zone defense we were in last night? It was great at times, imo.

                    I think it was the 2-1-2 that they played in New York, but they were much better with it tonight. The difference tonight is that zones sometimes allow openings for offensive rebounds, but when the shots were going up tonight we had three guys down low for the rebound just about every time.

                    For anyone that recorded...go to around 2:08 remaining in the third quarter and watch the zone we play on the next possession. THAT is great defense by everyone, imo...watching Stephen in that series made my respect for him go up. To me it's as good as you can play team defense.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Magic post game thread

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      Rick in his post game press conference said that Tinsley wasn't feeling well tonight. That is the only comment I'm going to make on that issue.

                      Jackson once again shot the ball horribly, and yet I thought every other aspect of his game was good. He made a couple of really nice passes and his defense once again was good.

                      Another sellout tonight, I wonder how much of that is the $4.00 tickets. As I said the other day I know they are selling the $35.00, $25.00 and $10.00 tickets for $4.00. Chris tonight said that next Fridays game is almost sold out.

                      I know the game was an announced sellout, but there were a ton of empty seats tonight in the balcony.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Magic post game thread

                        Are there really that many 'no shows' (actual people who paid for a ticket but don't come to the game) or is someone making these games a sellout for marketing purposes?

                        ....Or some businesses that had tix in the past just aren't able to find takers for the comped tix? ...Or the takers aren't actually coming to the game once they get their comped tix.

                        Hmmm... Or what the team itself is setting aside (more than usual?) tix for comping to radio giveaways and the like and they are instead going unused?

                        I sure didn't think the Philly game looked like 15,000 ppl either (which I believe UB said was the announced attendance).

                        -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


                        • #42
                          Re: Magic post game thread

                          Jack certainly helped us last night.

                          Big ups to Jack and his attitude this year.

                          Super Bowl XLI Champions
                          2000 Eastern Conference Champions




                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Magic post game thread

                            Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                            Really? That sounds fantastic. Who was on the floor at that time?
                            Well, that wasn't an exact play-by-play, but there was a lot of ball movement going on. Not positive of all five who were in during the stretch, but I believe it was JT, Quis, Al, JO and Jack. People were passing up jumpers to move the ball and force the defense to adjust. Wound up in open jumpers like 3 times.

                            Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                            I appreciate these post-game threads. I'm in the middle of a series of eye surgeries, and I can't see well enough to watch television, let alone attend a game. It is good to get reports from the several insightful posters here. Thanks to all.
                            Get better, man.
                            Read my Pacers blog:
                            8points9seconds.com

                            Follow my twitter:

                            @8pts9secs

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Magic post game thread

                              Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
                              Keep in mind, I dont' see people suggesting Jack is GREAT. Good seems like a reasonable description. If not that, how about solid?
                              I'm ok with "great" under certain conditions.

                              Basically, my expectations for Jack were so low that he's far exceeded them.
                              This space for rent.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X