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

Pacers/Bulls postgame thread

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

  • Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread

    Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
    Talking to the league office is like talking to a spouse who's not listening. "Yeah . . . uh hu . . . yeah."

    Someone needs to start a web site and put up utube examples. Bypass the league and draw it to everyones attention. Then keep score so we would know who the most blatant reffs are.
    That would certainly be interesting and it would get a lot of attention too. Everyone knows that NBA refs are the worst in pro sports. They are like the Big Ten officials of pro refs lol.

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread

      http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/bull...ose-im-beat-up

      INDIANAPOLIS -- When it comes to how he's feeling in the midst of the long grind of an 82-game NBA season, Derrick Rose readily admits the thing that no Chicago Bulls fan wants to hear.
      "I'm beat up," he said after Friday night's 115-108 overtime loss to the Indiana Pacers. "But that's basketball ... I think I was out there playing my hardest, giving my all, but physically I feel fine."

      Rose played 39 minutes against the Pacers and is averaging 38 a game this season so there is no question the Bulls' training staff will keep a close eye on him down the stretch. There's also no question that his body has taken a beating recently. As he spoke in the hushed Bulls locker room, he pointed out several news scrapes and scratches he had lining his body. He also noted just how physical it was against the Pacers, a team the 22-year old knows his squad may face in the first round of the playoffs.
      "It was physical," he said. "That's the way [the refs] let it be."

      Speaking of which, Rose was uncharacteristically vocal about how he felt the game was called on this night.

      He went to the line 21 times against the Pacers, but clearly thought he could have gone to the line even more. He also fouled out halfway through overtime.

      "I don't get that many fouls in games," he said. "I could go a whole game without getting fouls. I was just telling them to make sure they look at the tape with some of them fouls. That's all I said."

      No matter how many points he scored, or calls he didn't get, it didn't take away from the fact that Rose was in misery because his team lost a game it could have won.

      "All of them hurt the same, man," he said. "When you lose, it hurts the same. Unless you're in the championship game, that's when I think it hurts worse. But all these games, when we get to the playoffs, that stuff is going to hurt bad if you lose."

      The last word: "Try harder," - Rose, on what he possibly could have done differently on Friday night:
      Boo hoo seriously you played 39 minutes went to the line 21 times and you think the refs should call more? Nevermind the fact that they let you off the hook by letting the game not end when you fouled both Darren Collison and Danny Granger on that last play where we could have just ended it on foul shots.

      To be fair the parts that they have in quotes it really seems like Rose wasn't complaining about the fouls he didn't get called for that part is just ESPN's spin on it. It seems like he was complaining about the fouls that he drew himself that he was pissed about and wanted them to review . That too is pretty ridiculous though it's not like he was the only one drawing fouls.

      The part that makes me happy though is Rose thought that we were very physical in that game. I hope it leaves a lasting impression on him and has that in the back of his head that anytime you drive in the lane you may get the foul but we're not going to be giving up any easy buckets.

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread

        haha not only did he feel he should have went to the line more, he felt he shouldn't have been called for as many fouls as he can go a whole game without fouls.... I wonder why?

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread

          First off i I think Derrick Rose new found stardom is going to his head. I personally would love to see Pacers play Chicago in the playoffs.

          We have two very young PG's with a lot of potential. But they still have a lot to learn. Who could teach them better than one of the best PG that ever played the game.Steve Nash. He might be avalible next year. The Pacers mangement should try to sign him for a couple of years.

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread

            Originally posted by tflo View Post
            First off i I think Derrick Rose new found stardom is going to his head. I personally would love to see Pacers play Chicago in the playoffs.
            As someone who played against Derrick a few times in the old days and knows people who have played against him/with him for a long time up until Memphis, the big head is faaaaar from a new thing.

            He's an arrogant SOB who you just want to smack, but he's a hard worker and a winner, and I would HATE to see him in the playoffs. I would love for Miami to get the 1 seed so we can play them.

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread

              Whether our current PGs can or cannot learn, or whether they are just inexperienced, is ultimately irrelevant.

