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

What I Liked Tonight 42.01

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

  • #31
    Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

    Originally posted by rexnom View Post
    This year Danny has to show if he's going to be able to a franchise guy. 33 pts against a Pistons defense and Tayshaun Prince keyed in on you is a great start.I think this is why they hesitate to lock him down. We can't pay Danny first banana money if he's a second or third banana guy.
    especially since we're already paying Murph first banana money...
    I'm all for securing Danny's future in Indy eventhough I'll remain cautious; his performance last night was outstanding but should not be taken for granted too fast: it was the first game of the season... 81 to go. I want him to be extended now based on his progress season after season and because I think he has star caliber

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

      Originally posted by rexnom View Post
      This year Danny has to show if he's going to be able to a franchise guy. 33 pts against a Pistons defense and Tayshaun Prince keyed in on you is a great start.I think this is why they hesitate to lock him down. We can't pay Danny first banana money if he's a second or third banana guy.
      Originally posted by BKK View Post
      especially since we're already paying Murph first banana money...
      I'm all for securing Danny's future in Indy eventhough I'll remain cautious; his performance last night was outstanding but should not be taken for granted too fast: it was the first game of the season... 81 to go. I want him to be extended now based on his progress season after season and because I think he has star caliber
      You still need your ceiling, but I go to Danny with whatever that is right now. So, I'd say it's somewhere between 5/$60 and 5/$65 for the extension. That puts him solidly in the range of the Ellis/Deng/Iggy, which seems to be reasonable market value. He may or may not say yes, but it would be nice to get it put to bed.

      You notice that while they've said "there's no hurry", they haven't (to my recollection) said that they weren't going to try and extend him before tomorrow's deadline (as was announced in a couple of other cases, like David Lee).

      Do I think he's a franchise guy...no, not at this point (though it is somewhat less far-fetched than it had seemed previously), but sadly, these numbers aren't "franchise guy" numbers anymore.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

        It will be interesting regarding Danny's extension. As much as I'd like them to come up with a decision tomorrow, I don't see it happening.

        Danny's in kind of a limbo as a player right now: is he a really good second option or does he have the ability to be a first option in this league? He's still developing as a player- his skills at penetrating to the basket weren't what they are now last year. He's just getting better.

        Is that enough to warrant the first option money he's probably demanding right now? I'm not sure. When it comes to comparing his contract to Monta Ellis or Iggy's contract, that may or may not be valid, Danny could end up miles ahead of both players and maybe even better than Deng. Remember, he's still developing. I know I'll get panned for this, but it's no unreasonable to say Danny has a Paul Pierce ceiling. The chances of Danny being a 25 ppg player aren't excellent by any means, but it's a possbility, a possibility I never saw for most of last season.

        This is a difficult contract situation which may possibly lead to the Pacers paying Danny much more money than we initially thought, not because he's being unreasonable, but because he may be a tier above the player we thought he would develop into. If TPTB see even a really reasonable possibility that Danny could be a superstar, we better jump onto it, because it's not every day you can attract superstars to Indiana and it seems that Danny genuinely wants to be here. Jermaine and Reggie are the two most talented Pacers of the post ABA era. Danny could, and probably should, be joining those ranks before too long.

        But, more on topic, I can't believe Hibbert didn't play at all in the second half. He should have gotten at least 5 more minutes of PT.
        Last edited by idioteque; 10-30-2008, 08:42 AM.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

          I think the Simons are cautious. They don't want to overpay Danny. If he breaks out, averaging 25ppg and they end paying more, so be it. It's worth it considering it's more likely that he doesn't break out and they don't have to pay an exorbitant amount. It's basically become a contract year for Danny.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

            I don't see him averaging that much unless Mike stays out for a big part of the season. Let's hope he at least makes the 20 points mark though, otherwise we are doomed.
            Word on the street is he doesn't want your money, he only wants to please your ears...
            Bum in Berlin on Myspace

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

              Originally posted by tbabyy924 View Post
              After all those turnovers we were still in the game, down 5 with 2 min or something. If this was last seasons team, we would have been down 20.
              I think that's spot on. And a really good way to assess this game overall.
              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                Originally posted by Raskolnikov View Post
                I don't see him averaging that much unless Mike stays out for a big part of the season. Let's hope he at least makes the 20 points mark though, otherwise we are doomed.
                I actually think that Mike being out hurt Danny more than it helped him. Daniels brought little and scarcely stretched out the defense to help Danny shoot or cut.

