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

Travelling back in time to the start of the 2017/2018 season.

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

  • Travelling back in time to the start of the 2017/2018 season.

    Sorry in advance for this long read…

    What do I want to show with that threat? I was just curious how people reacted back then to a similiar situation: a lot of new faces start the season with a lot of changes to the starting lineup. I really enjoyed reading some of your comments back then cause they are awfully similiar to those from the latest postgame threat. I love PD but somtimes the bad vibes start to depress me and I need a reality check, so I won’t lose my faith in this team. I just wanted to share this little time journey with you. Hope you enjoy it as much as I did.

    Game 1 of the 2017/2018 season: BKN 131 – IND 140

    That was against a new formed Brooklyn squad, which everybody thought would be a very bad team. Top scorers in the game for Brooklyn were D’Angelo Russel (30 Pts, 5 Ast), Trevor Booker (20 Pts, 10 Reb) and Jeremy Lin (18 Pts, 4 Ast) who went down with a season ending injury in that game. We had a good team effort and the consensus on PD was that Sabonis is great (went 7 of 7 from the floor), Turner may actually be good at rebounding (had 14 Reb) and the team as a whole will be really good offensively, but not so much on defense. But it was a win, so everybody contributing to the game threat was happy (somehow we didn’t have postgame threats at that time).

    Game 2: POR 114 – IND 96

    After the first game we played a good Portland team without Turner, so Sabonis was starting at the 5. Top performers for Portland were Aminu (16 Pts, 16 Reb), McCollum (28 Pts, 7 Reb) and off the bench Evan Turner (17 Pts on 7 of 12 shooting). Sabonis had just 3 Pts and 8 Reb and nearly everybody played bad besides…wait for it…TJ Leaf with 17 Pts on 7 of 11 shooting with 4 Reb. So that was the first bad loss of the season, meaning people went crazy on PD. I will just post the most interesting comments in the order they appeared in the game threat:

    by dal9:
    „how much is Bogdan getting paid compared to CJ Miles? He seems to be a pretty serious step down“

    by D-BONE:
    „Sabonis needs to come off bench to be effective.“

    by D-BONE:
    „Bojan ever going to start hitting 3s?“

    by Eleazar:
    „Between Turner, Sabonis, and Leaf we have a bright future“

    by McKeyFan:
    „I didn't like it when we cut Seraphin, and we already see the fallout after game 2.“

    Overall the consensus was that our defense is just really bad and we couldn’t hit freethrows.

    Game 3: IND 108 – MIA 112

    First road game of the season in Miami against a not so good Miami team that played without Whiteside. Top performers for Miami were Dragic and Waiters. They played with Jordan Mickey at starting C and Olynyk as their big men. The Pacers had the second start from Sabonis and against that kind of competition he pleased us with 18 Pts and 12 Reb. Al Jefferson had his second good game in a row with 14 Pts on 6 of 10 shooting and 8 Reb off the bench. Those two and Oladipo (28 Pts on 10 of 23 shooting, 5 Ast, 4 Stl) were the only bright spots. I will note that Bogie had another meh game with just 7 Pts without a 3pt attempt in this game. Best comments on PD where some people got a little nervous already:

    by Trader Joe:
    „Pretty disappointed in CoJo so far. Just underwhelming in all aspects.“

    by owl:
    „Bogdanovich is the most disappointing.“

    by khaos01207:
    „I want to see sabo Myles pair starting“

    by Major Cold:
    „This team is trash. Not enough spacing on offense. Scrambling on defense.“

    by McKeyFan:
    „Aren't Thad and Dipo supposed to be good defenders? Not seeing it.“

    by owl:
    „At small forward the Pacers need somebody athletic and can hit a shot. Not a lot of good options currently. Maybe Leaf or GR3“

    by IrishPacer:
    „Only watched the first half. Bojan is so horribly slow, even worse than I feared. GRIII will surely start when he is back.“

    by LA_Confidential:
    „Bojan is the weak link. We will never compete with him as the starting SF. I'm eating crow right now when it comes to TJ leaf. He's definitely going to be the starting PF of the future. Myles, Sabonis, Leaf are a good trio to grow with.“

    So overall the people in the game threat started to love Sabonis and were pleasantly surprised by Collison. On the other hand they started to hate on Bojan. They didn’t like our defense at all and they thought that it was worth a try to start Sabo and Turner together.

