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

2010-2011 NBA Random Thoughts Thread part VII: Advent Children

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

  • Re: 2010-2011 NBA Random Thoughts Thread part VII: Advent Children

    Things we learned tonight- If Dwayne Wade ever feels taking the ball and deciding to win the game? There isn't **** anyone on the planet can do it about it.

    On one play tonight, Wade scored, blocked a shot on the other end, grabbed the ball and went coast to coast for another score. His final line? 39 points, 11 rebounds, 8 assists, 3 steals, and 5 blocked shots.

    I don't care what anyone says. I'd rather play any other team than the Heat. Stupid decision/douche baggery aside, Wade is an assassin.
    Last edited by mattie; 03-26-2011, 12:33 AM.

    Comment


    • Re: 2010-2011 NBA Random Thoughts Thread part VII: Advent Children

      Here's what the Heat are slowly figuring out and they will eventually figure out come playoff time: Bosh and LeBron are their "first 45 minutes" guys. They are uncomfortable in crunch time and, in the past, this has been a problem. Now? Not so much. They'll just defer to Wade. Wade can defer to them for the first three quarters or so and then take over at the end. That's the solution to their alpha dog problems. They're the second-best team in the East right now and the Bulls are just as new to this as they are. Interesting playoffs ahead.

      Comment


      • Re: 2010-2011 NBA Random Thoughts Thread part VII: Advent Children

        Originally posted by rexnom View Post
        Here's what the Heat are slowly figuring out and they will eventually figure out come playoff time: Bosh and LeBron are their "first 45 minutes" guys. They are uncomfortable in crunch time and, in the past, this has been a problem. Now? Not so much. They'll just defer to Wade. Wade can defer to them for the first three quarters or so and then take over at the end. That's the solution to their alpha dog problems. They're the second-best team in the East right now and the Bulls are just as new to this as they are. Interesting playoffs ahead.
        If this is truly how it pans out for the rest of there career. LBJ not being clutch and defering to Wade will kill his legacy. Along with how he left the Cavs.

        Comment


        • Re: 2010-2011 NBA Random Thoughts Thread part VII: Advent Children

          The concept of "clutch" is so haphazardly defined and applied in the NBA that it's essentially useless.

          Comment


          • Re: 2010-2011 NBA Random Thoughts Thread part VII: Advent Children

            Jared Sullinger says he isnt coming out.

            Comment


            • Re: 2010-2011 NBA Random Thoughts Thread part VII: Advent Children

              Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
              If this is truly how it pans out for the rest of there career. LBJ not being clutch and defering to Wade will kill his legacy. Along with how he left the Cavs.
              I just don't think LeBron cares about that. No, really. I think he wants to win. Miami is slowly figuring out that the best way to do that is to give the ball to Wade in the last minute. LeBron is still a go-to-guy but he doesn't have Wade's killer instinct. Critiquing LeBron for this is like critiquing Shaq during those early-2000s LA teams. Shaq never had Kobe's killer instinct. So what? There's a reason the other guy's there. That didn't mean that any team could stop Shaq (or can stop LeBron) but, ultimately, Kobe/Wade is going to be the killer. In both cases, the other guy was/is probably more talented. Just a different mindset.

              Comment


              • Re: 2010-2011 NBA Random Thoughts Thread part VII: Advent Children

                anyone see the end of the Spurs vs Blazers - Blazers won on a last second lob like the pacers lost to the bucks

                Comment


                • Re: 2010-2011 NBA Random Thoughts Thread part VII: Advent Children

                  Wow. The Spurs absolutely threw it away. Jesus. What sloppy play.

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2010-2011 NBA Random Thoughts Thread part VII: Advent Children

                    More of an interesting read.....but I love these insights into the draft process and the "Wow, things would have been different if this Team decided to choose one Player over another" stories:

                    http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketb...ecision_032411

                    NEWARK, N.J. – John Calipari brought Kobe Bryant to New Jersey three times that spring to work out.

