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

Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

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

  • #16
    Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
    That was a good shot by Ford. J, I don't think it is fair to imly that Fod won't pass the ball in those situations
    It was definitely a good shot. Nothing wrong with it, and I really like his aggression.

    It's just unfortunate how infrequently he is able to finish inside eight feet.
    Read my Pacers blog:
    8points9seconds.com

    Follow my twitter:

    @8pts9secs

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

      What?

      That was ugly. Spinning, falling backwards and triple-teamed. Don't make me turn the tv back on to look at it again, please.

      Perhaps Prince's long arms could have covered the ground. Perhaps TJ could have dribbled to create a passing lane instead of driving into all that traffic.

      That was a terrible possession. I was so much happier the previous possession when Daniels got the ball directly to Danny.

      (PS: Pistons' announcers before Daniels inbounded: "If the Pacers can't get the inbounds directly to Granger, look for TJ Ford to try to take it himself.")

      EDIT - a diagonal or curl dribble to find a passing angle would be a nice part of his arsenal. Also, it doesn't matter if he can't or won't make the pass, because he doesn't.
      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
      And life itself, rushing over me
      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

        To me it should come to no suprise that our defense is bad. Going into the season I think we all knew that we would have probably an average defense at the very best.

        With that said our defense is much improved from last year.

        This losing really sucks but I just keep thinking to myself how much better off we are right now compared to a year ago.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

          Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
          It was definitely a good shot. Nothing wrong with it, and I really like his aggression.

          It's just unfortunate how infrequently he is able to finish inside eight feet.
          Show me a guy 6'0" or shorter that is able to finish inside of eight feet and you'll be showing me Iverson. Or Nate Archibald. That's about it, period.

          Maybe I'm missing one or two other guys in NBA history, but probably not.

          I find it interesting that the official play-by-play log lists is at as: Ford jump shot: missed. I think he was farther away than you guys think he was. He was one step inside the FT line. But then again, I wouldn't have called it a "jump shot" either with that much twisting involved.
          Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
          Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
          Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
          Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
          And life itself, rushing over me
          Life itself, the wind in black elms,
          Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            Danny wasn't open on that play, I went back and re-watched to see if he was, Prince was right up on him.

            That was a good shot by Ford.

            J, I don't think it is fair to imply that Ford won't pass the ball in those situations
            Prince took away the three, but Danny had beaten him on a backcut. It would've been tight, but the pass was there for Danny cutting to the basket.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

              Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
              Show me a guy 6'0" or shorter that is able to finish inside of eight feet and you'll be showing me Iverson. Or Nate Archibald. That's about it, period.

              Maybe I'm missing one or two other guys in NBA history, but probably not.

              I find it interesting that the official play-by-play log lists is at as: Ford jump shot: missed. I think he was farther away than you guys think he was. He was one step inside the FT line. But then again, I wouldn't have called it a "jump shot" either with that much twisting involved.
              Right now Chris paul,Tony parker, before Joe Dumars,isaiha Thomas and there is more
              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                Right now Chris paul,Tony parker, before Joe Dumars,isaiha Thomas and there is more
                Dumars is 6'4", Parker is 6'2", Zeke is 6'1". In a couple more years, I'll add Chris Paul to the list of 6-foot and under guys that can finish but its too soon to put him in the same breath as Archibald and Iverson.

                I said 6'0" and under for a reason. There's a huge difference from under 6'0" in the NBA to average sized (6'2" to 6'4") PGs.
                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                And life itself, rushing over me
                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

                  Same ol, same ol.

                  When it comes to the wire, some players just simply step up. Danny did better tonight -- one turnover in crunch time, I think. Other than that, a great performance.

                  But Sheed and Rip both hit key baskets when it really counted. And we didn't.

                  That's the ballgame.

                  I agree. JOB was pretty good tonight, UB. But when we really need a bucket, we don't have the Rasheeds and Rips and Princes. Not yet.
                  "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

                    Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                    Dumars is 6'4", Parker is 6'2", Zeke is 6'1". In a couple more years, I'll add Chris Paul to the list of 6-foot and under guys that can finish but its too soon to put him in the same breath as Archibald and Iverson.

                    I said 6'0" and under for a reason. There's a huge difference from under 6'0" in the NBA to average sized (6'2" to 6'4") PGs.
                    6'1 or 6'2 are pretty close to 6'0 those 2'0 inches won't make any difference, they are still small players
                    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

                      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                      6'1 or 6'2 are pretty close to 6'0 those 2'0 inches won't make any difference, they are still small players
                      Disagree 100%. 2 inches different at PG is even bigger than two inches different at one of the taller positions, and history proves that over and over. And with somone like TJ, you're really talking about four inches of height differential against most PGs.
                      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                      And life itself, rushing over me
                      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

                        Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                        Show me a guy 6'0" or shorter that is able to finish inside of eight feet and you'll be showing me Iverson. Or Nate Archibald. That's about it, period.

                        Maybe I'm missing one or two other guys in NBA history, but probably not.

