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

Indiana-Toronto Postgame

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

  • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

    Originally posted by Dr. Hibbert View Post
    Was I the only one who loved the officiating last night, then? I wish all NBA games were called like that.
    It was more phsyical than a lot of the playoffs last season, I thought. The Pacers rely on getting to the FT, so I don't think swallowing the whistle that hard works all that well for them. Getting the ball inside became risky, because it was leading to a lot of strips/steals. I didn't think a lot of the TOs were a result of bad passes, or shaky dribbling. A lot of them came from getting their arm whacked and losing control of the ball.

    I like phsyical games, but that was over-the-top a bit.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
      So you think Melo is a good all-around player?

      That phrase "all-around impact" is pretty important to figure out what exactly they're trying to say, as opposed to how you're taking it.
      It's also pretty important to distinguish the fact that "all-around impact," and "all-around player," are not the same thing.

      Steve Nash isn't a great "all-around player," but he certainly makes a great "all-around impact."

      Comment


      • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

        Originally posted by mattie View Post
        I like West. Awesome dude. But no matter how well he does on the offensive side of the court, he doesn't rebound or defend. That's extremely frustrating especially from a Big. I'd rather have all defense and rebounding and make up for the offense else where honestly.
        If I recall correctly, his team tends to rebound better when he's on the floor as opposed to when he's off the floor. He doesn't grab a lot of them himself, but he tends to be good at boxing out on every possession and giving somebody on his team a chance. So it's not necessarily as bad as the individual stats may suggest.

        Comment


        • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

          Originally posted by Dr. Hibbert View Post
          Was I the only one who loved the officiating last night, then? I wish all NBA games were called like that.
          me too. I hope it means the league has decided to go with more physical play this season.

          Comment


          • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

            Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
            I like when they let them play, but not when the fouls result in a missed shot or a turnover, which happened a lot last night.
            Exactly. West was fouled several times on entry passes and rebounds. Bargnani practically tackled Hill to give him his only turnover. Then there were a couple bad calls on Hibbert and one on Mahinmi that were called fouls when they clearly jumped straight up. We got a couple calls to, but overall I thought it was pretty one sided. I like when they let them play in the paint, but I don't like all the hand and wrist slapping that was being allowed.

            Comment


            • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

              My observations:

              - The Raptors have something going. Man they were *active*, both offensively and defensively, and they have some great young players there.
              - The Pacers looked "veteran", by withstanding a pretty thorough butt-whoopin most of the 2nd half and then just imposing their will down the stretch by condensing the game to a slow half-court game and going to money-making shots.
              - David West is slow, plodding, old-looking --- and damn near unstoppable in the paint. Goes to show that athleticism doesn't mean squat in this league. The Raptor fans had to *hate* that old man was out there schooling them down the stretch. It was so out of place, and yet there was nothing they could do. If they manned him up, he just drove his guy down under the rim. If they doubled him, he found the cutters or guys on the 3-point line. So simple. Loved it.
              - Despite DWest's dominant 4th quarter, he finished with a 0 +/-, which means he just made up in the 4th for what wasn't being accomplished the rest of the game.
              - George Hill knows how to show up when he needs to show up.
              - PG had a good 1st quarter offensively --- and then looked like PG of last year for the rest of the game. But he continued to contribute in other areas. 15 rebounds is ridiculous. I'll take 14-15-5 most nights, lol. I do wish he'd be more of a killer in the 4th though.
              - Our defense on the whole was pretty porous, but it slowly got better as the game went on, and by the 4th quarter, Toronto really struggled offensively.
              - We actually shot the ball really well on the whole, except free throws. Come on guys, hit those freebies.
              - Toronto felt like they controlled this game in the 2nd half, but when you look at the box score, it's not exactly clear-cut as to why they were, until you look at the discrepancy in steals by Toronto and turnovers, which they also won handily.
              There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

              Comment


              • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                A lot of grit...and now the talent to make it pay off.
                http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...nce-stephenson
                "But, first, let us now praise famous moments, because something happened Tuesday night in Indianapolis that you can watch a lifetime’s worth of professional basketball and never see again. There was a brief, and very decisive, and altogether unprecedented, outburst of genuine officiating, and it was directed at the best player in the world, and that, my dear young person, simply is not done."

                Comment


                • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                  Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                  Bingo.

