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/Kings postgame thread

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

  • Re: Pacers/Kings postgame thread

    Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
    Young isn't a valid excuse for some of the things I've seen from this group. And I'm sick of that lame excuse all the time. Everybody wants to do nothing but make explain. I want to see a team that is trying to win. And too many times I just don't see it.

    AJ Price leading the team in shots? Who let that happen? AJ can't shoot a lick. He just throws some much crap at the basket a few go in once in awhile. Dude needs a reality check. You aren't that type of player AJ! Play good defense and run the offense! When you do that you are a winner and a big piece to the puzzle! You killed us tonight!

    My biggest issue with the team has always been with the leadership anyways. This is the same stuff we've seen, and the reality is it won't change without a change in leadership first. A few years back the franchise publicly accepted losing. And they have not wavered since. Big mistake. They chose to talk about the future instead. Another big mistake. The team and the fans fallowed their lead.

    Another thing I am sick of is the mealy mouthed posters on here that apologize for these lazy millionaires constantly. It's not unreasonable to expect something in exchange for your support. Leaving it on the floor is the least they can do for all the blessings we have allowed them to enjoy.

    Remember that without the fans, it all disappears into thin air. We are the only reason the NBA exists.
    Thanks for this reality check. We don't owe these guys anything. They owe us. These guys get paid more than probably anyone on this message board, and without the fans these guys don't have a job. So couldn't they try just a little bit harder?

    I think they are talented enough to win, and I can see a bull**** effort when I see it.

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers/Kings postgame thread

      Originally posted by Sookie View Post
      That second unit really couldn't do anything else. If you are going to put them in the game with Foster and Josh, there's going to be a lot of perimeter offense.

      The fact that those two don't score means that those post players can help on our guards too. And Sacramento backed WAY off of us and dared us to make those threes.

      I don't agree..shooters need to shoot. I've seen too many games won by guys who couldn't shoot, get hot at the right time. He's a good shooter. Even if he's been ridiculously off this season. Maybe he'll get his shot back before the playoffs.

      AJ also had 12 attempted assists (before garbage time..so in about 15 minutes) I've gone on about assists before..but my point is..he was trying to make something happen. He couldn't get anything going..but more often than not, when things get tough AJ's one of the few guys on our team that'll try and get things going and won't quit. (Tyler and Dahntay the other) I don't have a problem with him taking wide open shots (and they all were..for good reason..) Especially when he's trying to claw his way back in the game, and no one else is scoring..and the rest of the team was giving him the ball for him to shoot it.

      Price has played poorly the last couple of games. This game, he shot poorly..and was trying his hardest to get us back in the game, in pretty much every possible way.

      DC..DC instigated the only run (Yes, Danny was huge in it) this team made. He couldn't shoot for most of the game either. But it doesn't matter..he was trying to get things done.

      But our post players..terrible offense, they didn't shoot well, didn't screen/set picks well, didn't defend well..and even if by a stroke of luck Sacramento missed their layup..they didn't box out so Sacramento got the rebound.

      Now, if we had made a few perimeter shots, things would have been easier scoring wise for our posts..but that doesn't change the "didn't defend, didn't box out, didn't set proper screens"

      Essentially, this one isn't on the point guards. Especially not the backup..who shouldn't ever be put in the position to try and claw the team back in the game himself..but quite often is. AJ Price, at this point in his career, should never be at a point where people blame him for the loss. He's a 15 minute per game backup point guard. The fact that he's willing to put himself out there and try and get something positive going shouldn't be discouraged, even if he fails.

      Too many threes? They were wide open. That's why they were going up. And they went up a lot when Foster and Josh were in. What did you guys want Price, Jones, and Rush to do? Dribble into being guarded?
      Hicks said it best when he stated that nobody played well. However I'm sorry but I respectfully disagree with your assertion that the point guards are not to blame.

      In fact to me this game showed exactly why p.g. needs to be seriously considered in the future as a potential spot for upgrade.

      If Darren Collison is hitting his shots he can be a very effective player, however as tonight proved when he is not he is about useless on the floor. Sloppy, lazy defense along with dribbling skills that makes T.J. Ford look like Curly Neal does nothing to help anyone. He is not a floor leader and his court vision is all but non existant. I will freely admit that I prefer a pass first point guard but I can live with D.C. when he is hitting his shots. However tonight he clearly was not.

      A.J. Price is in a similar boat. Now he is not nearly the lazy defender that Darren is and he can dribble fairly well, but this guy took Jim O'Brien's game plan to heart and can't seem to let it go. His idea of a pick and roll is to use the pick to set himself up for the shot, roll be damned. Again, when he is hitting it works (sometimes) but more often than not it does not.

      At one point in time during the game I really was begging for Frank to bench both of them and just let Josh run the point because in all honesty at that point in time he could not have done any worse.

      BTW, I am thrilled that Cousins plays in the W.C. so we only have to see him twice a year. He is to much man for anyone on our team.

      Much like Greg Monroe will be again tonight.


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

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers/Kings postgame thread

        Cousins to Monroe, back to back... these crappy teams with their soon to be all-star big men are killing us!

        I wish we could nab one of them. What would it take?

        I say we offer Rush and a pick while Dumars is still in charge.
        Last edited by PaceBalls; 03-26-2011, 02:49 AM.

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers/Kings postgame thread

          Originally posted by Thingfish View Post
          Cousins to Monroe, back to back... these crappy teams with their soon to be all-star big men are killing us!

          I wish we could nab one of them. What would it take?

