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

Who Kidnapped The Pacers? Very Good Game

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

  • #16
    Re: Who Kidnapped The Pacers? Very Good Game

    Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
    Anyone ever considered certain players stepped up because they WANT to be traded?

    You are less likely to get traded if you play lousy in the games right before the deal.
    No, I don't agree with you on this one. Deals are made weeks ahead and not based on one or two games.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Who Kidnapped The Pacers? Very Good Game

      Originally posted by Dat Dude View Post
      = On the Hawks
      You make it sound like he's Al Harrington.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Who Kidnapped The Pacers? Very Good Game

        Originally posted by IndyHoosier View Post
        You make it sound like he's Al Harrington.
        He isnt even Al Harrington yet.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Who Kidnapped The Pacers? Very Good Game

          Originally posted by ALF68 View Post
          Good team effort, but let's not forget that the they were playing the Knicks. Who knows, maybe all of the trade talk did motivate them.
          I don't know about you but beating the knicks, priceless. The only thing better is beating the pistons. Oh, that happened too.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Who Kidnapped The Pacers? Very Good Game

            Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
            Anyone ever considered certain players stepped up because they WANT to be traded?

            You are less likely to get traded if you play lousy in the games right before the deal.
            I thought about that the other night but I didn't want to say it. And I don't know that you could sustain that for a couple of games unless something clicked and you realized if you play like that all the time the team could be pretty good as it is.

            I don't want to get too high after a couple of wins but it is HOW the team won that I was impressed with. Just by the same token, it's not always a loss that gets me down as much as how we lost.

            As a matter of fact, the record doesn't matter all that much to me right now. I'm just looking for signs of life that whatever the record, we're moving in the right direction. 2-3 games doesn't necessarily erase some bad memories... but it's a start.

            I just see very little wrong with the past couple of games. I missed the Chicago game (oddly enough I was at the Seven club and MNF was on TV instead of the Pacers).



            -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


            • #21
              Re: Who Kidnapped The Pacers? Very Good Game

              I wasn't planning on going to the game - but I decided to go at the last minute.

              Pacers played another good one tonight, of course the three point shooting covered up any and all mistakes. But the Knicks were playing a very soft zone and the Pacers had wide-wide-wide open threes all night long - so I don't have a real problem with them shooting so many.

              OK, I need to ask a question - is there room on the Tinsley bandwagon for me? Yes I realize I'm one of his biggest critics and I will never like his defense (we'll see how he does on Sunday that will be a huge test) and yes he dominates the ball more than I would like - but I must admit he's played very well lately - he's running the offense like he's capable of doing - he's taking good shots - and he's making the smart passes. But most of all I like his effort, his hustle - tonight he was on the floor a couple of times trying to come up with the loose ball and I always love that kind of stuff. That to me is leadership from a player who isn't always a good leader.

              Let me touch on Jeff next. You might look at the boxscore and think well Jeff played OK - but not great. Yes he missed too many shots - but other than that I thought this was one of his best games of the season. His defense on Curry was outstanding - he really battled him, frustrated him and was physical with him. Jeff was a huge presense in the game tonight.

              JO did what he had to do to help the team as did Al Harrington - Jax was pretty good and Granger's shooting was just huge tonight. I don't understand why the Knicks stayed in a zone when the Pacers were hitting the threes.

              Looks to me Rick has found his rotation. The starters plus Granger, Saras - a little DA, a little Baston and Shawne when he can give him a few minutes. I wish Daniels would play more, but I can't be too upset because he didn't play well enough - so I can't blame Rick. Just seems like Marquis really doesn't fit the system nor does he fit in with the current mix of players. The offense is designed for the small forward to be a spot up shooter - and that is where Rick had been playing marquis for the most part and Rick likes Saras on the floor with either DA or Tinsley.

              I want to make an important point about NBA offenses right now. It isn't an accident that more and more teams are going with two point guards in the lineup more often - with the zone defenses and the junk defenses that teams are playing it sure helps to have two point guards on the floor and I certainly like when we have two point guards out there

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Who Kidnapped The Pacers? Very Good Game

                The Jazz on Sunday. That will a be a good game to look at and see where we are.
                Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Who Kidnapped The Pacers? Very Good Game

                  So I gather Sunday's game is not televised?

                  -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


                  • #24
                    Re: Who Kidnapped The Pacers? Very Good Game

                    Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                    Anyone ever considered certain players stepped up because they WANT to be traded?

                    You are less likely to get traded if you play lousy in the games right before the deal.
                    LMAO. Don't worry, be happy. Jeez.


                    Nice game tonight.

                    Go get the Jazz on Sunday and make it three in a row overall and 7 in a row at home.


                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Who Kidnapped The Pacers? Very Good Game

                      Originally posted by Bball View Post
                      So I gather Sunday's game is not televised?

                      -Bball
                      Not unless you have NBA League Pass or live in Utah. FSN IN isn't televising it.

                      Bball why don't you go to the game

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Who Kidnapped The Pacers? Very Good Game

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        Not unless you have NBA League Pass or live in Utah. FSN IN isn't televising it.

                        Bball why don't you go to the game
                        Bball at a game? Nooooooooo...


                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Who Kidnapped The Pacers? Very Good Game

                          I also decided to go at the last minute. Ended up with free parking and then got handed a free ticket to the game because some guys friends didn't show up. They were $49 seats and I was planning to buy an $8 seat.

                          They played an excellent game, but then again we beat the lowsy horribly coached, no chemistry having Knicks. I'll be more convinced when we come up with more meaningful wins against teams like the Pistons again.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Who Kidnapped The Pacers? Very Good Game

                            Yes it is the Knicks, but hey at least THIS year we're winning the games we're "supposed to win" I remember last year looking ahead on the schedule and thinking.."Oh , not the ing bobcats they'll beat us by 30."

                            This year I look forward to embarassing those teams.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Who Kidnapped The Pacers? Very Good Game

                              we needed a win like tonight, it was good to see everyone playing well. we just need to keep it up.
                              If you havin' depth problems, I feel bad for you son; I got 99 problems but a bench ain't one! - Hicks
                              [/center]
                              @thatguyjoe84

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Who Kidnapped The Pacers? Very Good Game

                                Not sure if anyone mentioned this yet, but JO is now leading the league in blocked shots. NICE D JO!
                                Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X