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

Bulls vs. Pacers Postgame Thread

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

  • #31
    Re: Bulls vs. Pacers Postgame Thread

    Originally posted by cdash View Post
    Utah gets New York's pick (unprotected), so no rigging possible from Stern. Unless of course he decides to reward the Nets...LeBron with Wall, Lopez, and Courtney Lee?
    Ahh I think your on to something. Nets moving to Brooklyn eh?

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Bulls vs. Pacers Postgame Thread

      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
      John Wall ain't comin'.

      10th pick FT(L?)W.

      Easily one of my biggest concerns for the future of this team.

      It could be like beating Milwaukee in a meaningless end of season home game last year and losing the chance to move up from 13th to 10th in the draft.

      I'm pertrified they'll get Granger back and start to win meaningless games the last two months of the year. Go from the 4th pick to the 12th pick and still miss the playoffs by 5 games.

      Really the worst case scenario for the future.

      No, I'm not saying tanking, I'm saying play the youngsters full bore and let things fall where they may.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Bulls vs. Pacers Postgame Thread

        People still think the lottery is rigged?

        Sometimes I think certain people think there's a conspiracy behind everything. In fact, I'm sure some believe there's a conspiracy to try to make us all believe there are no conspiracies. It's all a master plan of the Freemasons, I tell you!

        -- Steve --

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Bulls vs. Pacers Postgame Thread

          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
          As I have mentioned I missed the two previous games - games that according to almost all of you proved the team had quit/Jim had lost the team. So i was anxious to see the Bulls games to see for myself. And I just didn't see it, I don't see a team that has quit on their coach or quit on their season. I do see a team that is frustrated and has no confidence right now. But more than that I see a terrible NBA team. I've watched the Pacers for about 30 years, very, very closely for the last 25 years and yes this team is terrible. The talent level is probably the worst in the league. I saw players last night want to win, but they feel they have very little chance of winning.

          Blaming the coach might be easy, blaming certain players might be easy, and trying to come up with some conspiracy theory to explain why they keep losing might be entertaining, but I see a team that doesn't have the talent to win many NBA games.

          During the summer there were a few threads asking who was the Pacers second best player. It was difficult to come up with a name and it was difficult not because it was hard to choose between several worthy candidates, no it was hard because there were no worthy candidates.

          This team is low on NBA talent and some of the talented players are too young to help a team win games.

          This!

          I'd say Danny is a 1st/2nd best player caliber at a position that is stacked in the league, not bad, but I wish he was a Point Guard or Center being as good as he is.

          Other than that, I'd argue you don't even have a starting caliber guy. You have a group of 7th, 8th best guys and then a group of guys who aren't ready, on a good team.

          And yes, you can say well played on a championship team. I don't mean that, you could play that game all day. I mean a true 2nd and 3rd best player caliber on a good team. Heck how about even a 4th or 5th best caliber guy, I'd take that.

          1st/2nd caliber
          Danny Granger

          7th 8th 9th man caliber
          Murphy
          Dunleavy
          D Jones
          Earl Watson
          Jeff Foster
          TJ Ford

          Wouldn't play on a contender/too early to tell
          AJ Price
          Luther Head
          Roy Hibbert
          B Rush
          Deiner
          Solo
          Hansbrough
          McRoberts

          I mean I truely believe that is how poor they are from a strickly talent standpoint on a contender viewpoint.

          Just shows you how far away they are at this moment.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Bulls vs. Pacers Postgame Thread

            OK so most of us after this game agree that what we have here is team that just can not compete due to the lack of overall talent. I tell you where the blame goes on....the GM. If the team regresses from medicore to terrible that means the GM is failing badly.
            JOB is a silly man

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Bulls vs. Pacers Postgame Thread

              Originally posted by SkipperZ View Post

              I just don't know what people are expecting from a bad team without their all-star player.


              A heck of a lot more than they are showing!! Think in terms of those 5 wins the type of play the players were exhibiting and the type of play being shown now. Granger didn't make those other players play like that, so this garbage others keep alluding to of Granger not playing is the NOT reason. If it was the reason, which it is not, then Bird has assembled a bunch of players with little heart and no pride in themselves or the team.

              One of the players said that the mentality of the players going into a game is one of not expecting to win. If indeed this is the case, that attitude lies at the feet of the architect of this team(Bird) and no one else. What I expect is players giving their all every second they are on the court, and nothing less... win or lose. They are being paid quit well for giving their best. If they can't give their best, then get out in the REAL world and make a living.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Bulls vs. Pacers Postgame Thread

                Speed - I agree with your list. Dunleavy of two years ago, could probably be a 3 or a 4. Although I would love to see him on a really, really good tesam and just see how effective he could be. He'd be a nice fit in the Lakers system. I think there is a chance that Dunleavy next season could get back to what he was two years ago.

                One big reason why JOB is changing the starting lineup so often is the roster right now has no starting caliber players.

                Having said all this, there is no reason for a lack of effort

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Bulls vs. Pacers Postgame Thread

                  Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                  A heck of a lot more than they are showing!! Think in terms of those 5 wins the type of play the players were exhibiting and the type of play being shown now. Granger didn't make those other players play like that, so this garbage others keep alluding to of Granger not playing is the NOT reason. If it was the reason, which it is not, then Bird has assembled a bunch of players with little heart and no pride in themselves or the team.