          I say we offer Rush and a pick while Dumars is still in charge.
          It would take Roy and 2 1st rd draft picks and Dumars would proably listen.

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers/Kings postgame thread

            Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
            It would take Roy and 2 1st rd draft picks and Dumars would proably listen.
            I'm all for it.

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers/Kings postgame thread

              It's just an idle thought, but speaking of veteran help in the backcourt
              and missing leadership, anyone think we could still use Jarret Jack ?

              He had and has his flaws. But he's still sorely missed. Letting him walk
              rather than pay him the $5mil per or whatever he ended up getting
              wasn't Bird's finest decision.

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers/Kings postgame thread

                words can't explain how pissed i'm right now. i'm sorry but 'this is a young team, this is normal, the sky is not falling' won't cut it this time. there is no excuse for yesterday, that was plain stupid, period.

                there is one thing this team is good at, killing the hype. whenever i get excited, these bunch of idiots find a way to destroy it.

                after last night i'm sure we are not going to make the playoffs, bucks will pass us. do these guys belong there? i don't think so.

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers/Kings postgame thread

                  Can we go one bad game without at LEAST one person on here calling for someone being traded?
                  "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


                  • Re: Pacers/Kings postgame thread

                    No point blaming any subset of players, they all lost together. I simply would ask that, after bricking three after three, the perimeter guys take a rhythm bounce or two into a slightly shorter two just to see what happens. You knew we would struggle against their inside tandem.

                    All of it just goes to show that if you can get a significant upgrade anywhere, you do it. May not be that easy to come by, of course, but I'm looking for it actively. Otherwise, we're looking at maybe .500 tops next year, which is improvement, but if we can speed that up a little by adding some veteran talent, sign me up.
                    I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                    -Emiliano Zapata

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers/Kings postgame thread

                      Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
                      Cousins had 1 less assist than Collison and Price combined. Tyreke Evan in 17 minutes of play had more than both of them combined.

                      That's not good basketball
                      Here's a nugget that a very wise former poster sent me in an email:

                      Consider this: Under Obie, the team assisted on 56.9% of their made FG's. This was not very good - about 1% below the league-wide average. It was also declining from a peak YTD of just under 58% or so.

                      Under Vogel, the Pacers only assist on 48.2% of their made shots. Memphis is dead last in the league at 52.5%. No. Body. Passes.
                      "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                      - Salman Rushdie

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers/Kings postgame thread

                        I did not see the game.

                        But giving up 64 points in the paint has to be a season high and a sign to me that the Kings manhandled us.

                        But as far as losing to a bad team at home? every team in the NBA even the Lakers, Celtics, Bulls, Heat, Spurs, Mavs lose a couple of games at home against bad teams, and the pacers are no where nearly as good as those teams.

                        Pistons are a tough matchup fo the Pacers, so should be interesting tonight. If pacers lose tonight and the Bucks beat Bulls at home, then the race is really on then. Part of me wants it to be a close race, would be good for this team, lets see how they do under pressure

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers/Kings postgame thread

                          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                          lets see how they do under pressure
                          I have a guess...
                          "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                          - Salman Rushdie

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers/Kings postgame thread

                            Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
                            I have a guess...

                            Only way you learn to play under pressure, is to go through pressure, learn from it

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers/Kings postgame thread

                              Originally posted by mattie View Post
                              The problem I have with your entire post is you use nothing but vague generalities to explain your negative outlook.

                              Please explain to me how "leadership" would have kept Tyler from getting absolutely manhandled in the post on both ends of the court?

                              How does "leadership" make Roy suddenly make those tough hook shots he attempted through out the game?

                              How does "leadership" suddenly make Rush shoot 50% from the floor?

                              Did you watch the game or did you simply decide that since there have been so many years of this team losing, that now is the arbitrary time to decide there can be no more excuses?

                              I'm not saying my explanation of the game is correct, or that I have some superior insight. I did watch the game however and I think I have a credible explanation for their loss tonight. I'd certainly enjoy healthy debate as to why I'm wrong.

                              My explanation is not excuses. I'm not feeling sorry for anyone. I do feel it is rather irrational and ridiculous to criticize the team as if they didn't play hard, or they are lazy, or they have no "leadership" capabilities. They care. They want to win. They bust their asses. Only some times? They lose. Why should we rip this team up and down as if they're somehow lazy or careless? I don't see it. And I don't feel the need to get angry for no other reason than "I wish my favorite NBA basketball team would win more."

                              Further me, you stated this team is talking of the "future" and is "accepting losing now." I wish this could be one of those situations where I could say, "I think you're wrong but it is just 'IMO.'" But this isn't the case. Vogel has repeatedly said he is trying to win now, not later. Now.

                              Lastly, to put a positive spin on my response, I realize it is frustrating, but get a grip! No matter if it takes 1 year, or 10 years to develop, if they simply aren't talented enough to win, it is a waste of time to get upset! It sucks to watch them lose, but it isn't because of a lack of effort. The more likely situation is a lack of talent and experience.
                              You just go ahead and keep drinking the kool aid.

                              Originally posted by Kemo View Post
                              "mealy mouthed"


                              Yeah unfortunately.
                              "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers/Kings postgame thread

                                A young team is a young team is a young team. The only consistency to be expected is inconsistency.

                                The Pacers have gone through some pressure games against very good teams and actually won some of them, and showed poise while doing so for the most part. But, as young teams do, some of the worst teams can beat them soundly on a given night regardless of what kind of effort they give. Last night was one of those games, in no small part due to the physicality of the Sacraheim (Anacramento?) interior players.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X