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

Odd Thoughts: Buffalo Hunters

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

  • #46
    Re: Odd Thoughts: Buffalo Hunters

    I really did not like the fact that Vogel went away from West. He didn't play at all int he 4th if I recall. When the other team is desperately trying to make a run, you have to impose your will on them. They truly did not have any answer for West over 3 qtrs. Terrible to go away from him. He ended up with 14pts, would have had 20 if he played in the 4th. It probably would have been a blow out.
    You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Odd Thoughts: Buffalo Hunters

      Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
      I really did not like the fact that Vogel went away from West. He didn't play at all int he 4th if I recall. When the other team is desperately trying to make a run, you have to impose your will on them. They truly did not have any answer for West over 3 qtrs. Terrible to go away from him. He ended up with 14pts, would have had 20 if he played in the 4th. It probably would have been a blow out.
      So you think going to David West would have more success against Durant than Durant would have had against West?

      I don't think they would have switched back to a standard lineup and I don't think West would win that battle. I think you would have seen more than 17 pts. from Durant in the 4th if we did this. We scored 28 points in the quarter; it's not as if our offense died.
      Time for a new sig.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Odd Thoughts: Buffalo Hunters

        On West... We had several possessions where we could not get a good shot. And a couple others where a contested 3-pointer bailed us out. West is a guy I trust to get a good look with the ball in his hands when we need a basket.

        On George... Pretty poor game. He worked his butt off on the boards to make up for the rest of his game though. Nice to see that level of maturity from a young player.
        Last edited by Doug; 04-07-2012, 06:17 PM.
        You're caught up in the Internet / you think it's such a great asset / but you're wrong, wrong, wrong
        All that fiber optic gear / still cannot take away the fear / like an island song

        - Jimmy Buffett

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Odd Thoughts: Buffalo Hunters

          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
          Um, wow.

          You mean the #1 DEFENDER of the +/- stat and one of PD's resident stat geeks doesn't really know a whole lot about it?

          Okay sir.


          The plus-minus most certainly does not "reward" anything. It's a stat meant to capture those ideas by implication, but it ties EVERYTHING into it which also includes matchups, quality of players on the court with you (both sides) while still also including TOs, FG%, rebounds, steals and all the other traditional stats as well.

          Danny had a bad +/- in the Houston game and people were attacking the stat because of that. I defended the stat by saying that it was showing some hidden aspect to Danny's night that the normal stats don't show.

          It is ONE stat, just like Points is one stat. Neither tell the whole story and neither can be 100% relied upon. You want to examine stats for correlation to wins or +/- as a team (like Hollinger, 82Games or basketball-reference do) and try to identify the complex interaction that can predict outcomes or suggest who was most critical to winning a game (or might be in the future).

          As of now NO STAT does this which is why Vegas sports books still haven't closed shop.


          Stats are wonderful, critical tools that are neither worthless nor without flaws.

          Heck, even the FINAL SCORE STAT has it's detractors unless you've never heard someone say that "yes that other team won tonight, but they weren't the better team".

          People see the score, reflect on how the teams played all game, and conclude that the score itself is a poor stat for judging the quality of the two teams when matched against each other.
          Note the first thing I said was no offense. And second, it does reward each player for doing all the small things however the +/- stat is also tied to team performance during the time that that particular player is on the court. The games official scorer records the differential in terms of gain (plus) or loss (minus). Example, if Paul George enters the game with the score tied and leaves with his team ahead by 5, he gets a plus 5. Conversely, if he enters with his team ahead by 13, and leaves with a 3 point lead, he gets a minus-10. I don't care if you support it or you don't, I have never seen the point in it as a fan but I'm sure it gives the coaches a good look over the coarse of the season who plays well together and what their best player combination is.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Odd Thoughts: Buffalo Hunters

            Originally posted by adamscb View Post
            one thing i noticed, after collison hit that clutch shot in the fourth, when barbosa was congratulating him, he was smiling like i had never seen him do before. that was cool to see.
            I saw him look like that during the first month or so of the season when we were all (OK, not all - most) noticing that his defense was better and he was trying to be a distributor *and* hitting his little mid-range pull-up. He looked good and he looked happy.

            I'm hoping the return of that indicates something about his play heading into the playoffs.
            "Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better." - Albert Camus

            "Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well." - Voltaire

            "Everyone's values are defined by what they will tolerate when it is done to others." - William Greider

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Odd Thoughts: Buffalo Hunters

              Originally posted by Peck View Post
              One other thing that I would like to add to my previous post is that last night's game proved to me beyond a shadow of a doubt why Jim O'Brien, Stan Van Gundy & Mike D'Antoni are just not really great coach's (IMO each of them are bad but I understand that overall that is not true)

              Why were we able to win the game? Well beyond great rebounding and solid defense?

