Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Pacers vs. Raptors Postgame

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

  • #31
    Re: Pacers vs. Raptors Postgame

    Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
    It's rough to be a Pacer fan right now. It's not the losing that's getting to me, it's the fact that we have no direction whatsoever.

    If there's anything worse then being a bad team, it's not realizing you're a bad team.

    Still having playoffs aspirations are fine if you're team is good or playing well. The Pacers haven't been either this season.

    We're not letting our young players go through growing pains, and we're not seeing what we have with our end of the bench guys. We're playing everyone out of position, to the point where we can't even get the players that will be around long term chemistry at the rightful positions.

    I understand testing Granger at PF in certain situations, but he's not a d*** POWER FORWARD! If Granger isn't a PF how the **** in 6'6 Dahntay Jones a power forward?!! You've got to be kidding me.

    Murphy can guard the power forwards in this league, by all means let him guard the bigger and more powerful centers.

    Earl Watson is a shooting guard at times? Nothing like a shooting guard that can't ****ing SHOOT!

    Oh I'm sorry, our 2nd round 6'0 backup PG is the one playing SG.. my mistake douche O'Brien!

    All I want is some sign of hope. Some sense of direction that shows light on the horizon. Most 3 year plans build towards that 3rd and final year, not just magically comes together the at the deadline.

    I really hope Bird has a big plan up his sleeve that I'm unaware of, b/c I simply don't understand the plan

    Personally, I hoping the big plan up Bird's sleeve is he's planning on not being here next season. We can all sit and type our complaints about O'Brien and his smallball game, but Bird is his enabler that allows it to happen. Bird is the one that picked up Jimmy's team option for next year w/o even considering to wait to see how the season would go. That major blunder of Bird is costing this team now in wins, and the future in salary after he fires O'Brien. I'm not sure who is more stubborn O'Brien or Bird in not admitting their mistakes and changing what needs to be changed for the " good of the Pacers."

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Pacers vs. Raptors Postgame

      Originally posted by cdash View Post
      Conspiracy theory: It has been relayed to Obie from TPTB that we are in tank mode. The challenge? Make it seem as if we aren't tanking. You take the fall with the media, explain to them your asinine moves and curious substitution patterns, and we will reward you by letting you come back to coach us next season.

      Why so he can ruin the what's left of this team and a new draft pick too? I'm hoping there is going to be a big change in the FO along with the coach.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Pacers vs. Raptors Postgame

        Originally posted by Sookie View Post
        Price, Jones, Rush, Granger, Hibbert...A lineup we haven't seen. A lineup of our most talented point guard, best PF, best Center, and best wings. A lineup that has a very good mix of offense and defense. Where the offense spreads the floor with Granger, Price and Rush, can drive with Price and Jones, and has a guy in the Center with Hibbert. A lineup that defensively, very good at the wings, decent at the PG and PF..and therefore can support the center. We haven't seen this lineup because...our freaking coach vaules the 3pt shot too freaking much.

        .
        I'll give you that I'd like to see that lineup, but I'm not so sure I'd call that decent at PG by NBA standards. I don't think this lineup would translate into more winning. I do think we might as well work with Price given everthing else we've got.

        DG at PF is good in some situation, bad in others. When it's bad, and given his play of late in either case, that may not be decent either.

        I dislike the coaching as much as the next guy, but this collection of talent is awful. If you had Jack on this team, then you could legitimately talk playoff contention. As it is, this is about a 30 win(ish) team.

        So if we can get more of certain players, I'm all for it. Whether any combo we can put out there now would be decent, I highly doubt.
        I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

        -Emiliano Zapata

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Pacers vs. Raptors Postgame

          Originally posted by cdash View Post
          Conspiracy theory: It has been relayed to Obie from TPTB that we are in tank mode. The challenge? Make it seem as if we aren't tanking. You take the fall with the media, explain to them your asinine moves and curious substitution patterns, and we will reward you by letting you come back to coach us next season.
          Im now totally convinced that is almost the plan. Except the part where he coaches next season. He got extended in exchange for tanking this season and being made the scapegoat. Thats why he will finish the season. And be fired the day following. Nothing like a top 5 draft pick and firing the coach to give people a little hope.
          The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Pacers vs. Raptors Postgame

            I'm holding on to hope that we're playing these lineups up until the trade deadline for show casing purposes.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Pacers vs. Raptors Postgame

              Originally posted by geetee View Post
              I'm holding on to hope that we're playing these lineups up until the trade deadline for show casing purposes.
              That's a good one. That should get us through the next three weeks. Thanks.
              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Pacers vs. Raptors Postgame

                Originally posted by cdash View Post
                Conspiracy theory: It has been relayed to Obie from TPTB that we are in tank mode. The challenge? Make it seem as if we aren't tanking. You take the fall with the media, explain to them your asinine moves and curious substitution patterns, and we will reward you by letting you come back to coach us next season.
                I like this theory but with one tweak. FO'B actually has full knowledge that he will be fired this offseason. He was given the extension as a gift for tanking and will use that money as a severance package for transitioning to whatever other job he can get, like back into the broadcast booth, or possibly as a sales associate trainer for JD Byrider.

