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

Gamethread 12/20/2012 vs Bulls

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

  • Re: Gamethread 12/20/2012 vs Bulls

    Originally posted by daschysta View Post
    On the bright side I was very pleased with what I saw from west. Seemed confident with the knee, and scored well in the post through traffic.

    Honestly jumping to an conclusions after a preseason game is silly on its face, but keep in mind this was the best team in the NBA last regular season, going up against their defense, and on the road tonight? We were likely going to lose at this point regardless. There was alot of good to take from these games too.

    Hans looks like a beast, and could win 6moy if he keeps it up. West looked promising. George makes some silly mistakes, but the talent is undeniable, and he's been productive, 15 ppg or so from him this year would be amazing on top of his great rebounding, danny blows annually during the preseason, nothing new to see there, roy has kept position better, eventually those shots will fall, noah is one of his worst matchups in the NBA...

    I'm still confident in my prediction of a 4th or 5th place finish once things really rev up. Chicago is an elite team, and moreso now with rip, we'll get better too once West is fully back in the fold, and Hill is fully acclimated. Don't get too high or low after preseason games, especially when we've only had a week and there are just two of them.

    I'm confident we'll kick the crap out of the pistons and have a season far more rewarding than any we've had in nearly a decade.
    Roy generally struggles against Noah it seems. I was expecting the same tonight.

    And I thought it was interesting that Collison was on Rose as opposed to PG.

    Comment


    • Re: Gamethread 12/20/2012 vs Bulls

      Originally posted by FireTheCoach View Post
      I think we'll get better as the chemistry starts coming together a bit with the new guys... I'll admit it was a fairly disappointing performance overall in the two preseason games.

      Tyler is a beast for sure, I was so excited when we drafted him... he is living up to my expectations and that rarely happens in sports. Couldn't be happier for the kid.

      Roy has always had poor games and great games... not surprised that he didn't look good. He'll get his groove on but he'll probably never really be that consistent threat night in and night out.

      Granger is like a ghost out there.... has been for a while now. Does he really want to be here or what... sometimes I wonder.

      Collison is NOT going to take us to the next level. He's as mediocre as they come.

      Hill looks pretty lost but I'll give him a pass for obvious reasons.

      I think West will be a nice addition, glad we got him.

      Other than that... it WAS just preseason but we need much improvement across the board, both sides of the ball, I don't care if it was the Bulls or not, we looked really crappy and not like a playoff team is supposed to look.

      Just my $.02
      Granger stepped up in the playoffs and did quite well, have you ever seen granger in the preseason? He's always bad there, and it has no effect whatsoever on regular season performance. Also we looked just as bad offensively at times during the playoffs last year, games against the bulls are never pretty, they are better than we are.
      Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

      Comment


      • Re: Gamethread 12/20/2012 vs Bulls

        Originally posted by pezasied182 View Post
        Roy generally struggles against Noah it seems. I was expecting the same tonight.

        And I thought it was interesting that Collison was on Rose as opposed to PG.
        Preseason, there's no need to pull out all of your tricks just to slow Rose. The Bulls even played a lot different, it wasn'tjust the Rose show on offense which limits the need to put your best defender on him.

        Comment


        • Re: Gamethread 12/20/2012 vs Bulls

          Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
          Dominate?

          I'd settle for serviceable at this point.

          The consistency thing is a HUGE issue. I feel like if it doesn't improve this season, then chalk Roy up as a good b/u C.


          Chuckle. The week b4 last people were throwing a hissy fit of not trading Hibbert for Marc Gasol due to how great Hibbert is. I guess he must have lost much of his greatness in 2 pre-season games.

          Lets just wait until the end of the season to see how much better Hibbert is than Gasol. Since there is no sarcasm icon for that statement, I'll just go cough cough.

          Comment


          • Re: Gamethread 12/20/2012 vs Bulls

            I see a lot of people being really down on Roy. Give some credit to Noah for excellent defense. Also, the Bulls were loading up on Roy down low. Obviously part of the fame plan for them. Hype was at an all time high before these games with the lockout and the moves we made, but that was the preseason, and I refuse to get to high or low from anything I saw. Recognize that we have a young developing team and take yourself off the rollercoaster before you throw up. Not directed at anyone, just sage advise.