                  One of the players said that the mentality of the players going into a game is one of not expecting to win. If indeed this is the case, that attitude lies at the feet of the architect of this team(Bird) and no one else. What I expect is players giving their all every second they are on the court, and nothing less... win or lose. They are being paid quit well for giving their best. If they can't give their best, then get out in the REAL world and make a living.
                  The results don't always match the effort.

                  Also I think you're seriously understating how much an All Star has an effect on the players around him. If you've ever played basketball somewhere and 1 guy is easily the best player on the team ... then you should be well aware of how quickly someone will leave a guy they aren't afraid of to go help on that 1 really good player.

                  Same thing here. When Granger is on the floor everyone on the other team has to be aware of where he is which leads to defensive mistakes and openings for other players. Without that, nobody cares where anyone on our team is, quite frankly.

                  -- Steve --

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Bulls vs. Pacers Postgame Thread

                    Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                    A heck of a lot more than they are showing!! Think in terms of those 5 wins the type of play the players were exhibiting and the type of play being shown now. Granger didn't make those other players play like that, so this garbage others keep alluding to of Granger not playing is the NOT reason. If it was the reason, which it is not, then Bird has assembled a bunch of players with little heart and no pride in themselves or the team.

                    One of the players said that the mentality of the players going into a game is one of not expecting to win. If indeed this is the case, that attitude lies at the feet of the architect of this team(Bird) and no one else. What I expect is players giving their all every second they are on the court, and nothing less... win or lose. They are being paid quit well for giving their best. If they can't give their best, then get out in the REAL world and make a living.
                    That 5 game streak is starting to look a lot more like an anomaly. I think back to something Chuck Barkley said a couple years back. "That early in the season, the bad teams don't know they're bad yet." But I'd be all in favor of going back to that lineup just to see, if for nothing else, it's the last time something seemed to work.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Bulls vs. Pacers Postgame Thread

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      The talent level is probably the worst in the league. I saw players last night want to win, but they feel they have very little chance of winning.
                      I disagree on the talent. You take any player other than Granger and Hansbrough off this team and put them in say the Laker's or Celtics rotation and they would suddenly improve greatly.

                      What the Pacers need more then anything is a closer. Meaning someone that can score in the last five minutes of a game.

                      Granger hit more winning shots then anyone else last year but he can't help when he's on the bench, and he also can't do it by himself. We need another player or two like Danny. The rest of the players are talented enough. We just need a couple stars.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Bulls vs. Pacers Postgame Thread

                        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                        John Wall ain't comin'.

                        10th pick FT(L?)W.
                        Agreed. Probably closer to a Cole Aldrich or Xavier Henry both of Kansas. And yeah, I know, not so much luck with Kansas players so far.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Bulls vs. Pacers Postgame Thread

                          Originally posted by Speed View Post
                          I'm pertrified they'll get Granger back........
                          Pertrified? Shucks, I ain't never seen nobody be pertrified afore. I'll have to keep my eyes glued to my winders to sees if'n I can spot one.

                          Just yanking you chain a bit Speed. I'll bet you heard Bird say it once, and it just stuck.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Bulls vs. Pacers Postgame Thread

                            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                            As I have mentioned I missed the two previous games - games that according to almost all of you proved the team had quit/Jim had lost the team. So i was anxious to see the Bulls games to see for myself. And I just didn't see it, I don't see a team that has quit on their coach or quit on their season. I do see a team that is frustrated and has no confidence right now. But more than that I see a terrible NBA team. I've watched the Pacers for about 30 years, very, very closely for the last 25 years and yes this team is terrible. The talent level is probably the worst in the league. I saw players last night want to win, but they feel they have very little chance of winning.

                            Blaming the coach might be easy, blaming certain players might be easy, and trying to come up with some conspiracy theory to explain why they keep losing might be entertaining, but I see a team that doesn't have the talent to win many NBA games.

                            During the summer there were a few threads asking who was the Pacers second best player. It was difficult to come up with a name and it was difficult not because it was hard to choose between several worthy candidates, no it was hard because there were no worthy candidates.

                            This team is low on NBA talent and some of the talented players are too young to help a team win games.
                            U.B. in all fairness to everyone else though last nights game was nothing like the previous two games. As I said at the end of my odd thoughts on the game I at least walked away feeling like we didn't lie down for them. The Atlanta game was just a beating pure and simple; the Miami game was nothing short of an embarrassment because that one was simply lack of effort or pride.


                            Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Bulls vs. Pacers Postgame Thread

                              Originally posted by Peck View Post
                              U.B. in all fairness to everyone else though last nights game was nothing like the previous two games. As I said at the end of my odd thoughts on the game I at least walked away feeling like we didn't lie down for them. The Atlanta game was just a beating pure and simple; the Miami game was nothing short of an embarrassment because that one was simply lack of effort or pride.
                              It was a completely different scenario.

                              Is it coincidence that the team played with more energy and athleticism, when its most energetic, and most athletic player got meaningful minutes? Doubtful.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Bulls vs. Pacers Postgame Thread

                                Originally posted by WetBob View Post
                                It was a completely different scenario.

                                Is it coincidence that the team played with more energy and athleticism, when its most energetic, and most athletic player got meaningful minutes? Doubtful.
                                I think Solomon has at least as much athleticism and Tyler has at least as much energy.

                                He does seem to have better hands than Solomon, though.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X