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:
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

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

Montieth blog

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Montieth blog

    Originally posted by RWB View Post
    There difference is not racial. The difference is people are close to the action on a basketball court. When a fight breaks out it can spill into the stands and involve spectators.

    Auto Racing? Unless a fan jumps down onto the track or get's in the pits are they close.

    Football? You still have to jump onto the playing surface.

    Hockey? Again the fans are shielded from the action.

    Golf and Bowling are the only American sports where the fans are as close to the players.

    That leaves Soccer which get's plenty of bad pub for it's violent behavior. I wonder how much race is a factor in that?

    That is an excellent point and I think your point is a bigger factor than race, but as much as I hate to admit it, I think race is a factor, maybe not the most important factor or certainly the biggest factor.


    • #17
      Re: Montieth blog

      Originally posted by Kegboy View Post

      Anyway, I don't think the unrest is just because we haven't made a move. It's because every day that goes by it looks more like we aren't going to make a move. Wells was on the radio yesterday saying that Tinsley will most probably stay and JO will as well. Then we find out that Rush and Graham have been signed to fully guaranteed contracts, which doesn't jive with the notion of major roster upheaval coming.

      The story was, wait until the draft. Then it was wait until FA season. Now it's wait until the moratorium is lifted. Then it'll be wait until rookies can be traded. Then it'll be wait until KG is traded. Then it'll be wait until camps start. Then it'll be wait until Dec. 15th (when signed players can be traded). Then it'll be wait until the trading deadline. Then it'll be wait until next year.

      It's all quite fustrating.
      I would say, just wait until camps open.


      • #18
        Re: Montieth blog

        Oh, I don't doubt that Bob Hill was high maintenance.

        I think Bob's great quality as an assistant is that the players get to know/ love him.

        I'm not sure that it pans out very well, long term. I think Bob still wants to be the coach they think is on their side when he moves over to the hot seat, but he knows he has to be critical. So he gets caught in no-man's land.

        Its why Bob is generally a great in-season turnaround coach but eventually the luster wears off a couple of seasons later.

        Still not sure how Rick is high maintentance. Unless he's concerned the computers, calculators, and egg timers aren't going to like him.
        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
        And life itself, rushing over me
        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you


        • #19
          Re: Montieth blog

          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
          That is an excellent point and I think your point is a bigger factor than race, but as much as I hate to admit it, I think race is a factor, maybe not the most important factor or certainly the biggest factor.
          I agree that it is a contributing factor to the media "outrage" that comes out of every fight.

          But, like you say, it is not as high on the list as many others.

          One other major factor that no one ever seems to bring up, however, is that the other team sports have more of a history of fighting. And in hockey and baseball (less so now that the pussification of America has accellerated in the last decade), it is actually somewhat a part of the game. In hockey, you do some scandalous crap like slashing a star player (cough*Gretzky*cough) and you know full well you're gonna get punched on your next shift. In baseball, if you back a guy off the plate too many times by going high-and-tight and the other team's pitcher retaliates later by hitting a batter, there is a good chance the benches are clearing.

          Both of these are historically ingrained components of the games themselves. Football doesn't have this "ingrained" component as much as the other two, but surely, fights are more apt to break out in a sport this violent and with this many piles in the trenches where people can do all sorts of messed up stuff. In basketball, there's never really a cause to fight. I mean, occasionally, there clearly is, but it's always somebody "went too far."

          The whole notion that the Knicks/Denver fight got more media play than that Florida State one with dudes swinging helmets at each other should be enough to prove that point.

          It's just not acceptable in basketball (high school and college too, which often have more white dudes) as it is in any of the other majors (and hockey ), so it causes more outrage.
          Last edited by JayRedd; 07-10-2007, 01:41 PM.
          Read my Pacers blog:

          Follow my twitter:



          • #20
            Re: Montieth blog

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            I would really like to know how Rick was high maintenance and also Bob Hill. I know Brown was and Versace really was also.
            i thought i was the only one confused by that. problem is, montieth doesn't make clear what he means by "high maintenance"

            now larry brown, i guess everyone would agree that he is high maintenance. a coach who constantly lobbies for trades, calls out players through the press, etc, doesn't make for a smooth working environment. and yet he's a pretty successful coach, so i guess being high maintenance isn't necessarily bad.

            rick though? what's the story there? that he wears out the players? i thought every coach does that (hence bird's 3 year rule)

            one thing for sure, obie has better "people skills" than rick, especially when it comes to winning over sportswriters


            • #21
              Re: Montieth blog

              Originally posted by Jay View Post
              Oh, I don't doubt that Bob Hill was high maintenance.
              The best groomed coach in all of professional sports not high maintenance? I think not!


