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

Game 03 Pacers at Grizzlies Post Game Thread

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

  • #46
    Re: Game 03 Pacers at Grizzlies Post Game Thread

    Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
    On the Indy feed when JO got a foul under the basket he yelled (IIRC) :

    "Oh my GOD!!! WHAT THE ****??? HELL NAW!!!"

    The camera was right in his face from under the basket and the mic was on for the first part, and then they turned it down for the rest. Good ol 2 second delay. But he said what he said and he was soon put on the bench. We stacked up maybe 4 more fouls and then he got T'd up while on the bench. Why he got the T wasn't shown.

    Only after all of this did Harrison return to his former "glory."
    I also had the (wonderfully humorous) Memphis feed.

    But, whatever, it doesn't really matter exactly what JO said/did. He's the 6-time All-Star captain of this team and he is allowed to talk to the refs. And while the "Hell naw" response may not seem like the best way to go about it, it's the same thing that all the other big stars in the League do -- Kobe, TD, Wade, LeBron and the rest. Even Nash was openly pointing to the charge circle and showing up a ref last night against LA.

    Point is, JO is the leader of the team and is the only one that should really be talking to the refs (along with the other vets somewhat as well). And in a game where we're watching Memphis shoot >50 free throws, there better be someone on the bench yelling loud enough at the officials to get a tech. I'd prefer it was Jimmy, but if not him, it should be JO.

    Aint none of that have a thing to do with back-up center, three-year veteran and someone who's known as a complainer/fouler/general pain-in-the-*** by the refereeing community. Different players have different rules and David does not get much leeway here. He knows it, but he just cannot adjust his behavior.

    Fact is, we don't need the front-court depth (we got plenty) so we should be looking to move him to one of the many teams in the League that could use a center (Detroit, Cleveland, Boston, Washington and Orlando all come to mind) while he's playing some quality ball. Sell high...he's not as good as he's been playing so far this year, and he's proven incapable of learning.
    Read my Pacers blog:
    8points9seconds.com

    Follow my twitter:

    @8pts9secs

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Game 03 Pacers at Grizzlies Post Game Thread

      Originally posted by Speed View Post
      Through 3 games, Dunleavy is averaging

      22.3 Points

      9 rebounds

      3.7 assists

      Unbelieveable
      You've missed the most important stat.

      He is also averaging just under 1 trip per game to the locker room due to face injury.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Game 03 Pacers at Grizzlies Post Game Thread

        Originally posted by Speed View Post
        wow Chicago 0-3
        Heck yes, I hate them Bulls. Speaking of where is Grace these days?

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Game 03 Pacers at Grizzlies Post Game Thread

          We had more points at halftime then the Bulls finished with.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Game 03 Pacers at Grizzlies Post Game Thread

            Oh and the Memphis brodcast really was funny. Apparently Marquis Daniels is a post up player for us.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Game 03 Pacers at Grizzlies Post Game Thread

              But...about the actual game.

              The offense was pretty much great. No real need to discuss it in depth. Granger's new aggressiveness is the greatest development of the early season. Dunleavy looks tailor made for this style and does almost nothing negative when we have the ball. JO and Ike can both score in the post at will. Tins is Tins. Rush and Diener are good fringe rotation guys that can stick jumpers. I like what Andre Owens brings to the table, and his goatee.

              The defense, though, was ugly. I guess it's natural to get lazy and unfocused when you feel like you can score every time you get the ball back on offense, but the lackidaisical effort on the perimeter was pretty embarrassing. Kyle Lowry did whatever he wanted off the bounce, and we were giving their whoe roster WIDE OPEN three-point looks. The final numbers weren't that bad (they hit 10-27), but they missed all 7 they took in the 4th according to ESPN, meaning they were 50% on 10-20 through 3 quarters. And the deficiency in the 4th can't be created to a better effort from us...Gay missed at least 2 wide-open shots I saw, and Miller and Jacobsen missed at least one each.

              So...not to be a gloomy gus about a win to make us 3-0, but we still need to improve our perimeter defense...which, overall, I guess isn't any surprise anyway.
              Read my Pacers blog:
              8points9seconds.com

              Follow my twitter:

              @8pts9secs

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Game 03 Pacers at Grizzlies Post Game Thread

                Question for everyone concerning arguing/talking with the refs.

                A poster on the FreeDarko message board mentioned this and it sounds absolutely perfect for the NBA: Every team designates a player as the team spokesman who can talk to the ref about calls. No one else but the captain. This cuts down on all the techs we see for excessive talking but it also gives the players a voice in the discussions.

                Someone told me they do this in hockey but I can't say I've ever watched a hockey game so I can't say whether that's true.

                What does everyone think? Would this work?

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Game 03 Pacers at Grizzlies Post Game Thread

                  Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
                  Question for everyone concerning arguing/talking with the refs.

                  A poster on the FreeDarko message board mentioned this and it sounds absolutely perfect for the NBA: Every team designates a player as the team spokesman who can talk to the ref about calls. No one else but the captain. This cuts down on all the techs we see for excessive talking but it also gives the players a voice in the discussions.

                  Someone told me they do this in hockey but I can't say I've ever watched a hockey game so I can't say whether that's true.

                  What does everyone think? Would this work?
                  Hmmm. How about the coach? He might even do it with some level of tact and intelligence instead of simply dropping the F bomb to the camera.

                  What is he doing anyway since he's certainly not calling any plays?

                  Edit: Designate one player if necessary...maybe anyone except JO, Harrison and Foster. Maybe not Tinsley either. The refs respect a complaint with a basis. They don't respect players like Harrison that constantly complain.
                  Last edited by BlueNGold; 11-03-2007, 11:25 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Game 03 Pacers at Grizzlies Post Game Thread

                    Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
                    Question for everyone concerning arguing/talking with the refs.

