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 playoffs postgame thread

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

  • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

    I swear nbatv makes me so mad... nba gametime started at 6:30 and the ONLY damn playoff series they have covered over the last 2 freaking hours is miami /sixers..


    It is pi$$ing me off ..
    "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/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

      Originally posted by Kemo View Post
      I swear nbatv makes me so mad... nba gametime started at 6:30 and the ONLY damn playoff series they have covered over the last 2 freaking hours is miami /sixers..


      It is pi$$ing me off ..
      They covered the Pacers/Bulls game for like 2 hours, it was actually getting annoying.
      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

        After the Hansbrough and 1 dunk I looked at my g/f and said 2 more scores and this game is over.

        The Pacers hit one free throw from that point sadly. I was still comfortable actually, up until the Korver 3. The Pacers had made plays all game long, so I figured it was there day. When the Korver 3 went down, I knew the game was over, even with 45 seconds left.

        I was pretty depressed really, Granger had a great 2nd half and played well, Hansbrough played well, Collison played well, Price hit shots, Rush hit a couple shots. Deng struggled, Boozer was in foul trouble and struggled, and we still lost the game.

        The Bulls really hit big shots that kept the Pacers from busting it open. Deng hit a couple big 3's. Korver had his shooting stroke unfortunately. Rose got to the free throw line. A game that looked like it was meant to be for the Pacers, ended up being meant to be for the Bulls. That's hard to swallow.

        I will say that if Rose is required to go for near 40 to beat the Pacers, this will be a fun series, and the Bulls will get beat by the Hawks or Magic in the next round

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

          inexcusable loss. i don't care if you are the last place team, you just do not blow 8 point leads late in the game. but, that pretty much sums up the last 3 years for the pacers and our lack of an on the court leader. we have some very good young players that should become a great core for quite a while. however, certain other players just need to go imo.

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

            Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
            After the Hansbrough and 1 dunk I looked at my g/f and said 2 more scores and this game is over.

            The Pacers hit one free throw from that point sadly. I was still comfortable actually, up until the Korver 3. The Pacers had made plays all game long, so I figured it was there day. When the Korver 3 went down, I knew the game was over, even with 45 seconds left.

            I was pretty depressed really, Granger had a great 2nd half and played well, Hansbrough played well, Collison played well, Price hit shots, Rush hit a couple shots. Deng struggled, Boozer was in foul trouble and struggled, and we still lost the game.

            The Bulls really hit big shots that kept the Pacers from busting it open. Deng hit a couple big 3's. Korver had his shooting stroke unfortunately. Rose got to the free throw line. A game that looked like it was meant to be for the Pacers, ended up being meant to be for the Bulls. That's hard to swallow.

            I will say that if Rose is required to go for near 40 to beat the Pacers, this will be a fun series, and the Bulls will get beat by the Hawks or Magic in the next round
            Deng didn't really look to score but when his number was called he hit several key shots with Granger guarding him.
            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

              Originally posted by croz24 View Post
              inexcusable loss. i don't care if you are the last place team, you just do not blow 8 point leads late in the game. but, that pretty much sums up the last 3 years for the pacers and our lack of an on the court leader. we have some very good young players that should become a great core for quite a while. however, certain other players just need to go imo.
              I know that this loss stings, but I dont look at it as much as the Pacers doing everything wrong in the last 4 minutes of the game ( and therefore it was their fault they lost ), but that the Bulls did the same exact thing they did in our previous game and for the whole season....their defense totally locked us down at the end and we had no answer for DRose. I don't like that we lost, but this was IMHO one of those situations where the better team won in the end. Despite the loss, the Pacers showed the naysayers that we weren't going to roll over and actually came out and competed for 45 minutes. I know that the last 3 minutes that count but the youngins actually did quite well, I'm proud of what they did tonite.
              Last edited by CableKC; 04-16-2011, 09:05 PM.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
                i sat right behind his mom and dad at MSA one series. his dad looks just like him.
                I had 2nd row for that series and he landed on me going out of bounds early in game 1 (I think, maybe 2). Being the sort that believes in repping the city as good natured basketball fans I said "Are you okay? Good hustle man" as he climbed back out of the seats.

                A few games later he pulled his crap on Reggie and I thought "man, I coulda give you a full on nutz shot if I'd known this was going to happen"


                PS - I never knew the refs had pockets on those game slacks, let alone that there was stuff in those pockets. Geiger lept and landed directly into me (ouch) but in doing so he kicked over the beers the guys in front of me had. So the ref walks over, pulls out a wad of cash and buys them all new ones. No kidding.

