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

02/20/2010 Game Thread #55 Pacers at Rockets

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

  • Re: 02/20/2010 Game Thread #55 Pacers at Rockets

    Originally posted by IUfan4life View Post
    I believe former Jets coach Herm Edwards said it best, "Hello, you play to win the game!"

    it is called competition. Maybe some of you never played sports or did anything competitive as a child, but you play to win the game.

    for everyone advocating us to lose, go root for the clippers. the Pacers don't need u as fans
    Yeah, I created Pacers Digest and have stuck around through the last decade only to now decide I'm not a fan. Very logical. Go someplace else with this "true fan" nonsense. It's not welcome here.

    Comment


    • Re: 02/20/2010 Game Thread #55 Pacers at Rockets

      Originally posted by IUfan4life View Post
      Sure I went overboard there but advocating tanking is just beyond me. I know what you are saying and I could not disagree more. Nothing is guaranteed in the draft. remember Jonathen Bender, shawne williams. or remember the bulls, and blazers getting the top picks. maybe if the great john wall is a bust, we wont all advocate the route of tanking in the future
      This is a legit concern... Larry picking the wrong guy with our good draft pick this season is something I'm greatly afraid of.

      I'm just so ready to be a good team again so we can stop having these arguments...

      Comment


      • Re: 02/20/2010 Game Thread #55 Pacers at Rockets

        Originally posted by IUfan4life View Post
        Sure I went overboard there but advocating tanking is just beyond me. I know what you are saying and I could not disagree more. Nothing is guaranteed in the draft. remember Jonathen Bender, shawne williams. or remember the bulls, and blazers getting the top picks. maybe if the great john wall is a bust, we wont all advocate the route of tanking in the future
        That's why they call playing the lottery "gambling". Sure, our chances are greater but that's all it is, a chance. An opportunity.

        Regardless of the outcome of the season, we have a lot of pieces we could use to obtain a higher draft pick, or maybe even another one.

        Just advocating losses makes me vomit.

        Comment


        • Re: 02/20/2010 Game Thread #55 Pacers at Rockets

          Originally posted by Hicks View Post
          Yeah, I created Pacers Digest and have stuck around through the last decade only to now decide I'm not a fan. Very logical. Go someplace else with this "true fan" nonsense. It's not welcome here.
          Well, he does have a point. (I don't agree with arguing about "true fan" and what-not) However I've seen a lot of fans don't wish a team would lose.

          Comment


          • Re: 02/20/2010 Game Thread #55 Pacers at Rockets

            Originally posted by IUfan4life View Post
            Sure I went overboard there but advocating tanking is just beyond me. I know what you are saying and I could not disagree more. Nothing is guaranteed in the draft. remember Jonathen Bender, shawne williams. or remember the bulls, and blazers getting the top picks. maybe if the great john wall is a bust, we wont all advocate the route of tanking in the future
            It's not like we got to this position on day 1 of the season. As long as the playoffs are realistically possible, by all means win every game you can.

            This is not our current situation.

            Last year, I was not part of the "tank brigade", I rooted for wins right down to the MIL win that dropped us three spots in the draft because that team fought for the playoffs until very late in the year, and by the point I was fully supportive of ending on a prideful, high note.

            This year has been a disgrace and far worse than last year, and the playoffs haven't been part of the picture for a long time now. The writing has been on the wall, and we should at least make some lemonade out of this lemon of a season.

            I promise you we will not make the playoffs. It's just not happening. Winning the rest of this year only hurts us because it lowers the likelihood of high talent coming here. There's never any certainty with a draft pick, but there's a damn better chance with a top 4 pick than picking 10th.

            Again, if we had something to gain by winning, I would be all for it, but we don't. They can keep trying, that's fine, and it's for the best. But I'm going to hope they come up short for reasons already given.

            Comment


            • Re: 02/20/2010 Game Thread #55 Pacers at Rockets

              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
              This year has been a disgrace and far worse than last year, and the playoffs haven't been part of the picture for a long time now. The writing has been on the wall, and we should at least make some lemonade out of this lemon of a season.

              I promise you we will not make the playoffs. It's just not happening. Winning the rest of this year only hurts us because it lowers the likelihood of high talent coming here. There's never any certainty with a draft pick, but there's a damn better chance with a top 4 pick than picking 10th.
              I wouldn't go as far as call this season a disgrace. It's been bad, yes, but not disgraceful.

              I'm not too sold on any of the high-draft picks being that ever-so fortune changer. Sure they're good, but one top 5 player isn't going to be the guy to get us to the promised land.

              Get our veterans (i.e. Ford, Murphy and Dunleavy) good PT, hopefully they'll remain at least consistent, then trade them. If you want picks, get more picks. I need to see better veteran players on this team going forward.

              If you guys hate this year then the next is going to be a lot worse if you want young players.

              Comment


              • Re: 02/20/2010 Game Thread #55 Pacers at Rockets

                Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
                Well, he does have a point. (I don't agree with arguing about "true fan" and what-not) However I've seen a lot of fans don't wish a team would lose.
                What the hell does this even mean?


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

                Comment


                • Re: 02/20/2010 Game Thread #55 Pacers at Rockets

                  Originally posted by Peck View Post
                  What the hell does this even mean?
                  I agree that you shouldn't advocate losing. Duh.

                  Comment


                  • Re: 02/20/2010 Game Thread #55 Pacers at Rockets

                    However I've seen a lot of fans don't wish a team would lose.
                    I'm still trying to decipher this statement. You say it means you agree fans don't advocate losing, right?