                I think it'll be interesting to see him play with Mike. He can't be hesitating because Mike is in there. Danny has to assert control of this team. TJ can be the vocal leader but Danny has to be the leader on the floor if he wants to lead this franchise.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                  Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                  (the main 4 in their starting lineup have started more games together than every other combo since 1991, with the exception of Jackson/Miller/D. Davis/Smits-fun fact).
                  Excellent fact. Thank you.
                  "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                    One of the Pistons commentators last night mentioned that the Pistons were shading their defense toward Danny. Mike will help take some of that pressure off with his ability to stretch the defense.
                    2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                      Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
                      I still dont understand why this wouldnt be talked about in the post game thread?
                      It's kinda like the bball playground or even a Pacers game.

                      You have the place where everybody can go post their thoughts about the game. Then a couple of others, if they do dare to take the risk, start their own personal thread with their own personal slant. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

                      So, most of us are regular rotation guys like Antonio Davis, Sam Perkins, or Derrick McKey . I've likened Peck to the Microwave (he's drops off once in a while, but when he appears, it's always hot), but Peck is really more like our Reggie Miller, continually throwing out interesting material for years on end.

                      The others who pump their chests and decide to start their own thread hope to reach that level, or maybe even Jalen Rose status. But, beware, lest the rest of the board decides you're Steven Jackson.
                      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                        Originally posted by rexnom View Post
                        I actually think that Mike being out hurt Danny more than it helped him. Daniels brought little and scarcely stretched out the defense to help Danny shoot or cut.

                        I think it'll be interesting to see him play with Mike. He can't be hesitating because Mike is in there. Danny has to assert control of this team. TJ can be the vocal leader but Danny has to be the leader on the floor if he wants to lead this franchise.
                        Originally posted by tbabyy924 View Post
                        One of the Pistons commentators last night mentioned that the Pistons were shading their defense toward Danny. Mike will help take some of that pressure off with his ability to stretch the defense.
                        True, Mike's return should only get him better looks, if anything. But he will also carry part of the scoring load no matter what, so Danny's average will go down. Long as they can both keep their aggressiveness, that's only a good thing. If your shot doesn't fall on a given night, you still have the easy baskets and FT's you get by always attacking the basket. I thought Mike was still better at doing that than Danny last year. Now if we have 2 wing guys who can do that on a consistent basis, that's pretty neat.
                        Word on the street is he doesn't want your money, he only wants to please your ears...
                        Bum in Berlin on Myspace

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                          Someone may want to start a new thread on the Granger deadline. That's a pretty big issue.
                          "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                            Things I liked:

                            Murphy's Rebounding
                            Rush's Defense & Finishing Ability
                            Jack's Defense
                            Granger's Assertiveness
                            Hibbert's Scoring Move
                            Overall Effort Level
                            "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                            - Salman Rushdie

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                              Originally posted by Raskolnikov View Post
                              True, Mike's return should only get him better looks, if anything. But he will also carry part of the scoring load no matter what, so Danny's average will go down. Long as they can both keep their aggressiveness, that's only a good thing. If your shot doesn't fall on a given night, you still have the easy baskets and FT's you get by always attacking the basket. I thought Mike was still better at doing that than Danny last year. Now if we have 2 wing guys who can do that on a consistent basis, that's pretty neat.
                              Very neat indeed I'm looking forward to seeing Danny out there with Mike. thought Quis was pretty bad yesterday - Mike's going to be a huge upgrade. Btw, Danny had a def. possession where he blocked two shots in a row which was awesome.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                                I can't believe no one has mentioned Hibbert taking a charge yet.

                                Granger is obviously the first thing you notice about the game, and everything that can be said about it, has been so I won't.

                                Rush's defense was the biggest surprise, and not that it was good, but that he didn't find himself in position to get a foul called on him. (Hibbert as well for the little amount of time he played) I think that's extremely telling about his overall smarts. Usually, you can clearly see the difference between how rookies get treated out by officials, and even notice that most don't get the picky fouls called on them as the season goes on that they would have gotten at the beginning. Defensively, he didn't look like a rookie at all.

                                Offensively, I liked how he attacked the basket when he entered the game. He scored some quick buckets, then just completely disappeared. With how good of a shooter he is, and his ability to get to the rim, he needs to look to score. When he would catch the ball in their offensive sets, he would immediately look to make the next pass. Not that there's anything wrong with that. The only time he looked aggressive is on the break, and man did he look good doing it, other than when he through it out of bounds.

                                I've watched enough of the rest of the new guys, besides McRoberts, to know what/who they are. It's just a matter of getting them chemistry with each other.

                                To sum it up easily, our rooks didn't look like rooks, and that is very encouraging. Yes, I know there will be set backs along the way, but coming in and being able to hold their own on day 1 is extremely impressive.
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X