                    A poster on the FreeDarko message board mentioned this and it sounds absolutely perfect for the NBA: Every team designates a player as the team spokesman who can talk to the ref about calls. No one else but the captain. This cuts down on all the techs we see for excessive talking but it also gives the players a voice in the discussions.

                    Someone told me they do this in hockey but I can't say I've ever watched a hockey game so I can't say whether that's true.

                    What does everyone think? Would this work?
                    They do this in volleyball and I feel that it works great.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Game 03 Pacers at Grizzlies Post Game Thread

                      Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                      I also had the (wonderfully humorous) Memphis feed.

                      But, whatever, it doesn't really matter exactly what JO said/did. He's the 6-time All-Star captain of this team and he is allowed to talk to the refs. And while the "Hell naw" response may not seem like the best way to go about it, it's the same thing that all the other big stars in the League do -- Kobe, TD, Wade, LeBron and the rest. Even Nash was openly pointing to the charge circle and showing up a ref last night against LA.

                      Point is, JO is the leader of the team and is the only one that should really be talking to the refs (along with the other vets somewhat as well). And in a game where we're watching Memphis shoot >50 free throws, there better be someone on the bench yelling loud enough at the officials to get a tech. I'd prefer it was Jimmy, but if not him, it should be JO.

                      Aint none of that have a thing to do with back-up center, three-year veteran and someone who's known as a complainer/fouler/general pain-in-the-*** by the refereeing community. Different players have different rules and David does not get much leeway here. He knows it, but he just cannot adjust his behavior.

                      Fact is, we don't need the front-court depth (we got plenty) so we should be looking to move him to one of the many teams in the League that could use a center (Detroit, Cleveland, Boston, Washington and Orlando all come to mind) while he's playing some quality ball. Sell high...he's not as good as he's been playing so far this year, and he's proven incapable of learning.
                      Well, when you put it this way, I definitely feel like I've overstated my case and I'll say it right out, I was wrong about JO setting a mood, UB is right that Harrison is his own man and that's that.

                      So I admit it. I was wrong.

                      AT least talking about it has brought me to a first in my life. I've never been internet flamed by an entire room full of people before.
                      “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                      “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Game 03 Pacers at Grizzlies Post Game Thread

                        Well, I finally watched my first full game of the season. I can understand why everybody is enthusiastic about the team, as they play with high energy and the offense is obviously more exciting. However, I do have the same sort of feeling I did in the post brawl games. You keep thinking, we are playing so well with what we have (a short handed roster w/o many superstars) but feel like the honeymoon will eventually wear off.

                        I like the fact we are scoring on jump shots, but it is difficult to imagine Dun Dun and Danny can keep at such a scintillating pace. At some point we are going to have to rely more on JO for those "superstar' moments, and I'm just not sure how we will adjust. There have been lots of these flashes of "ball movement team play" that have been quickly dashed once JO takes a major role. So far so good and hopefully the new coaching style will keep things humming along.

                        Granger has been the most impressive to me... just an assasin as of late with a very diverse arsenal. He is not only shooting the "3" with confidence, but he is finishing well around the basket as well. It is nice to see David H. playing well. I've always thought he could be a wild card for us if he could stay out of foul trouble and keep his head screwed on right.

                        I love the passing and ability to hit the 3 and mid-range shot. One thing pointed out tonight, which has been a bane of the Pacers in the past, is that when we shoot 3's we get the chance at those long rebounds. It is nice to actually have that stat work in your favor eh?

                        The coaching change has certainly seemed to be a good one thus far, so good luck to JOB and staff.
                        “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
                        motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
                        Reggie Miller

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Game 03 Pacers at Grizzlies Post Game Thread

                          Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
                          Well, when you put it this way, I definitely feel like I've overstated my case and I'll say it right out, I was wrong about JO setting a mood, UB is right that Harrison is his own man and that's that.

                          So I admit it. I was wrong.

                          AT least talking about it has brought me to a first in my life. I've never been internet flamed by an entire room full of people before.
                          Harrison is his own man. I don't lay much of this at JO's feet. However, do you think a true leader of a team should have taken care of that situation rather than have daddy coach go over and do it? For goodness sakes, it was his own backup.

                          I really think that was the perfect situation for JO to demonstrate some maturity and leadership. The truth is, he didn't show leadership there because he's merely a default leader on this team. That's why JOb had to do the dirty work and will continue to have to do it.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Game 03 Pacers at Grizzlies Post Game Thread

                            Our half-court offense is so suspect. When we had the lead and tried to bleed the clock we ended up with a crappy long 3 ball instead of the shots in rhythm we got during the whole game.
                            Pacers!

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Game 03 Pacers at Grizzlies Post Game Thread

                              I love what's happening, but when it comes down to under a minute left and we need a bucket or something like that, I'm worried about where it's going to come from. Sure Danny seems to be gaining that "killer instinct" but there's no reason to trust him in that situation yet, nor anyone on the roster. This seems like a great regular season system but when it comes to the last few weeks and fighting for a playoff spot, or in the actual playoffs, I'm worried about having consistent go-to plays.

                              Of course it's 3 games into a first year coach's tenure.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Game 03 Pacers at Grizzlies Post Game Thread

                                I'm glad that we can debate what the Pacers need to improve on after a three game win streak and a game which we pretty much controlled the whole way through.

                                Dun Jr. doesn't look overpaid. Tins doesn't look like the worst starting point guard in the NBA. Harrison doesn't look like a player who won't crack a NBA rotation. Granger doesn't look like a player who won't ever take it to the next level. I welcome the rise of new expectations.
                                "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

                                "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X