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

Pacers vs. Bucks Post-Game Thread: Pacers move up two draft spots

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

  • #46
    Re: Pacers vs. Bucks Post-Game Thread: Pacers move up two draft spots

    I have not read any of this thread yet, but I did watch the entire game and I thought last night was just a case where the better team won. Pacers played OK, I can't really compain too much about their play - the effort was good, they tried to play the right way.

    My greatest thought last night towards the end of the game is that I felt bad for Granger and Dunleavy - they did all they could.

    The fact is this current team without JO and Jmaal just isn't very good - talent level is one of the worst in the NBA without those two guys.

    let me read the thread now

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Pacers vs. Bucks Post-Game Thread: Pacers move up two draft spots

      Originally posted by Bball View Post
      I'm fine with Diener over Jamaal (of course you know I'd say that). At least Diener looks like he cares and he DOES push the ball and get the offense initiated quickly. And he's consistent. His lowest low is nowhere near Jamaal's lowest lows and his attitude is better. Neither can play defense, but again, Diener at least looks like he cares. Let me know the next time Diener goes "Tinsley" and pulls out the pouts or "oneupsmanship" crap.


      -Bball
      I agree completely about Travis. At the very least he's a guy that the fans can root for.

      Sure it is frustrating to see the guys trying to win the game, playing hard, following the system and yet just not being good enough to win the game. But right now I enjoy watching the team more without JO and Jamaal.

      The Pacers bench last night was horrid - every last one of them was just terrible. But I am concerned about Daniels. I have to assume he isn't healthy, because he hasn't played a good game in a month or so.
      Last edited by Unclebuck; 01-25-2008, 08:40 AM.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Pacers vs. Bucks Post-Game Thread: Pacers move up two draft spots

        I agree that I would rather see Travis play because he looks like he wants to be there, gives effort and listens to coach.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Pacers vs. Bucks Post-Game Thread: Pacers move up two draft spots

          Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
          This sounds more like a Bird type player in my mind

          http://www.nbadraft.net/admincp/prof...rooklopez.html
          A twin from Stanford? I can't see how that could go wrong...

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Pacers vs. Bucks Post-Game Thread: Pacers move up two draft spots

            Originally posted by OnlyPacersLeft View Post
            WE ARE AWESOME! ONCE AGAIN...WE ARE AWESOME!
            WHO NEEDS JO OR TINSLEY....THIS TEAM IS AWESOME WITHOUT THEM! NOW ALL WE NEED TO DO IS GET RID OF THAT GRANGER GUY FOR PAT GARRITY AND WE WILL BE EVEN MORE AWESOME.
            Ehmm... weren't you the dude that said we would go to the second round last year and definitely make the play-offs this year?

            Sometimes you have to suck before you get better, that time is now, though I maintain we should have worked about getting better earlier (by trading away JO in 2006 and Jamaal in 2007) instead of these "patches". Sure, we are likely to suck next year too, but that's a result of not making the moves when we (long)needed to make them. Think about the bright spot... we are bound to get a good pick next year aswell .

            With all of that said... I still love the Pacers and always will. And I will always keep following their games. Even in badtimes.

            Regards,

            Mourning
            2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

            2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

            2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Pacers vs. Bucks Post-Game Thread: Pacers move up two draft spots

              Originally posted by Bball View Post
              Once again, without JO we do a better job on defense of closing out on people coming open behind the arc, but our guards cannot stop the penetration. True, you could have JO in there playing goalie, but then we collapse inside on penetration and can't recover for the kick out.
              The Bucks go 38.7% from 3 on 31 attempts and you feel good about it? Do you dislike JO that much?

              Sorry, but I'll keep the 38% and at least reduce the 2pt% down enough so they don't go 47% overall. Also on the year they've allowed 37.4% from deep. Now I don't know how that breaks down with and without JO, but I'm guessing the average with him is about that. Certainly the 47 was higher than the 44 they've been giving up on the year.

              So I don't really see the positive impact of no JO out there. To me it's been pretty awful, and considering how much he was struggling on offense it's something to actually get worse without him.