                A great gig if you can get it. Travel, see the country, get to watch professional basketball in the best seats in the house in every single NBA arena in the country (often with opposing players playing at career best levels) for 82 games, while just yelling "Push! Push! Push!" or "Attack! Attack! Attack!" and complaining to the officials like any fan would, just with a better seat.

                For practices, make the guys play at full speed to tire them out to reduce effectiveness for games early in the season until the schedule gets heavy, with a primary focus on defense, and then run them as hard as possible and have them take as many shots as possible before the flow of the offense gets set up so that no rhythm or continuity is established. Then, complain about the heavy schedule and how your players are exhausted.

                Sometimes shots will fall early in the season and you'll win some games, and also during certain other stretches during the season, but with decreasing frequency as the season progresses. Rely on the players performance based incentives in their contracts to make them individually selfish in their play while motivating them to keep putting up shots while having only one player, Murphy, care about getting rebounds.

                Have the front office at turns chastise the players for not playing for the coach, threatening them with being traded while supporting the coach, and then recognize that we may be shooting a few more threes than we should be and that our performance is not acceptable. Have your best players play in lethargic ways that are completely uncharacteristic for them after they come back from injury or illness and perform at a high level for a few games just after having praised them in the media for doing so, especially calling one of those a basketball genius which was nearly immediately followed by turnover plagued brick fests that he had no explanation for whatsoever. Also, have a lingering illness that is impossible to disprove afflict the one young player that it appeared you were trying to develop after having him finally get to play after aggravating an injury he had sustained back in college. And, have one of the most popular long term players currently with the franchise basically end his season due to back injuries while not even keeping the fanbase informed about his condition. Why else would there have been any rumors regarding potential trades for him unless he is actually healthy after all?

                Also, exile the single untradeable player who epitomizes your pg approach while simultaneously praising him in the media to increase his potential "trade value" so that your attack becomes even more one dimensional, while claiming to still be driving the ball. Also, bench other players randomly in a nonsensical fashion after they perform well enough to help the team perform better during games, and discourage further positive development in both young players as well as vets like Dahntay by minimizing their impact and contributions with benching and reduction in playing time after they show signs of leadership qualities.

                No, all of this combined stretches the bounds of credibility for even the most paranoid of conspiracy theorists I would suspect. It would require too much buy-in from too many people on a consistent long term basis.

                Sure would be nice if that is the case, though, because our future would be very bright indeed if we could pull all of that off without getting caught, and my hat would be off to the entire organization for pulling one of the biggest franchise "turnarounds" in NBA history upon its completion.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Pacers vs. Raptors Postgame

                  I don't believe the tanking conspiracies.

                  JOB wants to win. JOB has one angle for defeating opponents: his uptempo style that relies on the three. If he switches to a traditional philosophy, he will feel like he has no advantage on the opposing coaches.

                  Everything is falling in on him. Like BBall keeps saying, it's bad basketball.
                  "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Pacers vs. Raptors Postgame

                    Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
                    I'll give you that I'd like to see that lineup, but I'm not so sure I'd call that decent at PG by NBA standards. I don't think this lineup would translate into more winning. I do think we might as well work with Price given everthing else we've got.

                    DG at PF is good in some situation, bad in others. When it's bad, and given his play of late in either case, that may not be decent either.

                    I dislike the coaching as much as the next guy, but this collection of talent is awful. If you had Jack on this team, then you could legitimately talk playoff contention. As it is, this is about a 30 win(ish) team.

                    So if we can get more of certain players, I'm all for it. Whether any combo we can put out there now would be decent, I highly doubt.
                    We can argue whether AJ is decent at PG, I'm sure. With many people coming up with different conclusions.

                    What I don't think is that much of a debate, is that he's our best option at PG.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Pacers vs. Raptors Postgame

                      Offensively.

                      He can be good defensively but has some things to learn. Nash schooled him and Calderon burned him a couple times last night.
                      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Pacers vs. Raptors Postgame

                        Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                        I don't believe the tanking conspiracies.
                        I don't either... This is not how you 'tank'.

                        You tank by trading away players that aren't part of the future but are only win now players. You tank by playing youth, developing and evaluating them, living thru their mistakes (to give them a consistent place in the rotation). If you do see one needing the bench for motivation, or not deserving of his minutes after trying everything from the drill sergeant routine to milk and cookies, then you replace him with more youth (or trade him for the sake of trading)... not replace him with a vet who has no place in the future plans. (You can play vets, but you don't maximize their minutes).

                        You sit injured players and milk it while they are injured until they are fully healed and conditioned (especially vets)... not allow them back on the court at the earliest possible moment. (While it could've been argued that's what we did with Foster, today's news tosses that theory in the dumpster... So look at Granger and Dunleavy instead).

                        You don't extend a coach you know you are going to fire. You don't do it if you're a cash strapped team and you don't do it if you are a well run organization who handles their finances wisely and are flush with cash. You just don't do it.

                        The only possible conspiracy theory I would even consider is that the season blew up so badly against the plans that Bird/Morway/Simon had that they've decided to ride it out with O'Brien because they fear a coaching change now might actually improve the W-L record and they now believe O'Brien's failure gives them the best hope at maximum losses this season.

                        I'd think $$$ reasons would be the more likely answer.
                        Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                        ------

                        "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                        -John Wooden

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X