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/Hawks postgame thread

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

  • Re: Pacers/Hawks postgame thread

    Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
    12 points, the 3 luckiest assists in history, and 5 rebounds in 18 minutes is certainly far more impressive than the 14 points, 6 assists, 4 rebounds in 22 minutes that AJ had against Cleveland as a rookie.

    You can keep trying, but you don't have any valid point here.
    He could have had 5 or six assist if guys made there shots. If you watched he was also trying to get the bench guys shots. He tried to get the ball to Lou AJ and Pendergraph. He put up the numbers he did playing unselfish basketball. The only time I saw him force things was when he was trying to get Jeff Pendergraph the ball.

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers/Hawks postgame thread

      Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
      Prior to the 4th quarter?

      3-9 from the field (ouch...), six points (on nine shots...), -4 +/-, 10 minutes (nine shots in 10 minutes...).

      Price was atrocious in the first three quarters; arguably the biggest reason we had fallen into an 18-point-hole heading into the 4th, at least amongst our own players.

      Anyway, Cleveland was up 16 (not 18) heading into the 4th, and naturally went into cruise control. We took advantage of it by making a surprising run, with A.J. lucking into a pair of made 3's. Kudos to us for not laying down and dying.

      I'll give A.J. a polite golf clap for having the quarter of his lifetime by finally actually hitting his shots at a decent clip (3-6), but I don't think it was as impressive as Lance's demolishing of the Hawks last night.
      This is killing me. Someone who worships the ground a sub 45% shooting power forward walks on, is using a point guard shooting 40% in a game to somehow discount that game as bad.

      As good of a game as Lance had last night, he was pretty low on the list of reasons why we won. Saying he "demolished" them is a pretty major overstatement.

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers/Hawks postgame thread

        Originally posted by spazzxb View Post
        He could have had 5 or six assist if guys made there shots. If you watched he was also trying to get the bench guys shots. He tried to get the ball to Lou AJ and Pendergraph. He put up the numbers he did playing unselfish basketball. The only time I saw him force things was when he was trying to get Jeff Pendergraph the ball.
        Lance had a good game last night. The best game of his young career. That isn't in dispute.

        To pretend like he single-handedly "demolished" the opposition is just silly.

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers/Hawks postgame thread

          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers/Hawks postgame thread

            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
            Thats funny yo

            Like that one
            Sittin on top of the world!

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers/Hawks postgame thread

              Originally posted by Anthem View Post
              Absolutely, and it's a strategy I totally support. Pack the lane and make them score from outside. But Danny sags off even more than PG does, and Danny still finds his man. It's just an awareness thing from a second-year player, and it should get better as the year progresses.


              Absolutely right, and matches what I said above.


              Yeah, I see that somewhat. But the guy playing instead of him is Inferno. I like D.Jones, and he's definitely got big-boy muscles, but you'd think Paul George's length, quick hands, and good instincts could allow him to defend just as well as Jones.
              You and xIndy see it as I see it. PG can drape 1's like Rose because he's a size mismatch for them defensively and has quickness. 2's seem to be a mixed bag, and he's not beefed enough for the three at this point. Between this and our other obvious defensive deficits at the 4 create the need for more of a help style defense. Hibbert seems to cover up a lot of the 4's deficits this year (surprisingly), but the extra stacking in the box seems to really be working.

              I mean, look at this:



              Look also at West during this play. Curious.

              I wonder what 15 more lbs of muscle will do to George's defensive game. It will certainly let him more naturally defend/play the 3, and then Hill can slide to the 2 at times... but the more significant equilibration might be to see better defense at the 4. If West/Hansbrough could hold down the post better, Hibbert can certainly make up for the rest and leave the perimeter with better coverage.

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers/Hawks postgame thread

                I see Atlanta went back home tonight and destroyed the Bobcats by 30.

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers/Hawks postgame thread

                  Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post


                  You show me proof that I said anything even remotely close to that and I will give you 5 c notes via paypal
                  P4E was right it was PAcerspride, my bad 90s. I had it confused with the McRoberts thread I guess. Whatever happened to Pacerspride that thread cracked me up.


                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers/Hawks postgame thread

                    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                    You should go look at AJ's month of January his rookie year. Then you should probably stop talking.

                    Or how about this

                    November 18, 2010 against the Los Angeles Clippers, 14 points, 6 assists, 2 rebounds on 60% shooting, Pacers won by 20+. I don't know why exactly why we need to find one game where AJ has been exactly as good as Lance was last night, but that should fulfill the request.
                    Yea,

                    How about 23 points, and almost single handedly winning the game...against Westbrook. The idea that AJ hasn't had a better game than Lance had, statistically, is hilarious. How about the Miami game, or the Phoenix game, or the Celtics game, or Game 4 of the Bulls game..etc..last season.

                    My favorite thing about the Price haters...they like to use the season after his knee injury as evidence to "he'll never get better". LOL. Like, instead of every other rookie, AJ had to rehab and play on one and a half legs...and I'm sure that had nothing to do with the result of his games.

                    AJ hasn't been given anything in Indiana. Even when he was outperforming veterans (and now, it seems like younger players) he gets to sit on the bench..because a coach prefers vets, or...someone is more invested in a younger guy. Every year he's been here he's had to prove he's, at the very least, the second best point guard on the team.