              Now Diener I'm fine with...as a backup. He's a great energy guy that can get hot from deep. That's a nice bump from the bench. But he can get dominated by quality starters both in the post and even on the other end protecting his dribble (he lost an ugly one in the lane during the 4th for example).

              They either need JO healthy or need him moved. And clearly they can't go on with Tinsley as their starter. He's back to being injured every other day as well, or benched secretly or who knows. It's 100% identical to how it was under Rick. I don't want him gone because he was shot at, I want him gone because he's an unreliable PG.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Pacers vs. Bucks Post-Game Thread: Pacers move up two draft spots

                Originally posted by Bball View Post
                I was just thinking... What if we would've allowed the 00-01 season to go down the drain and acquired a top draft pick? Or moreso let the 01-02 season go down the drain instead of focusing on the playoffs at all costs (since in 00-01 we still had a little glow of the 00 Finals on us)?

                Or even 02-03? What did 'saving' that season with the playoffs gain us?

                I'm not arguing FOR the 'tank' but I am saying if the wheels are coming off, why not let them sometimes? Who cares if Player X gives a losing team a slightly better chance to win (IF he wants to play that night), if player Y could use the experience and probably has more of a future with the team (or you need to see him in game conditions to really know what you have in the first)?

                -Bball
                I do agree with this. I'm anti-tank because it just sends the wrong message to the roster. The Celtics got LUCKY to save things with deals. Had they continued with just draft picks after that tank job you can bet that morale would be low and the losses high.

                But you have youth that you want to make decisions on, NEED to make decisions on. Time to run Shawne, Ike, Danny plenty (DG already is of course). And you still need to feel out Rush and Diener I suppose. Perhaps you could cut back on Jeff's time a bit and let his body catch up some, save him for next year.

                Then again, what if they get hot and make a run? IMO you have to go for it because no future is certain. Get it while you can. The brawl season following the ECF upset should have taught us all that.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Pacers vs. Bucks Post-Game Thread: Pacers move up two draft spots

                  Originally posted by jmoney2584 View Post
                  Also, what is all this on Dunleavy "shaking himself"? Did he mess up a crossover and look real real white? or was he just having an epileptic stress out?
                  dunleavy was on a fast break and he tryed to cross over i think it was charlie bell? And bell wasn't even really that close to him and dunleavy tripped over his own feet and fell to the ground...LOL
                  Turning the ball over and leading to a fast break bucket on the other end...awesome!
                  "GIMMIE DAT!"-DANGER

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Pacers vs. Bucks Post-Game Thread: Pacers move up two draft spots

                    Originally posted by Mourning View Post
                    Ehmm... weren't you the dude that said we would go to the second round last year and definitely make the play-offs this year?

                    Sometimes you have to suck before you get better, that time is now, though I maintain we should have worked about getting better earlier (by trading away JO in 2006 and Jamaal in 2007) instead of these "patches". Sure, we are likely to suck next year too, but that's a result of not making the moves when we (long)needed to make them. Think about the bright spot... we are bound to get a good pick next year aswell .

                    With all of that said... I still love the Pacers and always will. And I will always keep following their games. Even in badtimes.

                    Regards,

                    Mourning
                    I'm a homer...what can I say? I still think my seminoles are going to win the national title every year...LOL

                    it's just kind of frustrating when you know the talent level could be there and we don't utilize it. Granger should be an all star...so should tinsley...we shouldn't be this bad but we are.
                    "GIMMIE DAT!"-DANGER

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Pacers vs. Bucks Post-Game Thread: Pacers move up two draft spots

                      Originally posted by OnlyPacersLeft View Post
                      dunleavy was on a fast break and he tryed to cross over i think it was charlie bell? And bell wasn't even really that close to him and dunleavy tripped over his own feet and fell to the ground...LOL
                      Turning the ball over and leading to a fast break bucket on the other end...awesome!
                      ahhh hahaha clownin'
                      Roy Hibbert.... It's the POWER!!!

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Pacers vs. Bucks Post-Game Thread: Pacers move up two draft spots

                        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                        The Bucks go 38.7% from 3 on 31 attempts and you feel good about it? Do you dislike JO that much?