              • #22
                Re: Montieth blog

                Rick, from what we've heard from media outlets other than The Star and, has absolutely terrible interpersonal/ relationship skills. I've never really thought of that as "high maintenance" though. But I guess he's saying that everybody else has to work really, really, really hard to figure out how to get along with him.
                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                And life itself, rushing over me
                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you


                • #23
                  Re: Montieth blog

                  I'm just odd I guess, but the way many of you get all riled up and angered at Kravitz is exactly how I feel about Montieth and his writing.

                  Condescending is the only word that comes to my mind whenever I read his views on the team and it's fans.

                  I grow oh so tired of his annual summer writings of how all fans are just idiotic reactionary's who need his calming sage wisdom to make sure we understand that at the center of it all Donnie Walsh is there to sooth our troubled brow.

                  How every other sports writer, anchor, radio person is just a hype driven machine and does nothig but fan the flames of the reactionary fans, but the bunny is the one shining light in this sea of torment. If we would only put our faith in Donnie, Jesus and himself (in that order I might add) we would all be saved.

                  All that was missing from this blog was his usual and customary statement of "don't make trades for the sake of trades" for this to be one of his pulitzer prize winning articles.

                  Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13


                  • #24
                    Re: Montieth blog

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    I would really like to know how Rick was high maintenance and also Bob Hill. I know Brown was and Versace really was also.
                    the rick comment seemed like another post-firing cheapshot to me. i don't doubt rick's interpersonal skills are lacking, but mark directly follows that point with...

                    Some of the high-maintenance coaches performed well for stretches, but they tend to wear out the players. They also make life more difficult for the front office, either by refusing to deal with the distractions or by causing them.
                    rick wanted ron traded but was told to coach the rest of the team that TPTB would handle ron. who ignored or did not properly deal with the distraction in this case? criticize his poor interpersonal skills, or maybe not being a disciplinarian, or an often uncreative offense that relied too heavily on JO (although TPTB didn't give him many options last year)... but i don't think you could say rick really ignored major distractions. and rick isn't larry brown or isiah thomas or george karl... so i can't see him really creating distractions.
                    This is the darkest timeline.


                    • #25
                      Re: Montieth blog

                      Originally posted by RWB View Post
                      That leaves Soccer which get's plenty of bad pub for it's violent behavior. I wonder how much race is a factor in that?
                      No it doesn't. It gets talked about, but ultimately it's a running joke to have soccer hooligans, etc. I'd say the US apathy toward soccer still sits squarely on it being a boring, snobbish, elitist sport. I don't think most people soccer as more violent than the NBA, at least in terms of incidents (rather than the physical nature of the sport itself).

                      And the issue for me is that almost every soccer riot/violent act goes WAY past even the Brawl. Get back to me when flares are thrown at NBA players and loud racial chants are launched down on them.

                      Bird mixed it up plenty of times, Laimbeer made a habit of it it seemed. Heck even Detlef got tossed for his dust up with Ewing. Somehow that was "boys will be boys".

                      But when Jackson won't leave the court quickly it's outrageous and out of control??!?! It makes me sick having grown up watching Billy Martin and Earl Weaver. They could kick dirt, scream spit-flying filth in an umps face, throw anything they could find onto the field, flop around on the ground, and so on and it was just a big laugh and part of the game. Heck, it was ENDEARING, people loved Weaver for his antics, just as Lou is popular now for his.

                      Imagine Weaver being asked to leave the court like Jackson in Oakland and having his tirade instead of Jack yelling at the ref as he walked the isle to the exit door (center court, had to go around scorers table). Towels on the floor, Gatorade cups, probably the jug too, he'd probably grab the sweat mop and mock clean the floor and the refs shoes just to be a jerk. Would any announcer react in horror to the disgraceful behavior and thuggery?