                  Overall it was a pretty terrible game, but the result was saved because David West dressed up as Chuck Norris for Halloween. We did not execute well offensively, save for David West deciding to score every time down the floor in the 4th quarter. The rotations defensively were pretty abysmal, especially from the 2nd unit, but the 1st unit wasn't much, if any better.
                  .
                  I agree with the most of your post, but I have to question what you saw defensively. We just held them to 36% shooting at their house, and it's not like they were just missing a bunch of wide open shots.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                    Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                    I agree with the most of your post, but I have to question what you saw defensively. We just held them to 36% shooting at their house, and it's not like they were just missing a bunch of wide open shots.
                    http://scores.espn.go.com/nba/shotch...meId=400277724

                    Look at their shot chart. Look at how many shots they missed in the paint, and right at the rim.

                    Other than Roy's 5 blocks, for the most part, that isn't due to good defense. That's just bad offense.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                      Geez, right now every team seems to be turning the ball over a lot. Guess that makes it easier to swallow.

                      Kobe had 7 TOs yesterday.

                      Clippers had 22 TOs and still won. hahaha
                      First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                        Cmon Milsap. Dude had 11boards with 6min left in the 2nd. Only finished with 15. Dude was on a torrid pace to 20+ easily. Bummer.
                        First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                          Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
                          Paul George turned down the cuteness. He passed fairly well, despite the turnovers. He's learning, and that's encouraging.

                          I know that felt good for West, because Bargnani was pissing him off all game.
                          I agree. Paul looked MUCH better than he had in the preseason due to dialing stuff down a bit. He still tried to do too much at times and ended up losing his dribble, but overall he looked like a better offensive player than we saw last year.

                          B A M F - I mean this doesn't even need to be discussed at this point, and I agree that he was getting pretty PO'd by some of the physical play. Big mistake for the Raps.


                          I thought TYLER had a very useful, productive game. I would love to see more of that because it was a rare time that I felt good about his role on the court and how he was executing. I think the physical level the refs allowed also fit into what Tyler does.


                          Green was fine, that wasn't a bad game. He was active on defense and IMO was a sum positive on the night. The team has scorers, he doesn't need to light it up even if he's in for Danny. That's what Roy, Paul and David are for.


                          Ian to a large degree and DJ to lesser degree both got INTIMIDATED by the intensity and physical play. Ian seemed to let his confidence drop a bit until later in the game, although a couple of times he lost the ball via an UNCALLED FOUL. DJ seemed to get a bit fired up after also being pressed very aggressively early on which improved his game.

                          So I wouldn't sweat Ian or DJ one bit, they just got put on their heals by a Raps team that appeared to be playing for a title based on how physically close and aggressive they were on defense (ahem, fouling).

                          Sam Young made several nice plays, often away from the ball, and I just love seeing him find the space gaps on defense and cover them up, block out, etc. He had a quietly very helpful game.


                          Of course Roy was Roy which implies potential 2nd time AS center. Dude is great to the point that it feels boring to even mention it.


                          And how about Hill getting all gritty with his hip pointer. Last year and this summer we debated who the closer was and as I recall we had a pretty fair group that pointed directly at West and Hill. Last night emphasized the truth in that opinion.


                          They won't get caught so off-guard in game 2, and they showed great spirit in hanging in this one for the win.



                          Vogel had some really sweet plays in the rotation last night. Hill set the backdoor screen for Paul on the give n go with Roy and there was that complex play that ended up with Roy at the FT line dumping to a backscreen open West cutting to the rim. Some of the plays might still be rough, but fundamentally I LOVE WHAT VOGEL IS TRYING TO DO WITH THE TALENT HE HAS.

                          Dare I say "Carlisle-esque". Very hopeful on that front, seems like he and the staff have a good understanding of the roster and how to win with it.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                            Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                            http://scores.espn.go.com/nba/shotch...meId=400277724

                            Look at their shot chart. Look at how many shots they missed in the paint, and right at the rim.

                            Other than Roy's 5 blocks, for the most part, that isn't due to good defense. That's just bad offense.
                            They weren't just missing wide open layups either. We were contesting a lot of those shots. Even Tyler was defending the paint well. The defense deserves a little credit. D. West was pretty terrible most of the first 3 qtrs, though. I can't deny that.

                            edit: now if you say the wings didn't rotate as well as they should I can agree with that, but the big men, minus West for 3 qtrs, did a hell of a job rotating and playing help D.
                            Last edited by CJ Jones; 11-01-2012, 09:51 AM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                              Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
                              Cmon Milsap. Dude had 11boards with 6min left in the 2nd. Only finished with 15. Dude was on a torrid pace to 20+ easily. Bummer.
                              We call that the Troy Murphy system.

                              Get double digits in the 1st half, then cruise in the 2nd, and laugh all the way to bank.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                                I got a lil' frustrated by Vogel's substitutions in the 4th... it seemed like he kept some key guys benched entirely too deep into the quarter. It seems like PG and Hibbert didn't re-enter until the 6:00 mark.
                                There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X