                Me, all I got was Geiger sweat and some face time on the broadcast. Meh.

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                  Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                  Deng didn't really look to score but when his number was called he hit several key shots with Granger guarding him.
                  Yes. Deng "struggled" while hitting better than 50% from the floor...beating his scoring average...and grabbing 10 rebounds....and had enough time to shut down Granger in the 4th period. Fact is, he at the very least played Danny even.

                  I hope Deng doesn't come out of his funk or we will be in serious trouble.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                    Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                    Wade may have been the "best" player on the team, but he wasn't the best player on that team. That team won because of Shaq not Wade.
                    I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, at least for the playoffs. Wade killing Mavs defenders off the dribble, getting in the paint, scoring, or drawing fouls was the one advantage the Heat milked all the way to an NBA title.

                    As to today's game, I not into moral victories anyway, and a 16-1 run, likely the worst playoff collapse in the 45 year history of a proud franchise, makes me even less happy about the result.
                    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                      Originally posted by Shade View Post
                      I'm disappointed in Rose's comments about us being "too physical."

                      This is the playoffs, Derrick. Buck up or go home.



                      What comments? I've been googling and can't find what you're referring to.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                        Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
                        I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, at least for the playoffs. Wade killing Mavs defenders off the dribble, getting in the paint, scoring, or drawing fouls was the one advantage the Heat milked all the way to an NBA title.

                        As to today's game, I not into moral victories anyway, and a 16-1 run, likely the worst playoff collapse in the 45 year history of a proud franchise, makes me even less happy about the result.
                        I'd prefer to give the credit to Shaq in that title run, but it was clear that DWade got the ring. Shaq was needed to get it. But DWade was the more important piece, particularly in the playoffs.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                          Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                          What comments? I've been googling and can't find what you're referring to.
                          http://www.nba.com/playoffs/2011/eas...x.html?g=1&t=v

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                            They covered the Pacers/Bulls game for like 2 hours, it was actually getting annoying.
                            I agree. Today was a pretty good day for the Pacers overall. The made a very nice showing, the post game stuff had Danny's funny "ex girlfriend stalker" line paired with literally no tolerance for positive spin from him (we lost, period), Vogel sounded great in the timeout cut-ins (good coaching I mean), and the coverage afterward was pretty good in terms of Pacers highlights and opinions of their effort.



                            Buck - nice job on that video breakdown, that's my kind of analysis. I hate the "they never....he never...he didn't..." stuff from people when it can blatantly be shown to be false.

                            The best part of NBA ball happens in the 10-15 seconds before the shot when the teams are actually running and setting up plays. When you rewind knowing the final outcome of the play and track how a guy got to where he got, then you see how teams really won or lost a game.




                            BTW, I thought the Pacers defended the PnR pretty well today. Rose made some very tough splits and narrowly avoided a couple of charges. This felt like an outing that the Pacers could repeat. No one did anything I thought was outside of their normal game.




                            I've already admitted it before, but Tyler as a mid-jumper threat is a killer. I trust that shot and count on that shot. He has not become the power forward people thought (which I argued against) but he has become a great hybrid oversized SF. His lateral quickness gives the taller or bulkier PFs fits and he can still be safely switched to the SFs without getting killed.

                            He's not a banger but he's a fighter and that works just as well. I credit his work ethic to dial that shot in.



                            BTW, since people think I never trash Josh, it seems clear to me that for the last 3 weeks or so he's been struggling. He's lost several tough rebounds and had his shot stuffed at the rim many times recently. His game is out of character and I wonder if he's got a leg issue that's not being disclosed.

                            The hops part of his game is down about 6 inches. As a fanboy it stands out to me, there are many classic Josh plays that he's not been making lately and that hurts the team in a series matched up against an athletic front line.


                            Other than Josh I thought everyone else brought what's become their standard games...when they are on I mean. This felt like a classic quality representation of what this group is about.
                            Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 04-16-2011, 09:20 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                              Josh has a knee injury. I think someone in the know has reported that recently. I actually think he looks better, athletically, than he looked about three weeks ago.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                                Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                                Josh has a knee injury. I think someone in the know has reported that recently. I actually think he looks better, athletically, than he looked about three weeks ago.
                                Those mistakes he is making are not because of injury, he is looking frustrated, I think his age shows sometimes, to me him and Dunleavy were the worst players today.
                                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X