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 lose at Toronto

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

  • #46
    Re: Postgame thread - Pacers lose at Toronto

    Originally posted by imawhat View Post
    As much as I don't want them to play, we need Ford and Murphy to play well so their trade value isn't killed.
    This is the part of the NBA that makes me lose my childlike enthusiasm. Is this really what's going on? If so, I can see why the other players are losing their enthusiasm.
    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Postgame thread - Pacers lose at Toronto

      Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
      Firing the coach can really inspire a team. Just sayin.
      Yes, but it rarely leads to a successful season.

      If Bird were to fire O'Brien, he absolutely must take over the team himself. I don't think he wants to do that.

      I think I'd be happier if I never saw TJ and Troy play in a Pacers uniform again.

      It's really hard to appreciate the things that Troy can do when him being in the game is stealing minutes from players I'd rather watch play: Hansbrough, D. Jones, Rush, Head, S. Jones, Foster, Hibbert, etc.

      Earl Watson did some fantastic passing early in the game. They were the kind of passes that actually create shots for people. They weren't drive and kicks that succeed by getting the defense out of position. Just very solid passes that take advantage of poor defensive position and lead to scores. Passes we haven't seen the likes of from a PG since good Tinsley was around.

      There are certain times when I'm incredibly thankful for back to back games. This is one of them.
      "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

      - Salman Rushdie

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Postgame thread - Pacers lose at Toronto

        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
        TJ Ford did something I saw at a home game earlier in the year: Passed out of a blatantly wide open layup attempt. Drove me frickin' nuts. This time he not only didn't lay it in, but passed it to a Pacer with two Raptors in between him and the basket. Horrible.
        That was the play that caused me to use language not in keeping with the NBA Fan Code of Conduct. Luckily I was home and my wife wasn't listening.
        BillS

        A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
        Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Postgame thread - Pacers lose at Toronto

          Originally posted by cdash View Post
          I think the real question here is this: Why the hell does duke dynamite have a Murphy jersey framed?
          Because he's out of closet space.
          BillS

          A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
          Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Postgame thread - Pacers lose at Toronto

            What happened to all the TJ Ford fans? This place was much happier and much more optimistic when I was the only one who didn't like him.

            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


            • #51
              Re: Postgame thread - Pacers lose at Toronto

              Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
              What happened to all the TJ Ford fans? This place was much happier and much more optimistic when I was the only one who didn't like him.

              My problem with him right now is his attitude, leadership, effort, body language

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Postgame thread - Pacers lose at Toronto

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                My problem with him right now is his attitude, leadership, effort, body language
                I would say that . . .

                - driving into a pack of defenders heedlessly and throwing the ball away

                - taking quick shots without involving your teammates

                - playing with less intensity on the defensive side than offensive side


                . . . are things he's done since he got here. And they all fall under "attitude, leadership, and effort."

                The only difference now is you can add body language. In other words, he doesn't disguise his lack of good "attitude, leadership, and effort" as well as he used to.
                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Postgame thread - Pacers lose at Toronto

                  Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                  Well, we are talking about Jamaal Tinsley and TJ Ford here. There's other reasons to want to throw Jim under the bus, but I don't think this is one of them.

                  I'm stating that his last 2 season starting PG's and him have had problems. Maybe just maybe there is something to it, then maybe not. He is the common denominator, so you have to look at it. It doesn't necessarily mean that's problem, but you can't ignore looking at it either.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Postgame thread - Pacers lose at Toronto

                    Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                    I'm stating that his last 2 season starting PG's and him have had problems. Maybe just maybe there is something to it, then maybe not. He is the common denominator, so you have to look at it. It doesn't necessarily mean that's problem, but you can't ignore looking at it either.
                    Jack didn't have any problems

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Postgame thread - Pacers lose at Toronto

                      1) Tyler played well. I don't know if he can actually count on his low release point "stretch" hook thing he's got, but he did drop it a couple of times on bigger defenders and that's a huge positive. He must have some shot(s) like that to impact games. I was pleased to see him out there.

                      I'm ready to have Tyler get Troy's minutes in fact. Yes, me the hater would at least like to investigate the Tyler PF situation a bit more. Of course that's my motivation behind McBob support as well.

                      Keep in mind that I root for him to make it, I just have doubted that he will. I'm not sold after just a few blips in losing efforts, but if there is even a blip its worth looking into.

                      2) Ford - what more needs to be said. Personally I thought this was one of his better nights, despite the endless lane drive, off-balance, one-footed, fadeaway jumpers. I mean that's "his shot".

                      3) Dahntay - the best player on the team right now, despite Danny's offense and highlight play defense. Jones closes everyone out off the dribble, he never gives guys good space to work with, he never lingers away from plays. If I were Bird I'd get to Jones now and give him some strong assurance that he's going to remain a priority guy no matter how this year goes and work on keeping him in his energetic, get-after-it mindset.

