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

Yes we lost, but lets be realistic

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

  • #31
    Re: Yes we lost, but lets be realistic

    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
    The planets, moon and stars are apparently something Wade and Lebron must control because they spanked our fannies 3 times in a row...twice on our home court.

    It wasn't luck or the planets. Wade and Lebron are just better. Time to get over it. Even Vogel and DWest would tell you that.

    Edit: I notice you're not alone in this line of thinking. I suppose there are more than a few homers on this board. Nobody else in the world thinks the Pacers are better than the Heat...at least right now.
    Your just looking at the final outcome and not the entire story. up 2-1 we had them on their heels. They responded with an amazing game 4. In game 5 we played well up until Granger got hurt and our team collectively nose dived over a 2 minute stretch. Leaving Barbosa in over George was a huge mistake. Vogel should have put DC, Hill, George, West, and Hibbert out there to close the half out. But again in the 2nd half we had no trap to get the ball out of their hands.

    Regardless of the previous game's outcome. In Game 6, a trapping defense would have given us an edge I believe. Forced a game 7.

    And lets be real. They did not spank our fannies 3 games in a row. We lost by single digits in 2 of those games.
    You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Yes we lost, but lets be realistic

      Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
      I tend to agree with you. With a few defensive adjustments we would have handled them. We had enough offense to take them down, even with our post up troubles.

      1. We did not go under the screens enough. Sure we funneled them to Hibbert who did an admirable job defensively, he challenged a ton of shots the rim. But our wings let them get by us on the screens setting up those easy floaters. Vogel should have switched it up to go under those screens and take away the direct path to the rim for those floaters. Terrible non-adjustment there. He tried to defend it like the orlando series, except he did not realize that Miami's big 2 does the opposite of what Orlando does.

      2. Vogel did not implement a trap early in the shot clock. Which is just so infuriating when we did this so well against Rose last year. Honestly after game 4 had their 2 guys going off for 70 points. It shoud have been an automatic defensive adjustment. If 2 guys are going to beat you, then its best to get the ball out of their hands early in the shot clock. Even more frustrating when you hear Danny Granger mention it at the half. Especially when we have a trio of guys in our starting line up who could do it effectively! Remember every one drooling over the Granger, George, Hill defensive unit? Where did that go? Those guys should be able to execute a trap with out letting the other superstar catch the ball unchecked. Mario Chalmers isn't going to beat you!
      100% agree with you.

      1) I made that same suggestion in one of the game threads to have the players go under the screen instead of fighting over the top of it. I would have rather lived with turning Miami into a jumpshooting team than to have keep killing us with all those floaters. I do agree that those floaters were killing us for too long and too many times in this series. I mean this with so much sincerely, but I felt that I seen more floaters in the lane in this series than I have seen in TWO NBA season. Vogel never changed approach to combat or take away that shot.

      2) I agree with this statement too. I felt that Indiana was still relying too heavy on one-on-one defensive coverage for Wade and Lebron, and we never truly forced them to rely on other players for help.

      If you break down the series, Indiana just made some bad adjustments (and non-adjustments), but hopefully Vogel will learn from it. Personally, I would have STOPPED playing Barbosa and took my chances with D. Jones. It seems he was more harm than good.
      Last edited by ksuttonjr76; 05-27-2012, 12:11 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


      • #33
        Re: Yes we lost, but lets be realistic

        Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
        The planets, moon and stars are apparently something Wade and Lebron must control because they spanked our fannies 3 times in a row...twice on our home court.

        It wasn't luck or the planets. Wade and Lebron are just better. Time to get over it. Even Vogel and DWest would tell you that.

        Edit: I notice you're not alone in this line of thinking. I suppose there are more than a few homers on this board. Nobody else in the world thinks the Pacers are better than the Heat...at least right now.
        Vogel and D. West would tell me that Indiana is a Championship Team.

        If believing that our Pacers are better team than the Heat makes me homer, then consider me *****ing guilty as charged.


        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


        • #34
          Re: Yes we lost, but lets be realistic

          Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
          100% agree with you.

          1) I made that same suggestion in one of the game threads to have the players go under the screen instead of fighting over the top of it. I would have rather lived with turning Miami into a jumpshooting team than to have keep killing us with all those floaters.
          I will also add that it was a dumb expectation to think PG would be able to keep up with Wade by fighting thru the screens. A guy who is 6-9 and not particularly strong, is not going fight through the screen time and time again and keep up with smaller quicker player. Only logical decision would be to go under the screen and use your length to recover.
          You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Yes we lost, but lets be realistic

            Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
            I will also add that it was a dumb expectation to think PG would be able to keep up with Wade by fighting thru the screens. A guy who is 6-9 and not particularly strong, is not going fight through the screen time and time again and keep up with smaller quicker player. Only logical decision would be to go under the screen and use your length to recover.
            Not to mention, George has always struggled to get through screens.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Yes we lost, but lets be realistic

              Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
              Vogel and D. West would tell me that Indiana is a Championship Team.

