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

    Originally posted by rock747 View Post
    What style is that? NBA superstar? You really don't think NBA stars get preferential treatment? How come these guys didn't get to the line 21 times in college? (aside from those that didnt go)

    No, attacking, driving to the basket with great athleticism when a player does that they will get a lot of fre throw attempts.

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

      Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
      Did you also see the half dozen times he got away with a charge or an offensive foul? Or how about mugging DC.

      I didn't see his offensive fouls, he is great at sliding over and going around stationary defenders, he's like Jordan doing that

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

        Originally posted by Sookie View Post
        Really? Hmm..I must be remembering wrong. Just from looking at them, it seemed like a bad matchup for Josh, but maybe I'm wrong.
        Nah. I remember the commentary from that game when they was questioning JOB not putting Josh back in. If you go back to the game thread, I even spoke on it a couple of times.

        EDIT: NOW, I really remember. It was the game where Josh was having a great game, but it was the game where he got dunked on when JOB FINALLY put him back in the game. Bascially, the dunk "erased" everything that Josh was doing good up until that moment.


        Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

          Personally, I don't want to completely blame the refs. I thought the refs made better calls in the 2nd half, then the 1st half. David Stern probably made the call, and let the refs know that we have another potential Bulls vs. Celtics series going WITH a good storyline.

          # 1 Seed with the presumed MVP
          # 8 Seed with a young, rookie coach for a team entering the playoffs after 5 years
          Indiana the only team to have a Game 7 against the Championship Bulls
          Jordan vs. Miller angle
          A potential # 8 upset of the # 1
          Can Rose maintain his performance to take his team past the Pacers?
          Psycho T arguably being the most decorated college player ever


          Honestly, I can see the calls getting BETTER in order to extend this series, if the games remain competitive each time. The only questionable calls for me was when Granger was mugged on a drive and the traveling call on Collison. If we get blown out in one those games.....
          Last edited by ksuttonjr76; 04-17-2011, 10:47 AM.


          Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

            Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
            Number 5, iso for Danny, was interesting.

            Tyler was in the near corner and Danny waived him off twice before Tyler finally went to the other corner. Then Danny did his iso and threw a desperate pass attempt to Collison that failed just before the shot clocked expired.

            I'm thinking Tyler would have done a lot better with that possession if he had gotten the ball in the corner.

            Now, I hope Tyler was supposed to be in the other corner and that's why Granger waived him off. If not, I'm upset.
            Still waiting for someone to comment on this.
            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

              Originally posted by Anthem View Post
              Agreed. The Bulls will come to play in game 2.
              Uh, the Bulls already came to play.

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                That is one of the reasons I like George. Where most players will say he only made two shots, George is saying he made 2 shots too many. It shows that he doesn't want to be anything but the best.
                I read it the opposite of how you did. I think someone said he got cooked, and this is him defending himself.

                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.
                  Yep, same old Pacers these days. What with making the playoffs, playing out of their minds the vast majority of the game, and coming way closer to beating the #1 seeded, 62 win team on their home floor than anyone ever thought they would come. Yep, same old, same old.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                    Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                    forget the refs. the embarrassment is blowing a game in which you led 47minutes and by 10 with less than 4 minutes left. THAT'S embarrassment...
                    You don't even think this team deserved to play this game, yet now your standards are raised so high that this game disappointed and upset you? Get a reality check, man.

                    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.


                      Why don't you come out and say who you mean when we all know who you are referring to. You've been advocating to trade him for 3 years now.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                        Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
                        The Pacers threw some really soft double teams at Rose today. What's the point of doubling if you're not gonna make him give it up?
                        Well, assuming they didn't just fail to completely trap him (which is quite possible), it might be that those were meant to make Rose hesitate, switch mindsets from scorer to passer, and because of not fully committing, being ready to guard whomever he theoretically gives up the ball to.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                          Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
                          rotoworld has a pretty harsh assessment:

                          "Granger heat checks cost Pacers Game 1.

                          Danny Granger scored 24 points on 10-of-20 shooting (4-of-8 from downtown) with six rebounds, three assists, one steal, and one block as the Pacers lost control of the game late and lost to the Bulls in Game 1 on Saturday.

                          It was a typical Granger outing, as each made shot emboldened him to take the next one, but ultimately his one-man freelancing act killed his team down the stretch. Because his teammates have no faith that he will do the right thing with the ball, any semblance of offensive framework goes out the window once Granger starts pounding the rock."

                          http://www.rotoworld.com/headlines/n...-pacers-game-1

                          OUCH!! I hope Granger reads and understands what it is saying.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                            My thoughts:

                            1) I forgot how much I love the playoffs when the Pacers are in. I really stopped caring about it the last few years, but this rejuvenated me.

                            2) I think this game shows exactly why making it in, even as a 37-win 8th seed, is so important. Not only do these guys get tremendously valuable experience to help better themselves in the future, but we as fans (and Bird et al as management) get to learn a lot about what we have here.

                            3) With that in mind, I was very proud and impressed by a lot of our players. You would think this team would have looked like lambs, but they came out looking like lions. Very, very impressed by their demeanor. I have to think part of that is some of the tremendous collegiate backgrounds/experiences many of them have. This game lifted my hopes for this team/core.

                            4) I think a game like this, against a defense like this, is why having as many scorers as possible on the floor at the once is so important in the playoffs. I was just coming around to having Josh and/or Mike re-inserted with the starters because they are good movers/facilitators, but when a defense like the Bulls is on you, it's so huge to have secondary threats to get the ball to, guys who can score. The Bulls do a good job on Danny, Roy, and later DC as well, and suddenly you need that fourth guy like Tyler who can knock down shots or get fouled. It's also why having George hurts because while I'm optimistic about what year 2-3-4 George will be, he's not ready for prime time yet offensively, and he doesn't really give you much right now on that side of the ball. Unfortunately, neither Rush or Mike is going to improve that situation. However....

                            5) ... you might give Dahtnay Jones a shot at being the 5th scoring option. The main reason to play him is to see if he can stop some of Rose's drives into the paint, but with a lineup of Collison or Price, Jones, Granger, Tyler, and Roy, someone is going to get an opportunity to score one and one, and all of those players can do that. The key is having all 5 of them being ready and able to recognize when to give the ball up, and then of course actually making the right pass. They may not be up to that challenge.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                              We will win Game 2.
                              Originally posted by Piston Prince
                              Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
                              "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                                Originally posted by Evan_The_Dude View Post
                                I think we should be playing Paul George with the 2nd unit. Let Rush start. That way we still get the defense, but we get a little more aggressive with George being the one with the most "ability" off the bench.

                                I'd rather Dahntay start and set the tone with his agressive play. He can guard Rose on "D" and then Bogins has to guard him on offense which he can't do.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X