                      I'm ready to see Jones get 40 mpg. I feel 10 times more comfortable when he's out there than when he's not.

                      4) Danny - His 3 ball is staggering at times, no doubt. You can't argue with some of his make rates. But good lord is he becoming a chucker. He makes Person look like a point guard. 13 3PA and you had things like 3 straight trips where he just pulled up and bombed away with no offense at all. Sure he made the first 2, but it can demoralize a team when one guy just dominates the FGAs so mercilessly.

                      We love him and he has become a great scorer, but perhaps his next progression needs to be getting his teammates going too. His body language says he's taking things TOO personally. I like accountability, but he can't get in that frustrated, shoot it every time mode like he did last night.

                      5) Watson - look, I stand by my questions on his defense. I saw him get blown by at one point when he failed to close up his spacing. Maybe he was tired, but it was a weak effort.

                      HOWEVER, the dude is exactly what I want from a PG. His hip-twist fake, two handed bounce pass to Hibby in the post for a dunk was brilliant. Is it too much to ask for a PG to look for those kinds of plays. You don't need Tinsley handles or one-handed passing strength if you are willing to work smartly to improve floor position (see Head's lack of adjustment when he threw a Hibby feed out the baseline).

                      Watson is game on defense, comes up with some quality plays, picks guys up fairly well out top most of the time, and has shown a solid balance of getting others involved but keeping teams honest with his own shot.


                      6) Bench in general - I think a lot of these young guys are going to feed off how things are going with the core players (Granger, Ford, Troy, Jeff) and the coach. I don't read too much into the ups and downs of Roy, Rush, etc because I think a lot of it is coming down from the top.

                      I think it's wasted effort to worry too much about their game to game output, other than how all this impacts their long term development.
                      Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 11-25-2009, 11:35 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Postgame thread - Pacers lose at Toronto

                        Originally posted by pwee31 View Post


                        I just hope the team can pull it together before Danny explodes, b/c each game you can just see the losses getting to him and the frustration mounting.

                        You can see it more and more in the losses. I see a different Granger personality in the lossing. I hope he can keep his emotions under control, and doesn't let them get the best of him.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Postgame thread - Pacers lose at Toronto

                          What happened to all the TJ Ford fans? This place was much happier and much more optimistic when I was the only one who didn't like him.
                          I was never a fan, I was personally indifferent to the trade other than it productively breaking JO's contract into smaller bites. However it didn't take long for me to agree with your assessment of his game.

                          But there were a lot of people that suggested he was a big solution to our problems.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Postgame thread - Pacers lose at Toronto

                            Originally posted by imawhat View Post


                            As much as I don't want them to play, we need Ford and Murphy to play well so their trade value isn't killed.

                            Unfortunately, that is true. I wish it wasn't, but it is. As a fan it's hard to do, but it seems to be a necessary evil to accomplish the end result. The end result being both are traded.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Postgame thread - Pacers lose at Toronto

                              BTW, Troy/Ford and PnR defense.

                              VERY FIRST PLAY - Troy presses tightly into his man, which I assume is to let Ford go under. Ford follows over the top which is just stupid at that point, except if you want the best seat in the house to view the layup.

                              Should Troy have hedged it? Was TJ supposed to go under? Should Troy have played off so TJ could come through?

                              All I know is it looked like Troy was HELPING to set the pick rather than defending anything. And this kind of confused, whats-the-goal strategy continued for both of them most of the night. I rarely was able to see what they were trying to accomplish.

                              Look, when Bargs catches that one pass and does a fade-turn jumper over Roy from 15 feet out, you chalk it up to their talent. But just blatantly letting the ball drive to the rim?


                              BTW, I also saw Hedo run Rush off with some picks, come to the top for the catch and drive and go right down the lane for the layup. My issue when I backed up the Tivo was watching Troy literally move out of the way to go defend "his man" at the FT line.

                              Yes, always give up a clear path to make sure they don't kick the pass back outside to your guy. Good lord. Just dumb, basic strategy. No matter what the play is you ALWAYS choose to deny a clear path. Defense doesn't even start until you've taken that step and forced ball movement.


                              I had been complimentary of some of Troy's awareness, but this game didn't show any of that. It was a train wreck for both he and Ford in terms of CHOICES, not talent.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Postgame thread - Pacers lose at Toronto

                                Seth, I think both players did wrong. generally speaking the pacers want the big guy to hedge the ball handler - force him to take an extra dribble, or level him off briefly (allowing that split second so the guard can get back into position) and then get back to your man, while the guard fights through the pick in an effort to stay as close to the ball handler as possible. (Fighting through the pick - I mean trying to squeeze between the pick and the ball handler - Watson is excellent at this. Ford is not.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X