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

His best in Past? Mike Wells Indy Star

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Shade
    Re: His best in Past? Mike Wells Indy Star

    I hope JO is right. If he truly returns to old form, he should be able to run in this system. If I were him, I'd look at dropping a little weight if possible, though. Hell, as long as he can run the floor efficiently, he should be a lot better than Murphy most nights.

    In the meantime, he needs to sit out for as long as needed and not try to rush back. It does neither the team nor himself any good if he comes back again at less than 100%.

    Leave a comment:

  • Hicks
    Re: His best in Past? Mike Wells Indy Star

    (They are 84-81 with him in the past three-plus seasons, 44-44 without.)
    Now there's a stat.

    Leave a comment:

  • Evan_The_Dude
    Re: His best in Past? Mike Wells Indy Star

    I just wish he would get it. Is he not seeing what will make this team successful? We just need him to fit in with whats been working. We don't need him to be a star. If he comes back and we skid again, then what? Are we going to continue to ignore the numbers or are we going to do something about it?

    Leave a comment:

  • jeffg-body
    Re: His best in Past? Mike Wells Indy Star

    Originally posted by OnlyPacersLeft View Post
    lol@"he might play tonight in seattle" he won't. This day to day crap is stupid. Just put him on IR let him miss the next 5 and then we'll go from there. Really it's getting stupid wondering if he may or may not play.
    I agree with you on the whole day to day stuff. If he is injured, shut him down and make sure he stays home for treatment. SWill and a little Murph can fill in fine at the 4 spot.

    Leave a comment:

  • McKeyFan
    Re: His best in Past? Mike Wells Indy Star

    Originally posted by bellisimo View Post
    but if Ike could avg. 14pts a game from the bench before injury - no reason why JO could not avg 20+y
    No reason other than FG percentage.

    Leave a comment:

  • Major Cold
    Re: His best in Past? Mike Wells Indy Star

    We need his defense. There are times when we need to slow it down. JO can be utilized then as well as in the running game.

    Leave a comment:

  • bellisimo
    Re: His best in Past? Mike Wells Indy Star

    I agree - he should take as much time as needed ala Shaq to recover from whatever it is that is bogging him down. All this forcing to play is not helping anyone get into any groove.

    There is no reason why JO could not get 20 10 within the system...

    surely he can also get it outside the system...but if Ike could avg. 14pts a game from the bench before injury - no reason why JO could not avg 20+ long as he is healthy

    Leave a comment:

  • McKeyFan
    Re: His best in Past? Mike Wells Indy Star

    Quite refreshing for Wells to write this article.

    Now it's out in the open and everyone has to deal with it, including JO and TPTB.

    Leave a comment:

  • OnlyPacersLeft
    Re: His best in Past? Mike Wells Indy Star

    lol@"he might play tonight in seattle" he won't. This day to day crap is stupid. Just put him on IR let him miss the next 5 and then we'll go from there. Really it's getting stupid wondering if he may or may not play.

    Leave a comment:

  • Rajah Brown
    Re: His best in Past? Mike Wells Indy Star

    Return to his level ? Perhaps so. But while good for him, would
    that be good for the Pacers overall ?

    They don't need 20 & 10, All-Star status the noteriety that comes
    with it from him. They need him to 'fit'.

    I'll believe it when I see it.

    Leave a comment:

  • indygeezer
    started a topic His best in Past? Mike Wells Indy Star

    His best in Past? Mike Wells Indy Star

    November 30, 2007

    His best in past?
    O'Neal certain he'll return to old form, be central to Pacers' success

    By Mike Wells

    SEATTLE -- It seemed like just yesterday that Jermaine O'Neal was a perennial All-Star, appearing in national commercials and challenging for league MVP honors.