              No team can be a great team, or even a good team, without a decent floor general.
              A good PG makes the whole team better.

              It would do a world of good to have a great passer on that starting line-up. It is the position with the largest and most immediate impact. And DC could do with the mentoring.

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread

                Call me crazy, but I often wonder after games like this if the NBA doesn't somehow dictate to the refs which team to favor. It almost seems like the refs got the order from TPTB to help facilitate a decent Pacers lead, but allow D Rose and company to have a huge come from behind win, or even better, OT against us.

                Am I crazy or did the refs purposely enable our lead, then blow calls to make it disappear? Is the NBA really as fixed as it seems to me? Isn't it kind of more like the WWF in reality if this is true? Only we're lead to believe it's not?

                Or am I just really crazy thinking we got cheated out of at least one championship in the Miller era? Help guys, I need answers so I can be sane again! LOL

                I would also like to add that if Chicago hits their 3s at the end of the game we lose. So I really do believe everyone is shocked the Pacers won, because they wanted them to lose.
                Last edited by Midcoasted; 03-19-2011, 05:44 PM.

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread

                  Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                  Call me crazy, but I often wonder after games like this if the NBA doesn't somehow dictate to the refs which team to favor. It almost seems like the refs got the order from TPTB to help facilitate a decent Pacers lead, but allow D Rose and company to have a huge come from behind win, or even better, OT against us.

                  Am I crazy or did the refs purposely enable our lead, then blow calls to make it disappear? Is the NBA really as fixed as it seems to me? Isn't it kind of more like the WWF in reality if this is true? Only we're lead to believe it's not?

                  Or am I just really crazy thinking we got cheated out of at least one championship in the Miller era? Help guys, I need answers so I can be sane again! LOL
                  The idea that results are dictated is absolutely asinine. Rose DID deserve *most* of those fouls in the fourth, the rest are explained by the usual "star" calls that are seen in the NBA all of the time. That last call for example, it was an iffy call, but darren needs to know not to be in that positio in the first place, a star typically gets that call.

                  Star calls happen, but results aren't dictated.

                  Most of last night was simply our being unable to contain rose, and keep him out of the paint. A few calls were eh, but most of them we commited

                  Just listen to our own guys talk about rose, Danny called him the MVP, so did frank. He earned the trips to the line (except on the final play imo, but even those were iffy) These guys don't sound like someone talking like they believe he simply dominated because the refs gifted him free throws, we tried to be physical, but couldn't stop him, hence the FTS.

                  what pissed me off was teh no call on the other end, which was equally "iffy".

                  Plus the refs could have screwed us in overtime if that was their plan, escecially on the steal tyler had against rose, officials with an agenda could have easily called that a foul and killed our momentum.
                  Last edited by daschysta; 03-19-2011, 05:48 PM.
                  Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread

                    Yeah I watched the game live at Conseco last night, and then watched it again today on my DVR.

                    There were really only a handful of bad calls. 2 being the 2 three's at the end of regulation. Collison was tightly guarding Rose, and was likely too close for comfortable but he didn't foul Rose, Rose stopped and really jumped sideways into Collison.

                    On the Pacers last play, Granger was clearly hit in the forearm area by Rose, but no call was made. I think part of this was b/c Granger overreacted.. or I guess I should say overacted during the play. If Granger doesn't flail after he MIGHT get the call, keyword might.

                    The other bad call I noticed was towards the end of regulation when Foster was called for a foul on a Rose and 1. Foster was pretty much just standing in the restricted circle with his hand up, and Kurt Thomas came a pretty much nudged and locked Foster arm in what looked to a screen attempt directly under the basket.

                    Should have been offensive foul, could have been no call, ended up being defensive foul.

                    Other than that, the Bulls just started playing with more effort, kinda like the Pacers were doing the 1st 3 quarters. Rose got to the hoop and caused the Pacers fits in the paint, and the Pacers came up empty on a few key possessions that could have held the Bulls at bay.

                    Still got the win though in OT, which I think was a good sign after the collapse. Very interested to see how the Grizzlies game turns out. Memphis is in 8th in the West right now. Memphis is still playing without Rudy Gay, so I think the game will come down to the frontcourt. Randolph/Hansbrough and Gasol/Hibbert.