            Comment


            • Re: Gamethread 12/20/2012 vs Bulls

              When the idea of two new trolls being the same guy is floated, this is the response:

              Originally posted by ThatPacerFan View Post
              No I'm not, I'm sure our different I.P. addresses will blow that theory out the window....
              What an awesome response. Clearly this man has experience with banning on internet forums.
              This space for rent.

              Comment


              • Re: Gamethread 12/20/2012 vs Bulls

                Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                I'm with you. He'll do it in a way that makes some cringe (it's just not their preferred style for a PG... at all), but once those shots start dropping (and I think they will) and those passes start landing at the right times (as they already were starting to do at times last year), I think people will at least turn around so much as to admit he's doing something positive out there.

                I'm by no means convinced he'll earn a long-term place on our team, though. He has to prove a LOT.
                I can see the underlying talent...sure. But, to be fair, how many guys could you say that about in the NBA who never become anything? Lance's shot selection is still a huge issue.


                Comment


                • Re: Gamethread 12/20/2012 vs Bulls

                  Originally posted by TheDavisBrothers View Post
                  I don't know if anybody else realized this but, we actually outscored then 70-69 in the last 3 quarters, granted they had scrubs at the end, but still...
                  We actually pulled our starters way before they did. Noah and Boozer were even out there til the very end.


                  Comment


                  • Re: Gamethread 12/20/2012 vs Bulls

                    Originally posted by Psyren View Post
                    Honestly, the only player I really worry about is Roy.

                    I don't care how much you like him and how nice of a guy he is, he's just not that talented. He doesn't look stronger to me and still looks timid and scared.

                    Everyone else I think will get back in the flow shortly. I just can't help but worry about Roy though.
                    Roy, IMO, is already in his own head, which is his typical MO now. And seeing West and Hansbrough out there together and being effective couldn't have helped his shaky confidence. I'm seriously concerned about Roy moving forward. How will he respond if we end up going with West and Hans in late game situations? Yes they aren't as tall as Roy, but they are both much stronger and can hold their position in the post much better on both ends of the court.

                    I was very impressed with West. He seems to be extremely confident in that knee and was very active. I loved when he got the ball deep and used a quick elbow plunge into Noah's kidney to get the space he needed for the layup. That is a solid move. One that I think Hans will eventually add to his arsenal, and it would be great if he could teach Roy how to clear space like that, but unfortunately I just don't think Roy gets that. West is going to be a very good player for us this year, he looks in great shape and is clearly a confident vet out there.


                    Comment


                    • Re: Gamethread 12/20/2012 vs Bulls

                      Also, Paul George is intriguing the hell out of me, that past two games, if you had just given me a quick question of his "impact" without looking at the box score, I would have guessed mediocre to minimal. But yet, 17 and 10 & 14 and 6. That is NOT Brandon Rush folks. That is an aggressive player who just isn't quite on his game yet. Very intrigued by those two stat lines, if he had been on his game either of those nights we'd probably be talking about him averaging 20 ppg in the two preseason games, yet he put up decent stats and had an impact without me really taking notice. That is a very good sign IMO. Still needs to work on his damn jump shot though.


                      Comment


                      • Re: Gamethread 12/20/2012 vs Bulls

                        Man, the knives came out REALLY quickly on Roy.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Gamethread 12/20/2012 vs Bulls

                          Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                          Man, the knives came out REALLY quickly on Roy.
                          I know it seems that way, but honestly, I've been a bit irritated with his play since February of last year.


                          Comment


                          • Re: Gamethread 12/20/2012 vs Bulls

                            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                            I can see the underlying talent...sure. But, to be fair, how many guys could you say that about in the NBA who never become anything? Lance's shot selection is still a huge issue.
                            Very few have the ability to get where they want to go at any given time. Lance has it in spades.
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Gamethread 12/20/2012 vs Bulls

                              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                              Very few have the ability to get where they want to go at any given time. Lance has it in spades.
                              True, but his dribble is very loose, he needs to tighten it up a bit. What I mean by that is, he dribbles the ball pretty high, needs to keep it down low, he leaves himself open to it being easily poked at when he's in traffic.


                              Comment


                              • Re: Gamethread 12/20/2012 vs Bulls

                                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                                Very few have the ability to get where they want to go at any given time. Lance has it in spades.
                                Absolutely. He has an amazing sense of body control that can't be learned. For all the red flags and deficiencies in his game (and there are a lot), he has some elite skills that shine through and make you think there's another level he can get to.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X