                      I know better because I've seen it overlooked way too many times. In fact I'd say plenty of NBA coaches have gotten away with stuff easily as bad as what got Jackson that big fine for not "leaving quickly enough"...which took all of about 2 minutes max, if that.

                      It might not just be race, but it's something. There is some new perception that cranks up the sensitivity to NBA players behavior now when it didn't used to be that way, not even close in fact.

                      Frankly I think that's very specifically why Maxwell didn't have fans trying to kill him and why Stern gave him so few games compared to Artest just 10 years later.
                      Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 07-10-2007, 02:47 PM.


                      • #26
                        Re: Montieth blog

                        Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
                        .. so i can't see him really creating distractions.
                        Or as Montieth points out having the teeth to eliminate problems as well.
                        You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....


                        • #27
                          Re: Montieth blog

                          Originally posted by Sh4d3 View Post
                          To be fair, the Colts won a title last season, while the Pacers were a lottery team. Not improving on a lottery team = BAD, no matter how you look at it.

                          Add to that that other lottery teams have improved, and it's gets REALLY bad.
                          You are the perfect example of what MM is talking about. We are still 3 months away from training camp. Plenty of time to improve the roster or better position ourself for the near future.

                          Why do you people feel a trade had to happen the first two weeks trades are allowed? When there are still 10-12 weeks to go before camp starts? It makes no sense to me. If we have not made any changes come camp in October then gripe about not improving. To do so now is literally jumping the gun and just griping for the sake of griping.

                          Reminds me of all those folks crying about the Colts last year. Folks were premature with their tears then too.


                          • #28
                            Re: Montieth blog

                            Sorry Peck, but I agree with Mark on this one. At least where Bob is concerned it is just ridiculously too early to flip out on the lack of moves, and Mark does provide quality data to support it.

                            I doubt the rumor that the Pacers were thinking of trading into the late first round was BS, they just missed their chance to get what they wanted. That's looking to make moves but refusing to make a bad one just for the sake of doing something.

                            Unless you loved the Al deal you can't pretend to not understand the fear of making moves just to do something.

                            OTOH I realize Kegboy is right when he says that the concern is growing as signs point to them having to stand pat. I think that's directly where this is headed, but I was mad about them getting into this situation months ago when they made that GS trade.

                            I think you guys are seeing now why I was so upset then. Everyone was so happy to see Jackson gone that they were overlooking the fact that as a move it pushed them more into a financial corner, rather than opening things up for changes.

                            Right now we see what being stuck looks like. It stinks. But I was already ticked off when they got into this position months ago. So Mark is right to say "calm down, hold on, just be rational" and Kegoy is right to say "well it's not looking like things are going to get fixed anytime soon".

                            They probably aren't, so let's just be rational about that too. It doesn't seem rational to me to expect some magical change that will make next season any less unpleasant, barring just a total turnaround by the entire roster thanks to JOB.


                            • #29
                              Re: Montieth blog

                              We're crying because TPTB has came out and said they aren't going to use the MLE.

                              They also said that they were going to be involved on draft day, and that involvement had them switching 2nd picks for a guy properly named Stanko.

                              Do we expect them to bring in superstars and totally change the direction of the team? Hell no, that's unrealistic. But what we do expect is them showing that they're working on improving the team. Saying they're not going to be active in free agency, not being active in the draft shows they'd rather go back to camp with the same **** poor roster.

                              EDIT: YES! It came back around to the GS trade!! HOORAY! The team prior to the GS sucked just as bad. Who cares if they made the playoffs and then would have been bounced 4 games in? It would continue to give the false sense of security that they were close and just needed tweaking because "HEY WE MADE THE PLAYOFFS."

                              If I'm stuck rooting for a lousy team, I'd rather be stuck watching guys that didn't have court dates to worry about than watching players who kept showing up on the police arrest records.
                              Last edited by Since86; 07-10-2007, 03:06 PM.
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.


                              • #30
                                Re: Montieth blog

                                Originally posted by Robobtowncolt View Post
                                Sweet, only 400 more members to go.
                                2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion,

                                2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion,

                                2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up,