              We were killing them in the mid range game. Think about it, we both had the exact same 3 point field goal attempts & % 6-19.

              Both Danny & David West were just mid range assassins and all the shot blocking ability in the world isn't going to hurt a player who isn't in your shot blocking range.

              The mid range game is kind of a lost art, one that we are creating a renaissance for. The old men were just picking them apart from about 15'.

              Sure a dunk is great, yes a three is nice, but neglecting the mid range jump shot has caused a lot of needless losing over the years.

              http://espn.go.com/nba/shotchart?gameId=320406011
              Peck, this is a great point and one of my favorite things about Danny's newfound shot selection. So many times this season he's spotted up for three, pump-faked his guy into the air, and dribbled in for the sure-fire mid-range jumper. It's simply fantastic.
              This space for rent.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Odd Thoughts: Buffalo Hunters

                Originally posted by Peck View Post
                Great OT, Peck, but that buffalo looks way too sad.
                You Got The Tony!!!!!!

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Odd Thoughts: Buffalo Hunters

                  Originally posted by Peck View Post
                  BTW, under no circumstance am I saying it will happen but if the Pacers do lose tonight to the Celtics could we all not panic.

                  I say this to myself as much as any of you. I've seen a lot of talk about winning out the rest of the season and I'm sorry but that is just an unrealistic expectation that will set you up for misery if perfection does not happen.


                  I think the longest winning streak of the season is 10 which the Spurs are on right now.

                  Boston will be hungry because they have lost 2 straight. They want to send a message to us since we might meet in the playoff (not likely now but still a possibility) and frankly our guys have got to be wasted. Danny has had to play big min. the last three games so if he is worn down tonight how can anybody blame him.

                  I'm not trying to be Debbie Downer here but let's all give both the team and ourselves a break if somehow Boston takes the game.

                  On the other hand if we win we will celebrate like it's times square on VJ day.

                  SO... THIS IS YOUR FAULT!!!
                  ...Still "flying casual"
                  @roaminggnome74

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Odd Thoughts: Buffalo Hunters

                    Originally posted by Roaming Gnome View Post
                    SO... THIS IS YOUR FAULT!!!
                    Personally, I blame those damn gold uniforms myself. THINGS ARE CURSED!
                    "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                    "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Odd Thoughts: Buffalo Hunters

                      Originally posted by Roaming Gnome View Post
                      SO... THIS IS YOUR FAULT!!!
                      Actually what is the one difference between tonight and the other games we won? That's right BillS is back from France, so it's his fault.


                      Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Odd Thoughts: Buffalo Hunters

                        Originally posted by Sandman21 View Post
                        Personally, I blame those damn gold uniforms myself. THINGS ARE CURSED!
                        This. Burn them in the pyre!

                        We should chant the following:

                        "Die by my hand, all you hopeless ones
                        Deep down, my heart, darkest blood it runs
                        Through my veins its fire's burning bright,
                        You won't live through the night "

                        And just toss them in a huge fire and make s'mores out of them.
                        Originally posted by IrishPacer
                        Empty vessels make the most noise.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Odd Thoughts: Buffalo Hunters

                          Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
                          I don't know who this Nietzsche character is,
                          Doesn't he play for the Mavs?











                          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                          ------

                          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Odd Thoughts: Buffalo Hunters

                            Originally posted by Sandman21 View Post
                            Personally, I blame those damn gold uniforms myself. THINGS ARE CURSED!
                            man up ..!!! man up !!!








                            .

                            Last edited by Kemo; 04-08-2012, 06:02 PM.
                            "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


                            • #59
                              Re: Odd Thoughts: Buffalo Hunters

                              Originally posted by Peck View Post
                              Actually what is the one difference between tonight and the other games we won? That's right BillS is back from France, so it's his fault.
                              I TOLD Brenda I was going to get blamed for this.

                              Guess I need to go back to France and keep eating great food and drinking fantastic wine instead of scarfing italian sausage and drinking beer at the Fieldhouse.
                              BillS

                              A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                              Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Odd Thoughts: Buffalo Hunters

                                Originally posted by Peck View Post
                                Actually what is the one difference between tonight and the other games we won? That's right BillS is back from France, so it's his fault.
                                I have no problem sending Bill back to Europe. I sure hope he doesn't lose his passport along the way.




                                I just wanted to jump back in after watching some of the OKC game on DVR and say that I was too hard on Paul. It wasn't his rebounds because a lot of those were uncontested. But he made MANY really smart passes in the game, some of which didn't become assists but should have.

                                With the ball in his hands looking for his own shot he made some poor choices and took ugly, ill-advised shots that did hurt the team. But then he'd come back the next time and make a good play. So it was more 50/50 good vs bad rather than just an awful game as I had described it.

                                Kinda more like a classic Paul "I'm almost a star but I'm still a pup" game.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X