              If believing that our Pacers are better team than the Heat makes me homer, then consider me *****ing guilty as charged.
              Sure they will say that. But Vogel also said this: ''We just didn't have enough yet,'' Vogel said, ''but we'll be back.'' DWest also said: ''They're too good. They capitalize on your mistakes,'' West said.

              By the way, Vogel is right. We will be back and we'll probably be better. But that doesn't mean we are the better team right now. We'll be the better team when we beat them.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Yes we lost, but lets be realistic

                Wade and James minutes increased because it is the second round of the playoffs AND because the Heat were missing Bosh.
                Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Yes we lost, but lets be realistic

                  The Pacers are clearly a better TEAM. I don't know how you can call Miami's 3 man show a team. If you watched the last few games, you'd see that Lebron and Wade brought the ball up the floor and scored over 90% of Miami's points. That's not team basketball, because they don't have to play team basketball.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Yes we lost, but lets be realistic

                    Originally posted by Pacersalltheway10 View Post
                    The Pacers are clearly a better TEAM. I don't know how you can call Miami's 3 man show a team. If you watched the last few games, you'd see that Lebron and Wade brought the ball up the floor and scored over 90% of Miami's points. That's not team basketball, because they don't have to play team basketball.
                    So the Pacers were five on two and they got beaten badly. That shows you the power of superstars and it why teams without one or two or three rarely win NBA championships. The Pacers have no stars and they won't compete well against the teams that do have them.......

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Yes we lost, but lets be realistic

                      Originally posted by Pacersalltheway10 View Post
                      The Pacers are clearly a better TEAM. I don't know how you can call Miami's 3 man show a team. If you watched the last few games, you'd see that Lebron and Wade brought the ball up the floor and scored over 90% of Miami's points. That's not team basketball, because they don't have to play team basketball.
                      4>2. Miami is better. The season series is 7 to 3. The fact that people are even questioning who is the better team is becoming laughable.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Yes we lost, but lets be realistic

                        Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
                        So the Pacers were five on two and they got beaten badly. That shows you the power of superstars and it why teams without one or two or three rarely win NBA championships. The Pacers have no stars and they won't compete well against the teams that do have them.......
                        It takes a perfect storm and a deep team of veteran players to overcome that. It also requires that the opposition isn't MJ's Bulls, Magic's Lakers or Larry's Celtics. So, to a large extent you are right. But it's indeed possible and the Detroit Pistons already proved it.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Yes we lost, but lets be realistic

                          One team, one time with a great coach. It may not happen for another 20 years......

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Yes we lost, but lets be realistic

                            Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
                            One team, one time with a great coach. It may not happen for another 20 years......
                            I'm not sure if Dallas from last year doesn't qualify, although Dirk is a top 10 player. Point is, it usually requires one of the top 5 players in the league. Like Magic, Larry, Michael, Shaq, DWade, Kobe, Timmy, Hakeem, etc. Dirk is very good...but IMO he's not at that level. So, yeh, I think I agree.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Yes we lost, but lets be realistic

                              Originally posted by rm1369 View Post
                              There is also a group that advocates trading DG only because they believe DG and PG are redundant. I'm in that group. It's not that I don't want him on the team, it's just that I believe the team needs someone in the starting libeup to attack the rim off the dribble. IMO, that player is never going to be DG or PG. Both lack the handle or the passing ability necessary to compliment the rest of the starters. Those two paired with a combo guard at point leaves your offense very limited when faced with an attacking, gambling defense. An upgrade at point guard would help, but doesn't completely solve the problem. If you believe that is what the team needs then it becomes obvious one of DG and PG have go.

                              If The pacers are better we should have given them the knockout punch when we were up 2-1. Lebron and Wade flexed their muscles and didnt let that happen. They are the better team
                              Larry Bird and Ryan Grigson- wasting the talents of Paul George and Andrew Luck

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Yes we lost, but lets be realistic

                                Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
                                4>2. Miami is better. The season series is 7 to 3. The fact that people are even questioning who is the better team is becoming laughable.
                                What's laughable is that you consider yourself a "fan". What's laughable that people still believe you that you need a "superstar" to win. The reality is that we challenged the Bulls last season. The reality is that we challenged the Heat in a shorten season. The reality is that Vogel will get his FIRST offseason of training camp and preseason games THIS season. The reality is that it took two Superstars to step their game up to beat a relatively inexperience team.


                                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

                                Working...
                                X