                    How exactly does that statement go hand in hand with

                    I don't agree with arguing about "true fan" and what-not


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

                    Comment


                    • Re: 02/20/2010 Game Thread #55 Pacers at Rockets

                      I'm not too sold on any of the high-draft picks being that ever-so fortune changer. Sure they're good, but one top 5 player isn't going to be the guy to get us to the promised land.
                      A top 5 pick may not "get us to the promised land" but you have to start somewhere. If you have a better idea on how to improve the talent level on this team within the next 6 months, I'd like to hear it.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 02/20/2010 Game Thread #55 Pacers at Rockets

                        Bottom line: The schedule will finish us off. I just don't see the outcome of last season playing itself out due to the schedule. We are all kidding ourselves thinking that this franchise, coach or the players are going to go out of their way to lose here on out. I think we have a few more surprise wins coming down the road as well as nights where we will see an inferior opponent smack us in the mouth. However at the end of the day, I don't see more then 10 wins happening. It's not worth getting upset over.

                        If a top pick is going to be had, it's going to be by us being naturally bad.
                        ...Still "flying casual"
                        @roaminggnome74

                        Comment


                        • Re: 02/20/2010 Game Thread #55 Pacers at Rockets

                          Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                          Selfish is rooting for wins right now for the instant gratification. Wins that mean absolutely nothing other than to damn us to more mediocrity should it become a habit these next 7 weeks.
                          I know we've had numerous threads about this. I'm not knocking your opinion but I have my own: I think you should strive to win every game with all your effort. It's just a standard, a positive truth of the universe. It's what John Wooden would do.

                          Regarding last night's game, I certainly enjoyed watching TJ score well and I'm glad Solo had a good game. However, I am against playing TJ down the stretch and am against benching Roy down the stretch.

                          Certainly, there will be games where JOB's formula last night gains a win (a blind pig finds an acorn; a stopped clock is right twice a day, yada, yada). But, in the longer view, playing Earl or AJ down the stretch is better for winning (they actually look to pass a lot), and Roy's inside presence is the best formula for our team winning.
                          "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                          Comment


                          • Re: 02/20/2010 Game Thread #55 Pacers at Rockets

                            Originally posted by IUfan4life View Post
                            I believe former Jets coach Herm Edwards said it best, "Hello, you play to win the game!"

                            it is called competition. Maybe some of you never played sports or did anything competitive as a child, but you play to win the game.

                            for everyone advocating us to lose, go root for the clippers. the Pacers don't need u as fans
                            You play to win the game and the playoffs and the championship. You don't just stop at winning the game. I don't know how you go far in the playoffs without 2 or 3 big time players and you don't get them picking 14-17. We've tried that and so far it isn't working.

                            Comment


                            • Re: 02/20/2010 Game Thread #55 Pacers at Rockets

                              Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                              I know we've had numerous threads about this. I'm not knocking your opinion but I have my own: I think you should strive to win every game with all your effort. It's just a standard, a positive truth of the universe. It's what John Wooden would do.
                              In theory, that's great. The problem being: That's simply not the reality of today's NBA. I don't really feel bad about wanting us to lose. The system is set in place for teams like us to lose to improve our franchise. I hope the NBA does something to fix this, because it's really sad when fans of a team are upset by a win. I'm not entirely sure how you fix the lottery, but something needs to change. Actually, I'm happy that the CBA is almost up, the NBA needs to make some serious changes. I hate this buyout trend, I hate that one bad contract can handcuff your franchise for six years, I hate that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, and I hate that players that do bonehead things (here's looking at you Artest, Arenas, Tinsley, Shawne) can't have their contracts voided. It's going to be awful for us as fans during the lockout, but good will come out of it.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 02/20/2010 Game Thread #55 Pacers at Rockets

                                Originally posted by cdash View Post
                                In theory, that's great. The problem being: That's simply not the reality of today's NBA. I don't really feel bad about wanting us to lose. The system is set in place for teams like us to lose to improve our franchise. I hope the NBA does something to fix this, because it's really sad when fans of a team are upset by a win. I'm not entirely sure how you fix the lottery, but something needs to change. Actually, I'm happy that the CBA is almost up, the NBA needs to make some serious changes. I hate this buyout trend, I hate that one bad contract can handcuff your franchise for six years, I hate that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, and I hate that players that do bonehead things (here's looking at you Artest, Arenas, Tinsley, Shawne) can't have their contracts voided. It's going to be awful for us as fans during the lockout, but good will come out of it.
                                I agree with this. In the NBA there is more incentive to be always either really really good, or completely god-awful. It is possibly harder hop into the upper NBA echelon from a consistently .500 team than it is to go from god-awful to great. A good coach can make a team with .500-type talent win 50 games every now and then, but they'll never compete for a championship. That's pretty horrible for the league, and it will only mean more and more fans will lose interest in the NBA.

                                I'm not sure how it would work, but there do need to be more rewards for .500 teams, more possibilities to move up, to gain talent. Maybe this means tinkering with the guaranteed status of contracts, or tweaking the free agency rules, or - I don't know.

                                I mean, look at our team right now. Even if we had the greatest management in the world, this 'three-year wait-and-see' thing would still exist. We have had (or will have had) no opportunity for significant improvement for three years. Is there any team in the NFL that would feel this way?

                                That said, you can't let a flaw in the system convince you to root for your team to lose. Winning is the object - rooting to lose is bad juju.
                                You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X