                    Kobe Bryant may have changed the trajectory of John Calipari's career 15 years ago when Calipari didn't draft him.

                    This was 1996. Cal was the new coach of the New Jersey Nets, fresh out of the college ranks at Massachusetts. Bryant was a high schooler from suburban Philadelphia, the first modern player who was academically qualified for college to say he was jumping straight to the NBA anyway.

                    The Nets had the eighth pick overall, too high, many said, for an unproven 18-year-old. With each drill Cal ran Bryant through at the Fairleigh Dickinson University gym, he grew convinced otherwise.

                    “If you watched the workouts, you’d say either this kid has been taught to fool us in the workouts or he’s ridiculous,” Calipari said, back here in Jersey, now preparing his Kentucky Wildcats for a Sweet 16 game Friday against Ohio State.

                    “I worked him out three times and I thought I was losing my mind. Obviously I wasn’t. He was really good. I’d brought him in a third time because I just said, ‘I’ve got to see this kid again because this is ridiculous.’ “

                    This was no simple choice, though, and it can be argued it was a choice that 15 years later still reverberates throughout basketball – from the Nets to the Los Angeles Lakers to Kobe and Cal and, indeed, all the way to the University of Kentucky.

                    The circumstances made things tricky. Calipari was just weeks into his NBA life. Kobe wasn’t Kobe yet. The league’s prevailing wisdom was to choose experience – college juniors or seniors. It was a man’s league, and Bryant was a cocksure kid trying to buck the system.

                    Bryant also had powerhouse representation, rising agent Arn Tellem and Adidas rep Sonny Vaccaro, who had staked millions on Bryant right out of Lower Merion High School. At first, Tellem wanted Cal to draft Bryant and kept sending Kobe to FDU to cause jaws to drop.

                    Then the Lakers stepped in and requested a workout. L.A. was picking 24th, but Tellem was interested – better franchise, bigger market, more Adidas flying off the shelves. The Lakers set it up at the old Fabulous Forum in Inglewood, Kobe matching up with Dontae Jones, a big, physical, 6-foot-8 senior who had just led Mississippi State to the Final Four. It was no contest; Kobe destroyed Jones from the word “go.”

                    “I remember [Lakers general manager] Jerry West coming down from the stands after just a little while and saying, ‘Shut down the workout,’ ” Vaccaro said. “He didn’t need to see any more. That was it. Game over.”

                    There was no way to get Bryant to drop all the way to the Lakers, so West began working potential trades. If Kobe could get to Charlotte at 13, he said, the Lakers could trade Vlade Divac for the young phenom. Team Bryant wanted it to happen.

                    Only Calipari still was enthralled. Tellem spun a 180 and now began claiming Bryant wouldn’t show up in Jersey, began saying they’d send the kid to play pro ball in Italy, where he’d spent much of his youth. Everyone now admits it was an idle threat.

                    “Arn [wanted the Nets to draft him] until he knew he could get him to the Lakers,” Calipari said. “Then he was against it. Arn was all over me, and then all of a sudden [I] get the call the day before the draft.”

                    Some people told Cal to stand strong and not get pushed around. Others suggested the safe pick – promising Villanova senior guard Kerry Kittles. It was the call of a lifetime.

                    “Everybody knows that I was talked out of [it],” Calipari said.

                    He picked Kittles, a good player with bad knees. Bryant went to Charlotte, then L.A. The Lakers have won five NBA titles and counting with him. The Nets have won zero. Calipari was fired in 1999, his shooting star of a career suddenly plummeting to earth only to slowly be rebuilt.

                    Now Cal is back in Jersey, standing in a back hall of the Prudential Center, recounting this 15-year-old draft-day decision on the eve of a big NCAA tournament game.

                    It’s funny because no one else has to answer for not picking Kobe Bryant in the 1996 lottery – not the Clippers, who took Lorenzen Wright; not the Cavaliers, who took Vitaly Potapenko; not the Grizzlies, who took Shareef Abdur-Rahim; not the Warriors, who took Todd Fuller; not the Mavericks, who took Samaki Walker; and so on and so on.