                    If the Pacers can win that matchup, they should be in good shape if they guard the 3 point line, and Conley doesn't breakout like he does from time to time

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread

                      I love his attitude. Hate all you want, but I'd love to have him here.
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread

                        Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
                        Yeah I watched the game live at Conseco last night, and then watched it again today on my DVR.

                        There were really only a handful of bad calls. 2 being the 2 three's at the end of regulation. Collison was tightly guarding Rose, and was likely too close for comfortable but he didn't foul Rose, Rose stopped and really jumped sideways into Collison.

                        On the Pacers last play, Granger was clearly hit in the forearm area by Rose, but no call was made. I think part of this was b/c Granger overreacted.. or I guess I should say overacted during the play. If Granger doesn't flail after he MIGHT get the call, keyword might.

                        The other bad call I noticed was towards the end of regulation when Foster was called for a foul on a Rose and 1. Foster was pretty much just standing in the restricted circle with his hand up, and Kurt Thomas came a pretty much nudged and locked Foster arm in what looked to a screen attempt directly under the basket.

                        Should have been offensive foul, could have been no call, ended up being defensive foul.

                        Other than that, the Bulls just started playing with more effort, kinda like the Pacers were doing the 1st 3 quarters. Rose got to the hoop and caused the Pacers fits in the paint, and the Pacers came up empty on a few key possessions that could have held the Bulls at bay.

                        Still got the win though in OT, which I think was a good sign after the collapse. Very interested to see how the Grizzlies game turns out. Memphis is in 8th in the West right now. Memphis is still playing without Rudy Gay, so I think the game will come down to the frontcourt. Randolph/Hansbrough and Gasol/Hibbert.

                        If the Pacers can win that matchup, they should be in good shape if they guard the 3 point line, and Conley doesn't breakout like he does from time to time
                        Not being from Indiana,I am jealous of you guys, I really don't understand why there isn't more fans going to the home games. One of these day I will make to Conseco Fieldhouse.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread

                          Originally posted by tflo View Post
                          Not being from Indiana,I am jealous of you guys, I really don't understand why there isn't more fans going to the home games. One of these day I will make to Conseco Fieldhouse.
                          Part of it is fair weather fans, part of it is the economy. We have one of the best arenas in the world, but the casual fan doesn't have that guy they want to go see, and the Pacers don't have a team you must get out and see.

                          I think Hansbrough is slowly becoming that guy though. He doesn't have a flashy game, but he works hard and he's starting to put up real numbers. Now obviously he needs help and the Pacers have to find a way to get him some.

                          For those who have not been able to avoid games in the past, or get decent seats during the Reggie Miller days, this has been a good time for them to get out to an NBA arena and get decent seats to watch the Pacers, thing with Chicago being so close, it's work the same for Bulls fans who can't afford good seats in Chicago, why not wait until the Bulls play the Pacers, drive 4 hours and get really good seats at a reasonable price that you likely would not be able to get in Chicago, but can get in Indy.

                          I suggest you try to make it before the Pacers turn a corner, though you may enjoy the atmosphere more when they're winning and the place it packed, it's fun to get nice seats and enjoy the game regardless of the crowd

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread

                            re: official calls

                            it seems that when a team a a lead like the pacers did in the bulls game, the officials quit giving the team in the lead the benefit of the doubt calls. so drives on the offensive end that might be called a foul are not called and defensive plays that might be close but ok are called as fouls. this tends to be the case with every team.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread

                              I honestly think, if Granger can't be the #1 go-to surefire leader of this team, the Pacers either need to somehow acquire that guy or package Granger to acquire that guy. Because having Granger as a clear #2 guy expected to be a #1 is a rollercoaster ride that ends the same way almost every season.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers/Bulls postgame thread

                                Originally posted by Dr. Hibbert View Post
                                I honestly think, if Granger can't be the #1 go-to surefire leader of this team
                                How many of those are there in the NBA? Not very many... Most teams don't have that guy.
                                This space for rent.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X