                        Sorry, but I'll keep the 38% and at least reduce the 2pt% down enough so they don't go 47% overall. Also on the year they've allowed 37.4% from deep. Now I don't know how that breaks down with and without JO, but I'm guessing the average with him is about that. Certainly the 47 was higher than the 44 they've been giving up on the year.

                        So I don't really see the positive impact of no JO out there. To me it's been pretty awful, and considering how much he was struggling on offense it's something to actually get worse without him.


                        Now Diener I'm fine with...as a backup. He's a great energy guy that can get hot from deep. That's a nice bump from the bench. But he can get dominated by quality starters both in the post and even on the other end protecting his dribble (he lost an ugly one in the lane during the 4th for example).

                        They either need JO healthy or need him moved. And clearly they can't go on with Tinsley as their starter. He's back to being injured every other day as well, or benched secretly or who knows. It's 100% identical to how it was under Rick. I don't want him gone because he was shot at, I want him gone because he's an unreliable PG.


                        THANKYOU SIR!

                        I am so glad that you have said this, i thought the entire forum was goin crazy! I have been catching up on a lot of reading and i am shocked by so much "We are better with J.O. and Tins". I'm sorry, but, maybe on the odd occasion we play good basketball without them, but overall, i see no doubt that we can't reach the same level without them as we can with them, even if neither level is particularly high!

                        Thank-you again! You have saved my confidence in this forum!
                        'All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.'
                        Animal Farm, by George Orwell

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Pacers vs. Bucks Post-Game Thread: Pacers move up two draft spots

                          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                          I do agree with this. I'm anti-tank because it just sends the wrong message to the roster. The Celtics got LUCKY to save things with deals. Had they continued with just draft picks after that tank job you can bet that morale would be low and the losses high.
                          Yeah I know I have said this before but if you wanna win big your gonna have to get lucky somewhere.

                          I consider Joe Dumars pretty damn lucky to have gotten Rasheed Wallace for pretty much nothing. It's why they won that championship that year. Now I have a lot of respect for Joe but to be able to get Rasheed at the price he did, that took some luck.

                          The Spurs are pretty lucky that they landed the number one pick in 1997. That got them Tim Duncan. The 1rst overall pick in 1998 would have gotten them Michael Olowokandi.

                          Never under estimate the value of luck.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Pacers vs. Bucks Post-Game Thread: Pacers move up two draft spots

                            In terms of luck...

                            Our biggest weakness has been the guard spot since Reggie retired, it is just our luck that the best guard in the draft comes from Indy. I don't know how it could be more story book perfect. Let's do this thing Sonnnn
                            Roy Hibbert.... It's the POWER!!!

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Pacers vs. Bucks Post-Game Thread: Pacers move up two draft spots

                              Originally posted by rommie View Post
                              Yeah I know I have said this before but if you wanna win big your gonna have to get lucky somewhere.

                              I consider Joe Dumars pretty damn lucky to have gotten Rasheed Wallace for pretty much nothing. It's why they won that championship that year. Now I have a lot of respect for Joe but to be able to get Rasheed at the price he did, that took some luck.

                              The Spurs are pretty lucky that they landed the number one pick in 1997. That got them Tim Duncan. The 1rst overall pick in 1998 would have gotten them Michael Olowokandi.

                              Never under estimate the value of luck.
                              Not to mention how lucky the Heat were at the time to get the players they did below market value.

                              The Celtics and Heat also acquired some nice draft picks and prospects for a few years, then took a plunge for a superstar.

                              We need to focus on rebuilding, acquiring high draft picks and young players toiling away needlessly on other teams' benches, with the foresight to make a run at free agents (or a trade for a superstar) when TinMurphLeavy's contracts all come off the books in three years. By then, we'll also have JO's deal off the books, and we can make a run at putting together a serious contender. The LAST thing we want to do right now is take on any contracts longer than 3 years in length.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Pacers vs. Bucks Post-Game Thread: Pacers move up two draft spots

                                Btw, I don't ever WANT the Pacers to tank, but I can live with them doing so unintentionally, especially if it's due primarily to our developing our young players.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X