                    Cal’s sin was almost taking Kobe Bryant. He shrugs. It’s a lot easier to discuss now, when he’s on top of his game at Kentucky, when his career is back in the stratosphere.

                    “Look, it all played out for everybody,” he said. “I’m telling you I enjoyed coaching Kerry Kittles. Could it have turned out differently? Would [Kobe] have stayed in New Jersey? How about he says, ‘I’m not staying here. I’m not going to be here; I’m going to get traded in a year or two.’ All sorts of stuff could’ve happened.”

                    Besides, Bryant was a handful to coach early in his career. He still can be. Hindsight offers no guarantees.

                    Calipari has long gotten over the bitterness of getting fired. It was humiliating – he wanted to spend the day after with the covers over his head, until his wife, Ellen, made him get up and go out in public. She took him to Positano’s, an Italian restaurant near their then-home in Franklin Lakes so he could realize life goes on. Rather than being met with scorn, Cal was told by a guy who came over to his table that he’d never buy a Nets ticket again.

                    From that day, Calipari has rebuilt his whole career.

                    “It was the best experience,” he said. “Two things. I’m a better coach to better prepare these young people, which is what my job is. And two, it’s a humbling thing when you step in and they say, ‘We don’t want you. Just beat it. You’re out. You can’t do this job.’

                    “Now there’s some self-reflection. Where did this go south? What do I need to do to improve? And I’m still learning that.”

                    Calipari is in his second season at Kentucky, “one of those jobs that you work your entire career to be a part of.”

                    He has a young, dangerous team, yet in many ways this is what passes for a rebuilding year for him. He’s in the Sweet 16 as a four seed, not a one seed like he’d prefer. He has the nation’s top recruiting class coming in next season, when the Wildcats will be a favorite to win it all. At UK, he’ll always be a player on the national scene.

                    Yes, it played out fine in the end. No regrets. Yes, he should’ve picked Kobe Bryant 15 years ago, should’ve pushed back and called the Italy bluff, should’ve hoped he could’ve gotten that young superstar to carry him and the Nets’ franchise to unimaginable heights.

                    One door closed that day. But the one that eventually opened and brought John Calipari back here to Jersey has been pretty good, too.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2010-2011 NBA Random Thoughts Thread part VII: Advent Children

                      Yeah I read that a couple days ago it worked out for the best Calipari wasn't cut out for the NBA anyways. Hard to believe that HS guards were so risky back then.

                      I also don't buy Kobe had that kind of clout either I mean a 17 year old? Really?

                      Just admit you were too scared to call his bluff because of his age and you weren't sure he'd turn out so great.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2010-2011 NBA Random Thoughts Thread part VII: Advent Children

                        I hope James Dolan is regretting he listened to Issiah Thomas again.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2010-2011 NBA Random Thoughts Thread part VII: Advent Children

                          Originally posted by immortality View Post
                          I hope James Dolan is regretting he listened to Issiah Thomas again.


                          You're kidding right? the fact that he listened to Isiah Thomas again after all that has happened should already answer your question that he doesn't.

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2010-2011 NBA Random Thoughts Thread part VII: Advent Children

                            Wish we had a Derrick Rose :<. How did the Bulls get a chance to pick him again, was it a pick from the Curry trade ?
                            Last edited by immortality; 03-26-2011, 09:55 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2010-2011 NBA Random Thoughts Thread part VII: Advent Children

                              Chicago fans are filling up the Bucks arena and celebrating like they wanted to at Conseco.

                              Bulls win 95-87 after comeback.


                              [~]) ... Cheers! Go Pacers!

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2010-2011 NBA Random Thoughts Thread part VII: Advent Children

                                Originally posted by immortality View Post
                                Wish we had a Derrick Rose :<. How did the Bulls get a chance to pick him again, was it a pick from the Curry trade ?
                                No they were like 9th in the lottery and they won it. David Stern fixed it.
                                Last edited by pacer4ever; 03-27-2011, 12:48 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X