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

IND/MIN postgame thread

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

  • Re: IND/MIN postgame thread

    hmmm I know we lost, I can read we have a grassy knoll somewhere, by a source that remains anon and in fact the location of the knoll as well and what happened there stays in Vegas, BUT

    In 219 posts not one mention of the starting line-up most of you wanted for some time now?
    So, you get what you want, they lay an egg and the players need to give their paycheque back.

    The line-up shakeup obviously did not work so "hot" and sadly enough I see no one commenting on that.
    I think that's a far more interesting dicussion than what happened where by who and when and with what to whom. For that stuff we have Hercule.
    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

    If you've done 6 impossible things today?
    Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

    Comment


    • Re: IND/MIN postgame thread

      Originally posted by able View Post
      hmmm I know we lost, I can read we have a grassy knoll somewhere, by a source that remains anon and in fact the location of the knoll as well and what happened there stays in Vegas, BUT

      In 219 posts not one mention of the starting line-up most of you wanted for some time now?
      So, you get what you want, they lay an egg and the players need to give their paycheque back.

      The line-up shakeup obviously did not work so "hot" and sadly enough I see no one commenting on that.
      I think that's a far more interesting dicussion than what happened where by who and when and with what to whom. For that stuff we have Hercule.
      Sadly the 2 changes that were made to the lineup, which I understand why they were done, can not make up for the fact that the 3 remaining starters laid giant eggs (one of the less colorful things I've said about their play tonight).

      Collison is at rock bottom right now. Roy is not as bad as we've seen but he is not effective at all at the moment & Danny....well I don't think any of us have a single clue about Danny.


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

      Comment


      • Re: IND/MIN postgame thread

        Tyler was easily the best starter on the floor. They didn't lose because they changed the lineup, they lost because they got their asses handed to them.

        If anything, they didn't replace enough starters. AJ Price should be starting ahead of Collison.

        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

        Comment


        • Re: IND/MIN postgame thread

          If Cherokee's legit, and I have no reason to doubt him/her I'm just fairly new so I'm not about to take an anonymous message board poster at their word, I'd put major money on it being Collison.

          Comment


          • Re: IND/MIN postgame thread

            Originally posted by Shabazz View Post
            Whatever is going on, I can guarantee you Tyler is not going to quit working hard and trying to win games. Hopefully enough of his teammates will try to match his effort before the season ends that the team still makes the playoffs.
            We get it, Tyler's God. These types of fans are what turns people off of guys like Kobe.

            Comment


            • Re: IND/MIN postgame thread

              He's laughing because he knows he's have a verrrrrry unusual off night, and If you're done with this team, stop posting on PG. If you're a true fan you will always support this team. We've had a grim 3 years, get over it! The knicks went through 7 straight years, you good have alot worse, so just stop your whining. Oh no! We played an awful game guys! Were on a 5 game losing streak, oh no it's the end of our franchise! The heat are also on a 5 game losing streak, and jsyk, it's because of so called pacer4ever fans like you, that make this team look worse.

              Comment


              • Re: IND/MIN postgame thread

                Guys, we have to support this team. End of story. Do we have an awesome team? Not by any means. Do we have a great team? We have some great pieces, we just need a few more. So were going through a horrible stretch of losses, deal with it. Have faith in our Pacers. I also have been to 12 Pacer games this season, but one thing irritates me more than our losing streak, and its our attendance rate at our games. Were barely averaging 10,000 fans per home game. The NETS were averaging that every game before D-Will jumped in. The KINGS, WIZARDS, CLIPPPERS, T-Wolves...CAVS! Theres something wrong with those numbers.

                Comment


                • Re: IND/MIN postgame thread

                  Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                  Then I guess I'm confused as to what name shocked you in regards to... something.

                  If the name of the person causing the implosion shocked you, then I have a guess.
                  I'm gonna guess that we see your guess out of town on a rail after the season...
                  http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...nce-stephenson
                  "But, first, let us now praise famous moments, because something happened Tuesday night in Indianapolis that you can watch a lifetime’s worth of professional basketball and never see again. There was a brief, and very decisive, and altogether unprecedented, outburst of genuine officiating, and it was directed at the best player in the world, and that, my dear young person, simply is not done."

                  Comment


                  • Re: IND/MIN postgame thread

                    Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                    Tyler was easily the best starter on the floor. They didn't lose because they changed the lineup, they lost because they got their asses handed to them.

                    If anything, they didn't replace enough starters. AJ Price should be starting ahead of Collison.
                    Completely agree.