    Three-plus years, even more injuries and numerous trade rumors later, O'Neal's stock, status and numbers have plummeted to levels not seen since he rode the bench in Portland.
    O'Neal has missed 73 games the past three-plus seasons due to injuries. His latest setback is to his left knee, which required offseason surgery and has limited him to 10 games this season.
    "You're always going to be open to criticism in professional sports," said O'Neal, who is averaging 13.2 points -- 11 fewer than in 2004-05. "I know people are saying I'm not the same player I used to be. I accept it because it is what it is. I've been hurt the last few years. I believe once I get over the hump, and I believe I'm going to get over it, I'm going to be the player I was before."
    When O'Neal gets healthy is anybody's guess. He might play tonight at Seattle.
    The Pacers are 5-1 without him this season, leading many to wonder if they would be better off without him. (They are 84-81 with him in the past three-plus seasons, 44-44 without.) Several scouts who have attended recent games suggested they are better without him because his style doesn't mesh with coach Jim O'Brien's up-tempo offense.
    O'Brien and the Pacers adamantly dismiss such talk as nonsense.
    "This style will help his game," Pacers CEO Donnie Walsh said. "He is a great athlete. The halfcourt style doesn't appeal to his athleticism. When his leg settles down, he can get back to playing his old way."
    The Pacers have maintained all along that they are better when they run, but the numbers suggest they have had a difficult time mixing O'Neal's low-post scoring with their new approach. O'Neal is second on the team in assists, but the offense still slows down to get him involved.
    Without him, they are averaging 108 points and have knocked off playoff teams Dallas, Denver and Washington.
    With him, they have averaged 99.8 points and once lost six consecutive games. They've been held to 90 or fewer points five times this season. All five times O'Neal played, and the Pacers are 1-4 in those games.
    "We've made strides as a team, but those strides will be even greater when Jermaine gets back," said O'Brien, who is coaching his first scoring post player. "We run the same offense with or without him. We run the same defense with or without him."
    O'Neal spent the summer rehabbing from arthroscopic surgery to remove loose cartilage in his left knee and getting into shape for O'Brien's offense.
    He hit the first of several snags when he collided with teammate Shawne Williams in practice. Then he slipped during a preseason game. The swelling in his knee caused him to sit out most of the preseason
    "I lost some confidence in my knee," O'Neal said. "I've never lost confidence in my abilities as a basketball player. That will never happen. It's all about my knee. I kind of underestimated my recovery time and the difficult part of having surgery. I thought at 29 years old I could bounce back and do things on the run. My body let me know that I can't do that anymore."
    O'Neal, who has led the Pacers in scoring the past six seasons, has only been a shade of his former self this season. He lacks explosiveness to the basket. He has a hard time shooting over defenders, evident by the number of times he has had his shot blocked. O'Neal has yet to score 20 points and he's shooting a career-worst 39 percent.
    His lack of production hasn't gone unnoticed.
    Nuggets coach George Karl, never one to bite his tongue, earlier called Danny Granger the Pacers' top scoring option and referred to Mike Dunleavy as the "glue" to the team.
    O'Neal sees validity in the criticism.
    "The wear and tear wore on me mentally because I couldn't move," O'Neal said. "I haven't played anywhere near the level I'm used to playing at. That was the real reason for the team, the training staff and I got together and said I needed to step away from this, because it got more frustrating than helpful."
    O'Neal is signed through 2009-10. He has the option to become a free agent after the season, but doing so would mean walking away from the remaining $43.345 million he is owed in hopes he could make more elsewhere.
    O'Neal isn't concerning himself with the future, except to deliver a message to critics who insist his career is declining.
    "I'm not going to be broken down," he said. "Do I believe I'm going to return to my form? Absolutely. I truly believe I'm going to return to my level."
    Call Star reporter Mike Wells at (317) 444-6053.


    I honestly hope he is right, but has there ever been a player that didn't think they could come back and compete? Oh, and say good-bye to any trde value JO had with this out in the open (as if GM's didn't already know) Now the PUBLIC pressure will not allow JO to be accepted in any package deals either IMO.
    Last edited by indygeezer; 11-30-2007, 07:16 AM.