                    Look, I agree with what most people say about AJ. He isn't that talented. He's pretty good with a lot of stuff (especially if his shot ever returns) and maybe he can improve some things. He clearly does get better year after year on the defensive end.I don't know what Lance is. I didn't see his good game, and he hasn't looked like anything to me besides that.

                    What I do know, is that AJ probably has the highest bball IQ on the team. That doesn't mean he doesn't make mistakes. He does. But he's actually essentially only had one season to play. And he knows better, most of the time. And I'll take a smart point guard who is a leader, to play next to my all star SG or SF any day of the week, over an all star PG. (But that's just my personal opinion over how to build a team.) And that's why I like Price. He's go the intangibles. Sure..he's got the potential to be "good" at pretty much every facet of the game. That's nothing special though. What makes me a fan is his Bball IQ, and his ability to run a team and be a leader. That is valuable skill. Something that I can tell you, AJ's the only guy on the team that has it. (Although DC, is trying)

                    Lance had a good game apparently. Unfortunately, I didn't see it. I hope he shows up again though, I'd like to see what some of the fuss is about.

                    I'm not going to lie though, some people like New York City guards, some like West coast players, etc..they all have their personality types. I always love the Long Island Guards..I have since I was quite young. (Although most of the ones I've watched have been women.. Sue and Bria..<3 ..although Bria is quite a bit different from Sue and AJ...)
                    Last edited by Sookie; 01-13-2012, 01:56 AM.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers/Hawks postgame thread

                      why can't we just be happy that we have both players on our roster?
                      Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers/Hawks postgame thread

                        I disagree with Sookie on AJ. I like the guy, I think he plays hard and gives it his best every night. But I am not too blinded by that to see a guy who is gonna be anything more than a career 2nd/3rd stringer. He can't create on offense at all. He can make the easy pass and knock down an occasional three. But his shooting percentages are horrific (career 38% shooter, 30% from 3), and his assist numbers are pretty unimpressive. He plays solid defense for the most part, but nothing special. AJ is the type of guy who can give you spot minutes and an occasional nice game where he gets hot from 3, but if he is playing a key role you are gonna be in trouble. JMO

                        I think some people are way too worried about an occasional turnover, which is Lances biggest problem right now. The best players in the league have the most turnovers. It is a part of creating offense. A big reason Lance is turning the ball over so much is that he is just learning how to play with his team mates. He hasn't had much court time and he has played with a variety of line ups. Lance is the kind of guard that takes awhile getting used to playing with. He is a very talented player. And a lot of people are gonna find that out this year. He's strong and can finish around the basket, and he's the best passer on the team. And most people would disagree, but I would even say he has the best basketball IQ on the team. He has a natural feel for the game that is rare. I've been saying this since we drafted him. He just needs a chance to play through his mistakes and gain experience and he will be one of our best players. He was a steal in the second round.
                        Last edited by Taterhead; 01-13-2012, 02:39 AM.
                        "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers/Hawks postgame thread

                          Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                          I think some people are way too worried about an occasional turnover, which is Lances biggest problem right now. The best players in the league have the most turnovers. It is a part of creating offense. A big reason Lance is turning the ball over so much is that he is just learning how to play with his team mates. He hasn't had much court time and he has played with a variety of line ups. Lance is the kind of guard that takes awhile getting used to playing with. He is a very talented player. And a lot of people are gonna find that out this year. He's strong and can finish around the basket, and he's the best passer on the team. And most people would disagree, but I would even say he has the best basketball IQ on the team. He has a natural feel for the game that is rare. I've been saying this since we drafted him. He just needs a chance to play through his mistakes and gain experience and he will be one of our best players. He was a steal in the second round.
                          Out of curiosity, what leads you to think that? Even Lance's biggest fans would tell you that it's too small of a sample size to draw such a conclusion.

                          When talking about basketball IQ, I'd look at vets like David West, who spent countless hours studying tape of Karl Malone. Then I'd look at four year college players like Roy Hibbert, who developed at one of the best programs in the country, under one of the best coaches, and who also has an eagerness to pick up anything and everything from some of the best big men in the game.

                          I agree with you when you say that Lance has a natural feel for the game. I think what's clear is that he has exceptional vision and the talent to make passes that others couldn't make or wouldn't even attempt. That much we can deduce from even the few minutes he's played. But I wouldn't confuse this with basketball IQ, yet.
                          2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers/Hawks postgame thread

                            Please play another game already.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers/Hawks postgame thread

                              I didn't get to watch that Orlando-GS game. I assume Mark Jackson was using a hack-a-Howard strategy?

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers/Hawks postgame thread

                                Holy **** people. Both AJ and Lance are on the Pacers. Why in the **** are we bashing our own players? Come on. This is disgusting.

                                Also, doesn't Granger get bashed when he doesn't share the ball and tries to dominate the game? We tell him that "it's a team game, share the wealth." Well, constantly bashing a PACERS player you don't like or only promoting one player is basically the same thing. We are freaking 7-3. I don't care if Pendergraph leads us in scoring tonight, just win the damn game.
                                Last edited by BPump33; 01-13-2012, 09:14 AM.
                                Passion. Pride. Patience. Pacers

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X