                    It also lends credence to those of us who said changing the lineup wouldn't do anything to help either.

                    It wasn't the SG/PF positions that caused this team's meltdown. It was the other 3. Those positions were simply the easy scapegoats, and this isn't the first time that has been the case this season.

                    Comment


                    • Re: IND/MIN postgame thread

                      Originally posted by Bball View Post
                      Cherokee,
                      If you'd kept the source of Portland a secret then you could've actually told who the mystery person on the Pacers is without divulging your source in any way.

                      Just a simple "I have a contact with another team that told me Foster was the problem in the lockerroom". ...or whatever....

                      I realize the horse is already out of the barn this time but it's something to consider next time.
                      Or just log on under another name and spill the bean with no source.

                      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                      Comment


                      • Re: IND/MIN postgame thread

                        Originally posted by Cherokee View Post
                        I just talked to a friend of mine who works in the Portland Trailblazers' front office and asked him what he knew about the Pacers. He said the team's implosion is the talk of the league (among front offices, anyway). He wouldn't tell me who was to blame, but he did tell me it wasn't Lance. He said what Wells heard the other night was just part of the argument and that the target was someone else, and Lance was just part of the very loud conversation. He also said Josh is playing hurt (which we found out tonight), and that Bird is PO'd beyond belief. He also said he didn't think Vogel had a prayer of getting the full-time job. I promised I wouldn't say who was the target -- and I'll keep my word -- but I was shocked to hear the name.
                        Notice that Cherokee never used the word "player." The "target" may be Bird or Vogel.

                        Not that it really matters. Because the players may be wrong. They are certainly wrong if the target is Tyler or Lance.

                        They may not be wrong if the target is Danny. DC as the target doesn't make much sense to me. I don't know how much he is able to change, and that problem is solved by Vogel benching him. Vogel can't really bench Danny Granger.
                        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                        Comment


                        • Re: IND/MIN postgame thread

                          Originally posted by Kaufman View Post
                          barring illness to a coach, has any team ever had three head coaches in one season?

                          Yes the Pacers have

                          1988 Jack Ramsey is fired after the pacers start I think 0-13, then Mel Danials coaches a game or two and then Geroge Irvine takes over for the rest of the season

                          Comment


                          • Re: IND/MIN postgame thread

                            Originally posted by able View Post
                            hmmm I know we lost, I can read we have a grassy knoll somewhere, by a source that remains anon and in fact the location of the knoll as well and what happened there stays in Vegas, BUT

                            In 219 posts not one mention of the starting line-up most of you wanted for some time now?
                            So, you get what you want, they lay an egg and the players need to give their paycheque back.

                            The line-up shakeup obviously did not work so "hot" and sadly enough I see no one commenting on that.
                            I think that's a far more interesting dicussion than what happened where by who and when and with what to whom. For that stuff we have Hercule.
                            Yup, was excited when I saw the starting line-up. But when you get the same **** no matter the line-up, then the discussion quickly moves from line-up changes to the deeper problems with this team.

                            What are we going to comment on? It didn't make a difference? Agreed. We could start Solo at point guard right now and it wouldn't make things worse (seriously, look at the box score. 2 assists, 7 turnovers. I think Solo could do that).

                            So we move on to speculating as to why the players are so bad. Why Granger looks like a pouting brat. Why DC looks like he's playing with 2 broken thumbs. Why no one but Hans is putting any effort into the game. Why the players are yelling at each other, not passing, standing around and half-assing it on D. I think these are more interesting questions since it doesn't seem to matter who we start.
                            Danger Zone

                            Comment


                            • Re: IND/MIN postgame thread

                              I don't know who the mystery player is. But I would be shocked if it is one of the fringe players - it has to be one of the core guys.

                              But then again the word shocked was used to describe our reaction if we found out.

                              Granger, Hibbert, Collison - I figure one of them.

                              Comment


                              • Re: IND/MIN postgame thread

                                ALERT: Silver Lining time ...


                                One thing I can take as a positive going forward after all these losses (especially this eyegouging MIN game I bore witness to )... Is the emergence of TYLER Hansbrough!

                                Tyler has really stepped it up a huge notch , and is looking like something special.

                                Once the rest of the team decides to get out of their funk (and shew wee it's fonkey), Hans is really gonna solidify the 4 spot for us. I believe we are seeing the birth of our next all star (if we even have another for awhile, unless George blooms quicker)..
                                "NO ONE wants to play Tyler Hansbrough!" ..
                                "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X