                        I find it interesting that the official play-by-play log lists is at as: Ford jump shot: missed. I think he was farther away than you guys think he was. He was one step inside the FT line. But then again, I wouldn't have called it a "jump shot" either with that much twisting involved.
                        C'mon...I'm not talking about or expecting him to get to the rack and finish in traffic continually throughout the game often like Ivy, Tiny, Tim Hardaway, or KJ.

                        I'm talking about him clearly going by his man and having space near the hoop -- even after the rotation -- but not being able to make the shot, which is something that not only he himself has shown an ability to do in the past but something that middling talents like David Wesley, Nate Robinson, Earl Boykins, Derek Fisher, Nick Van Exel, John Bagley, Dana Barros and BJ Armstrong were/are all able to do to different degrees.

                        Some of it seems to be unluckiness for TJ, as the ball consistently bounces off the inside of the rim, but he clearly isn't utilizing a consistent arsenal of tear drops, pull-ups, upfake-step-throughs or stutter-steps to get to the other side of the rim that I have seen some evidence of him showing in the past. He seems to only go to either a complete stop turn around fadeaway type thing like he did at the end of the game or a sweeping, half-hook/half-prayer while guarding the ball with his body and floating towards the basket support.

                        Again, I do think he possesses the capability to make these shots. I've seen dude do it. But for whatever reason, he just continually seems out of sorts, not confident and hesitant to commit to any action out there at all. Everything he does (and yes, that is hyperbole) just seems tentative.
                        Last edited by JayRedd; 12-12-2008, 11:59 PM.
                        Read my Pacers blog:
                        8points9seconds.com

                        Follow my twitter:

                        @8pts9secs

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

                          Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                          Disagree 100%. 2 inches different at PG is even bigger than two inches different at one of the taller positions, and history proves that over and over. And with somone like TJ, you're really talking about four inches of height differential against most PGs.
                          That is fine, I just want the pacers to end with one of the firts five draft picks next year, either Blake griffing or Steven curry, Steven curry could be the answer for the pacers at the end of games, he is a clutch shooter
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

                            Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                            What?

                            That was ugly. Spinning, falling backwards and triple-teamed. Don't make me turn the tv back on to look at it again, please.

                            Perhaps Prince's long arms could have covered the ground. Perhaps TJ could have dribbled to create a passing lane instead of driving into all that traffic.

                            That was a terrible possession. I was so much happier the previous possession when Daniels got the ball directly to Danny.

                            (PS: Pistons' announcers before Daniels inbounded: "If the Pacers can't get the inbounds directly to Granger, look for TJ Ford to try to take it himself.")

                            EDIT - a diagonal or curl dribble to find a passing angle would be a nice part of his arsenal. Also, it doesn't matter if he can't or won't make the pass, because he doesn't.
                            I have to agree TJ wasn't even looking for the pass during that entire 8 seconds, He had his head down driving to the basket. I think he loses his vision in crunch time and starts to dribble too much. I've been to 4 games this year, and everyone of them TJ starts to hold on to the ball and dribbles around too much with 5 min left in the 4th.

                            Even my girlfriend (who is no basketball mind) screams pass the ball TJ!

                            He is one of the reasons we fall apart late in the game all the time. Holds the ball too long, Look at the shot clock violation Granger had in the forth, TJ was dribbling around at the top of the key, stopped and granger had to run up to get the ball with 1 second left on the clock!

                            i've noticed several games Granger has been able to hit a big shot in the closing minutes of the 4th to bring us with in striking distance of a win and they go away from him. Get him the ball and let him do his thing. I think they've only gotten him the ball a few times on buzzer beaters this season. Not enough. Best player should be taking the final shot. Especially on this team. Instead we have Quis, Rasho, Jack, Ford. Everyone but Granger taking the last shot on the crunch time rotation.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

                              Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                              ...David Wesley, Nate Robinson, Earl Boykins, Derek Fisher, Nick Van Exel, John Bagley, Dana Barros and BJ Armstrong were/are all able to do to different degrees.
                              Welsey was a 6'0"'er, but I never thought of him as a guy finishing at the rim. Hell, in my mind, Wesley was the guy Mark Jackson would always light up for a triple-double and then have the audacity to tell the post-game sideline reporter, "I think Wesley's one of the best defensive PGs in the game." (). Van Exel was 6'1" and I'm being strict here for a reason. Bagley I'll give you but that's not exactly who anybody wants to compare TJ Ford to on this board (but it might be a better comparison). Barros could finish at the rim but such a high percentage of his shots were 3's that I no longer think back of him as a dribble-penetration threat and BJ Armstrong was 6'2" and sucked but had the luxury of playing alongside Jordan and Pippen.
                              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                              And life itself, rushing over me
                              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

                                Originally posted by Shade View Post
                                We looked horrendous in the first half. That's where we lost this game.

                                And we have no defense to speak of.
                                We were up w/ less than 3 to go. I don't see what the first half had to do w/ it. We had momentum and we kept fighting back on offense. We just didn't stop them on defense and Ford lost his footing a bit on the last shot.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X