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:
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

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

O'Brien speaks and....

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: O'Brien speaks and....

    I still say "the kids" would have helped us win more last year, and more this year.

    There's no way you can convince me that playing Dun and Dahntay at the 4 instead of Josh improved the team's chances of winning last season.

    Playing Murphy over

    And it was as close as "provable" as stats could get that Price helped the team win more than Ford did.

    This season, even though Posey and Foster are an upgrade over Troy, I still think, in the long run Josh and Hans will win us more games. And even though Ford has played better, Price has still played better than him. And either AJ or DC should be finishing games, because they need to know how to do that.

    It's the same old JOB doing the same old crap..and it's tiring..and honestly, there's no good reason for it. These guys aren't going to be here next year (except Maybe Dun..and possibly Foster if he doesn't retire) and they don't help us win more than the younger guys.

    why do I sense a Foster/Posey closing frontmen lineup coming..


    • #17
      Re: O'Brien speaks and....

      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
      I do too Jim...NEXT YEAR.

      Remember THIS YEAR was "next year" LAST YEAR when you "put the people in who you thought would help you win games". How's that working out? You did nothing last year and this year you were just starting to get around to doing what you've put off for 2-3 years already.

      Keep on playing vets now and putting off playing for tomorrow. This is the problem.

      JOB was giving the free pass on the first 2 years of W-L because those were supposed to be rebuild and develop years. But he didn't do that, he took that free pass and just went ahead and ran with vets destined for other teams anyway.

      Here's my proposal which I think is more than fair. Let's say that he's been trying to "win now" the last 3 seasons, not "rebuild". He's been "forced" to sit the kids so he can use the vets to win games.

      Okay. Well then I'm going to go ahead and take that free pass off for the last few years and judge him 100% on the W-L total. It stinks, so fire him. Period.

      Oh, wait, you shouldn't be fired because you were rebuilding? Hmmm, I don't recall you saying that.

      Pick a freaking side and live with it. Either own up to the W-L record with the vets OR get a free pass on the W-L while playing the frustrating kids and making their improvement the primary focus.

      BTW, you know what coaches who are developing players don't do? They don't call a nice outing by one of the developing kids "irrelevant" because the TEAM lost the game. They acknowledge the small moments of growth and encouragement and point out to fans that its a sign of the steady improvement with the young core.

      That's how you know he's not interested in development, nothing he says or does is anything like a person would say or do if they had that objective in mind. And given the state of the team 3 years ago why would you want anyone coaching that didn't have those objectives in mind foremost?

      PS - I'm not for tanking, I've argued load and hard against it. Development is not tanking. You take the wins if you can get them, you just make improving the talent the #1 focus and winning in the SHORT TERM a secondary priority.
      Exactly, I wouldn't mind keeping JOB around if he was more focused on improving the teams future when it is obvious that the team isn't going to win a championship or even seriously compete for a winning record. I would rather see the younger more exciting players than just the same ol' same ol' and I imagine most fans agree. Even if they aren't winning I believe the team would sell more and be more exciting if it is the future that is playing instead of the past.

      The NBA is a brand of basketball that most people in Indiana don't like to begin with. In order to get people to watch you got to give them something to be excited about. The players that people are excited about aren't the players who will be gone after the season. It is the players who will be here a while, and who will make this team competitive again.


      • #18
        Re: O'Brien speaks and....

        Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
        Exactly, I wouldn't mind keeping JOB around if he was more focused on improving the teams future when it is obvious that the team isn't going to win a championship or even seriously compete for a winning record.
        We're a single game below .500 and it is somehow clear we aren't going to seriously compete for a winning record?

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


        • #19
          Re: O'Brien speaks and....

          Originally posted by BillS View Post
          We're a single game below .500 and it is somehow clear we aren't going to seriously compete for a winning record?
          What about the previous 3 years? Or my comment about competing for a championship? Hey, I guess anymore people just care about what have you done for me today, and don't care to look at the past even though the vast majority of the time the past will tell you more about the person than the here and now.
          Last edited by Eleazar; 12-26-2010, 05:15 PM.


          • #20
            Re: O'Brien speaks and....

            Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
            What about the previous 3 years? Or my comment about competing for a championship? Hey, I guess anymore people just care about what have you done for me today, and don't care to look at the past even though the vast majority of the time the past will tell you more about the person than the here and now. As well like usual people only pick out one part of a comment and don't look at the whole sentence. It wasn't even like it was a big huge post with multiple paragraphs and both comments were separated by a paragraph or two. No they were sitting side by side in the same exact sentence. I thought it was supposed to be young people like me that didn't care about the past or had poor reading comprehension.
            .... you said competing for a championship OR even a winning record. So yes, they were in the same sentence, but YOU made it an either/or scenario. We're 1 game away from .500. It's pretty clear we're competing for a winning record right now, so this rant about his reading comprehension and all is pretty uncalled for.

            Maybe you should should type what you mean, or learn to comprehend your own posts and not be so rude when you said something that doesn't make sense. You're the one who left that open to criticism, not Bill.


            • #21
              Re: O'Brien speaks and....

              I didn't think he was rude; I think that's an overstatement.


              • #22
                Re: O'Brien speaks and....

                Maybe not in the tone of the post, but I find it rude to point the finger at someone else and blame them for your own mistake.


                • #23
                  Re: O'Brien speaks and....

                  Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
                  .... you said competing for a championship OR even a winning record. So yes, they were in the same sentence, but YOU made it an either/or scenario. We're 1 game away from .500. It's pretty clear we're competing for a winning record right now, so this rant about his reading comprehension and all is pretty uncalled for.

                  Maybe you should should type what you mean, or learn to comprehend your own posts and not be so rude when you said something that doesn't make sense. You're the one who left that open to criticism, not Bill.
                  I did no make it an either/or scenario. I said "or even" which isn't the same as just an "or". I know what I said, and I did not make a mistake in my wording.


                  • #24
                    Re: O'Brien speaks and....

                    The word 'even' doesn't change it. In fact I also said the word 'even' in there, so I'm well aware of that, but it doesn't change anything. You had 2 requirements in your scenario, and if either of them is met, then your argument is moot. Even by your own words, because we are currently competing for a winning record.

                    I'm not going to bother debating this further because it's there in black and white that you clearly said it that way.

                    Last edited by xBulletproof; 12-26-2010, 05:32 PM.


                    • #25
                      Re: O'Brien speaks and....

                      Well the loss tonight certainly undoes the lucky tip win vs New Orleans. I had them flipped on the schedule.

                      So enjoy the "only 2 games under" while it lasts. There are a string of teams coming along that don't look too interested in helping preserve JOB's winning plan.

                      Wiz games give you hope for a couple of wins, although the first 1 is a road game the night after playing Boston here. The others are Boston, @NY, Spurs, @ATL, @PHI, Mavs, Bulls...then you get a "break" with a west coast trip that starts with the Clips and Warriors. I can see winning those, but the end of the trip hits DEN and POR which look to be tough as the trip wears on.

                      To me that's 4-7 at best, and more likely 2-9.

                      Then you come back to ORL, NJ and @CHI. Seems like it could go to 4-11 before hopefully beating Toronto to end the month and go 5-11. That would put them at 18-26 to start FEB.

                      I can see making up a couple of games in FEB to get to maybe 5 under, but then March is lopsided with road games and 3 of the 7 home games are NY, CHI and BOS. So by April it would seem likely based on the games so far that they would be around 10 games under .500.

                      And that means another 36-46 season isn't a bunch of pessimistic BS. It's someone thinking the @CHI or home vs MEM games weren't flukes, but legit whippings.


                      • #26
                        Re: O'Brien speaks and....

                        Things could always change, I suppose, but right now my gloomy thoughts from the "predict the season" thread are unfortunately pretty close. I believe I said then that I wanted to believe this is a .500 team (41-41), and I still think I see one, but I felt something would screw it up and we'd win closer to 32 or 36 (forget offhand which I said) wins. Right now that "something" is our rotation and offensive gameplan (coaching).


                        • #27
                          Re: O'Brien speaks and....

                          My worst fears are coming true. Tyler and McBob are getting end of the bench minutes. Posey, Dunleavy and even Solo are getting more minutes than either of them.

                          I am also moving toward the same stage that I did last year when I switched off the game. It's simply not interesting and I may just start reading the box...

                          I really do have better things to do than watch Posey, Dunleavy and Solo. Later.