    Game 4: IND 130 – MIN 107

    Everybody expected a loss to the new formed Timberwolves who, on paper, looked like a real threat in the west fort he first time since ever. On that night Jimmy Butler was out, so there was a slim hope to steal a W. At the end the Pacers blew out the Wolves with a great game by nearly everybody (Collison had 16 Ast to 1 TO, Joseph shot 8 of 11 for 21 Pts, Leaf 5 of 10 for 11 Pts, Sabo 7 of 7 for 15 Pts and 11 Reb in his 3rd start and Vic with 28 Pts on 11 of 16 shooting. It was also the first good game for Bogie with a 19 Pts outing on 9 of 12 shooting, but just 1 of 3 from three.
    Since it was a W I won’t copy and paste the comments, cause there was not much to complain about…PD was at peace.

    Game 5: IND 96 – OKC 114

    The next night in Oklahoma, the Pacers would meet the new trio of Paul George, Russel Westbrook and Mello for the first time. It was the total opposite to the night before. Vic and Collison were the only bright spots. Sabo had just 4 Pts on 1 of 9 shooting, but 11 Reb. The bench as a whole went 6 of 25 shooting and Bojan had just 4 Pts on 0 of 7 shooting (0 of 5 from three). They were just down 6 at the half cause Dipo was on fire.
    The mood on PD was okay given that loss, since it was on a back2back after a nice game. People already found that our team was never giving up and that Dipo might be great. They wanted Turner back and hated Bogie even more. They also wondered what happened to Lance Stephenson, cause he didnt have a good game at all since the start of the season.

    Game 6: SAS 94- IND 97

    The game Vic surpassed Paul George one to zero in game winners. Sabo had another good outing, but the bench was again just 5 of 21. After 6 games I could find the first positive comment about our defense on PD:

    by LucasRL13:
    „Our team is playing great defense...
    Even Collison, lets get this W, and stay positive after OKC, Minnesota and Spurs, i think no one tough this was possible“

    Now we jump to game 38: IND 101 – MIL 122

    A lot happened since game 6. Oladipo is out for his 5th straight game and the Pacers lose their 5th straight and fall to 19-19 on the season. Meanwhile on PD Vnzla is hating on Turner and advocating for Sabo to start in his place since he is destroying bench bigs with good numbers in Pts and Rebs. Other than that everybody hates on the starting unit, the coach and Bogie who was still looking for his shot.

    Coming back to Game 1 of the 2019/2020 season:

    We have a lot of new guys and our starting unit has 4 new guys in it. What does history show us? The team in 2017 had also a ton of new guys with 3 new starters in the line up. Took them a while to acclimate, especially Bogie. They had really bad defense at the beginning. And they were a really bad team without Vic. You sometimes tend to forget how good Vic is and how important he is, especially closing out a game. It took them 39 games to get over .500 for good that year. The one big difference from 2017 to 2019 is about expectations… So I would say we wait a little bit, cause history shows us that a team with that huge number of new faces needs half a season to jell. It’s as easy as that. Once they found their identity they started to win games. Everybody started to find his role after Dipo. The chemistry got better and better. I guess thats why last year they played so good without Vic, cause they already knew who they were, they were a veteran team. I hope some on here will give it a little bit mor than 5 games to judge this team, the coach, the players and so on…

    I will end this with the best comment I found about yesterdays game:

    by Kid Minneapolis:
    „I'll tell you why we lost:
    - Identity. Both offensively and defensively. The Pacers have a lot of new faces and are still figuring each other out, and it showed... whereas the Pistons largely have their identity, which is a .500 ball club, but still, when one team has an identity and the other is still feeling it out, I give the team with somewhat of an identity the advantage most of the time. It becomes more evident down the stretch of a close game... the team with an identity can apply that pressure and that's exactly what happened, because the Pacers controlled large parts of this game until the last 5 minutes or so. I'm actually somewhat impressed the Pacers scored 110 while going some stretches looking a little confused and rusty, which might be a good sign down the road.
    --- Defense. We hit our target of 110, but we let the Pistons throw down almost 120 on us, and they were at 25th-ranked offense last year. Again, the first point above had a big part of that. Another big part of why that happened was the dribble penetration by their guards. Drummond was huge tonight, but I felt like a lot of their offense was being initiated by their guards, there just wasn't enough pressure on them. DRose had his way last night, and Jackson didn't particularly score a ton, but was still setting up the offense. The ball was swinging and getting inside and that allowed Drummond to do what he does, which is shoot from 1 foot or less, and it also resulted in some nice looks from 3 for Kennard and others.

    I'm not terribly tore up over this loss, when I put some context around it. We were in the driver's seat and basically didn't close them out. Young team, still learning each other, that's what happens. I think it'll take them 10 games to figure everything out and then things'll get rolling.“

    Spot on if you ask me.
    Last edited by InYaFace; 10-24-2019, 07:52 PM.

  • #2
    You should post some of the comments from game 1 lol

    Comment

    Working...
    X