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

Odd Thoughts: Skinning the Cats

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • sportfireman
    Re: Odd Thoughts: Skinning the Cats

    Can we please move past the era of the old coach.... he's gone. Let's keep him gone by not bringing him up so much or at all.

    Leave a comment:

  • RoboHicks
    started a topic Odd Thoughts: Skinning the Cats

    Odd Thoughts: Skinning the Cats

    Odd Thoughts: Skinning the Cats
    Written by Peck


    I’m thinking about starting a segment called “how would Jim O’Brien have lost this game”. Ok, I’m kidding (sort of) but I can’t help it tonight as I want to share with you why I feel that had we not had the coaching change, this game vs. the Bobcats would have gone another way.

    I take you to the very last made basket of the ball game. Think about who made it and the circumstance of why it was made. Roy Hibbert misses a layup that falls out and from the right side of the rim, in swoops a soaring Josh McRoberts to tip the ball in giving the Pacers a 104-102 lead. The only other point scored the rest of the game was a free throw (after missing one) by Gerald Wallace.

    Go back in time just three weeks ago and ask yourself if all things were the same but the coach was different do you believe that Josh would have been in the game? You might say but maybe Tyler would have been in the game. Then you would have to ask was he the closer on most nights?

    I think we all know where I’m going with this. Most of us who are not delusional know that the person playing in that situation would have shared the same first name as our fourth, fifth, eleventh, fifteenth and nineteenth Presidents and has a last name that rhymes with Rosy. This said player would have been firmly planted beyond the three point arc and chasing the offensive rebound would not have been a priority or even a thought.

    However that was then this is now and instead of focusing on something that didn’t happen we are going to use this space to rejoice over the plays that did occur.

    It’s Odd Thoughts and as with all Odd Thought’s were going everywhere tonight, so strap in, keep both arms inside the cart and hold on to personal belongings cause (cue Heath Ledger) here we go.

    I’ll be honest I was yelling for the Pacers to run off of the floor and was begging for the fieldhouse staff to shut the power off just as soon as the game ended. I thought the referee’s were walking over to review the play and I was just as sure as the world that Jackson would have been sent to the line to shoot three free throws with no time remaining. However much to my joy and surprise they walked over picked up their jackets and walked off of the floor.

    See Stephen it doesn’t always pay to be a Douche Bag to the referee’s.

    Once I got home and saw the replay on NBA TV, which I watched over and over again, I think the referee’s made the right call. However let’s not kid ourselves either had that been Wade, Bryant, James, etc. shooting that shot I think we all know they are going to the line.

    Now in all honesty some fans are going to be upset that the Pacers once again let a lead disappear in the fourth quarter and yes there is some justification for concern. But overall I think the more important thing is that this young team (it’s so nice to actually say that and mean it) is learning and has had the poise to pull this out.

    I mean this was an important game to the Bobcats, we were on the back end of a back to back where we spent a lot of energy trying to beat one of the best teams in the NBA and the Bobcats have been playing very well lately.

    There are reasons we could have folded tent and lost, but we didn’t.

    Someone said that Pacers need to learn to play under pressure and I say that is exactly what they are doing. I don’t mean they are playing perfect under pressure, I’m saying that they are learning to play this way and in many cases this is the first time they have been exposed to these late game situations.

    Let’s look at some players.

    I’m going to just say our starting front line was the player of the game, well honorable mention to Gerald Wallace for missing the free throw, as all three of our starters were just outstanding.

    I’m not sure I can say one was more valuable than the other. Danny was efficient and hit important shots, Roy was dominant on the inside and had a defensive presence and Josh was just overall outstanding and had an interior behind the back pass that Mark Jackson would have been proud of, not to mention the game winning basket (although it was not a last second shot but still the game winner none the less).

    Both Tyler and Jeff struggled a little tonight but that’s cool, they have been excellent in the previous five games.

    Also I thought this was the first good game that A.J. Price has played since Vogel took over as coach.

    The two players right now that are having the hardest time adjusting to the new system are Price & Dunleavy and in Price’s case I think it won’t take him to long to adjust but he is going to have to get used to being a distributer again as opposed to just a scorer. It’ll come but it might take awhile to get there.

    Ok stat of the night time.

    We, the Indiana Pacers, took a total of 11 three point shots tonight. That used to be a half, heck sometimes a quarter, for our club.

    The fact that we hit almost 50% of those shots sure helps as well, but I can not tell you how happy I am to no longer have to suffer through watching 3 after 3 after 3 be thrown towards the basket.

    Second stat of the night. Indiana wins the rebound battle 42-40 thus making it six out of six games that we have won the battle of the boards.

    Does anyone think it is a coincidence that we have won 5 of those 6?

    Furthermore does anyone miss playing small?

    Ok some odd questions about the Bobcats.

    Does anyone suspect that the players talk back much to the coaching staff there now? I mean for the love of God Paul Silas is a big bad man in his own right but then his assistant is Charles Oakley. Whew that’s a whole lot of badness on the sidelines, to bad it doesn’t translate into floor play for them.

    Is the official sponsor of the Bobcats hostess? I mean I’m a fat man but I’m also an old man who does not play professional basketball. Good Lord Boris Diaw looked like he had two pigs in a gunny sack whenever he ran in the opposite direction and I’m pretty sure that he and Sherron Collins might have shared the same pie (or more likely 7 layer cake) prior to the game. I think I now understand what happened to Sean May.

    Ok now an odd thought about some general NBA news. I am now amused to no end that Carmelo Anthony is considering signing an extension with the Nuggets if he is not traded. Seems that now maybe the prospect of losing that kind of money might actually outweigh the bright lights of the Empire City. For the fans of Denver I hope that this is the way it works out. As a former ABA city and fellow small market team I really feel for the fans out there who have had to endure this and they don’t deserve to be sent to NBA purgatory. The fact that it keeps Carmelo out of the East and away from N.Y. does not offend me either.

    Not that I’m complaining but man what the heck is up with the Bucks? I know they have had some injuries but both Jennings and Bogut have been playing and they are still losing. You have to wonder how long Skiles will be able to keep his job. I’d love to have Scott here but right now I think the team actually needs a lighter touch and a more up beat positive person to counter the three previous years of tyranny.

    I can’t tell you how happy I am to once again be able to do these without having to think about you know who and how he impacted every single aspect of the game for us. From the players on the floor to the plays they were running.

    Now we can just focus on the players and how they are performing their jobs.

    We didn’t do that much in this one, which I apologize for. We’ll be sure to get more in depth later.

    Late edit: Ha, I just figured out a way to cheat the system.

    In honor of a good game and a great run of 5 wins in 6 games I give you all the gift of Dancing fruit.