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

4/10/2011 Game Thread #81: Pacers Vs. Knicks

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

  • Re: 4/10/2011 Game Thread #81: Pacers Vs. Knicks

    Originally posted by KingGeorge View Post
    You can't compare players off of one play.

    If that were the case, he would be an elite player if you look at the game on March 15th.
    I'm comparing my observation of the two based on their performance over the last 4-5 years. I'm saying that, IMO, that sequence is indicative or representative of what I perceive to be difference in abilities and big-shot making of those two players. Granger was also MIA after the first quarter while Melo managed 34 while saddled with some foul troubles.

    I really like Granger, but I think he's a spot up shooter who should be a better defender. I think we're trying to fit him into a role he can't really live up to. That's not his fault and we may not have any other alternative right now.
    I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

    -Emiliano Zapata

    Comment


    • Re: 4/10/2011 Game Thread #81: Pacers Vs. Knicks

      Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
      Last observation: more so late in the game, but to some extent throughout, we've got guys not recognizing when they're actually open or when they have a driving lane to exploit. Instead, they often hesitated allowing the defense to recover.In the last two minutes, it looked like an overemphasis, in my opinion, on running clock. Hopefully they learned what that got them seeing as they couldn't manufacture a good shot, or any shot for that matter, late in the shot clock.
      I completely agree with this. They definitely seemed to be like, ok let's run the clock and they will just run out of possessions. The one possession where Tyler had a wide open jumper and passed it really bothered me. Collison passed up a good shot too.

      Comment


      • Re: 4/10/2011 Game Thread #81: Pacers Vs. Knicks

        Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
        Compare Danny and Melo on each team's last shot. A good example of how DG is not an elite level player and will never be able to be the #1 guy on a team.

        Also, Danny was flat out awful driving the ball tonight. I thought the Knicks prepared well for that by running the double team after he'd put his head down with the dribble. He never had any clue the other defender was coming.

        Don't know if the Bull's D needs the help, but I might be noting that tactic for future reference. Danny's scoring moves off the dribble have to be quicker, less bounces, and more directly to the hoop or quick pull up. The problem is he's not effective enough to blow by, so he's constantly having to take several lateral dribbles to try to create space to loop around his defender.
        1) It's one play.
        2) Danny was FOULED. You can make anyone look bad if you are allowed to foul them.

        Comment


        • Re: 4/10/2011 Game Thread #81: Pacers Vs. Knicks

          Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
          I completely agree with this. They definitely seemed to be like, ok let's run the clock and they will just run out of possessions. The one possession where Tyler had a wide open jumper and passed it really bothered me. Collison passed up a good shot too.

          Yeah, I think this is the quintessential example of failing to stay aggressive and going to a "prevent" approach that blows up in your face. Hopefully, it can serve as a lesson.
          I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

          -Emiliano Zapata

          Comment


          • Re: 4/10/2011 Game Thread #81: Pacers Vs. Knicks

            Lost cuz young players panicked down the stretch. DC panicked and overhandled/dribbled. Hansborough panicked and forgot what to do in the post. Hibbert missed shots from point-blank. Etc.

            Can't blame any one player. Just hope they learn from it, though I don't really expect this 4Q problem to get fixed this postseason. That's more of a long-term, developmental thing with young players.

            Comment


            • Re: 4/10/2011 Game Thread #81: Pacers Vs. Knicks

              Great 3rd quarter, typical 4th quarter collapse. No excuse blowing a 9 point lead going into the 4th quarter. Still a good dress rehearsal for the playoffs though.
              Larry Bird and Ryan Grigson- wasting the talents of Paul George and Andrew Luck

              Comment


              • Re: 4/10/2011 Game Thread #81: Pacers Vs. Knicks

                Originally posted by oxxo View Post
                1) It's one play.
                2) Danny was FOULED. You can make anyone look bad if you are allowed to foul them.
                Danny also blatantly pushed off Melo to create the initial separation for the shot. I thought, if you weren't going to call the push-off, you couldn't call the elbow tap either. It probably wasn't the best play the Pacers could have run. Exact same play they ran the last time against the Knicks; I would have liked to see a little more originality out of Vogel on that one. I know he wants Danny taking it, but same play? Like the Knicks wouldn't recognize it? Really?

                Comment


                • Re: 4/10/2011 Game Thread #81: Pacers Vs. Knicks

                  Originally posted by oxxo View Post
                  1) It's one play.
                  2) Danny was FOULED. You can make anyone look bad if you are allowed to foul them.
                  Do you think DG is a clear-cut #1 option on a legit NBA contender?

                  I think he'd be great as a second offensive option with a specialty in jump shooting.

                  He may have been fouled on the last play, but where was he after the first quarter?
                  I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                  -Emiliano Zapata

                  Comment


                  • Re: 4/10/2011 Game Thread #81: Pacers Vs. Knicks

                    Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
                    Do you think DG is a clear-cut #1 option on a legit NBA contender?
                    No, but the Pacers are a small market team. Danny Granger is our #1 option because Indy isn't attractive to big name players.

                    All we can hope for is that he continues to grow with the team.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 4/10/2011 Game Thread #81: Pacers Vs. Knicks

                      Originally posted by KingGeorge View Post
                      No, but the Pacers are a small market team. Danny Granger is our #1 option because Indy isn't attractive to big name players.

                      All we can hope for is that he continues to grow with the team.
                      no, he's our #1 option because management hasn't done a good enough job in acquiring a true #1 option whether that be through a trade, the draft, or due to organizational philosophy.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 4/10/2011 Game Thread #81: Pacers Vs. Knicks

                        Making mountains out of mole hills anytime Danny does anything wrong.. Shocking.

                        He missed the shot. *** damn.. No one is 100% in clutch situations, and what's important is that Danny, Roy, and DC are playing at an extremely high level headed into the post-season.
                        Last edited by BringJackBack; 04-10-2011, 11:07 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 4/10/2011 Game Thread #81: Pacers Vs. Knicks

                          Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                          no, he's our #1 option because management hasn't done a good enough job in acquiring a true #1 option whether that be through a trade, the draft, or due to organizational philosophy.
                          Yes. True #1 options are a dime a dozen, how haven't they just gotten one? It's just that easy. You just say you want one, and BAM ... there he is.

                          Comment


                          • Re: 4/10/2011 Game Thread #81: Pacers Vs. Knicks

                            Originally posted by BringJackBack View Post
                            Making mountains out of mole hills anytime Danny does anything wrong.. Shocking.
                            Yeah, if he comments in the game thread you already know the subject. Heck, there's no need to read the comments; they're all interchangeable.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment


                            • Re: 4/10/2011 Game Thread #81: Pacers Vs. Knicks

                              Decent game overall, I really wanted the Pacers to win this one in front of the fans, that last play called by Vogel was pretty bad, how you call the same play againts the same team? Oh well, let's hope they learn from this for the playoffs and get to practice different last second plays that are not Iso's
                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment


                              • Re: 4/10/2011 Game Thread #81: Pacers Vs. Knicks

                                The players were really cool at the end.

                                Throwing shoes and towels into the stands.

                                Better than last year when the energy was drained because we sucked and lost that game by 20.

                                NEXT TIME ILL BE SITTING IN THE FIELDHOUSE ITLL SAY PLAYOFFS ON THE FLOOR!!!!!!
                                In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X