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

  • #91
    Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

    For those of us who accept Hansbrough and Stephenson as 2nd team / bench players, we generally see the positive of their contributions to the team.

    For those of us who still expect them to be starting calibre players, they can do little right.

    Both contributed quite well given their role in the game's flow tonight. I liked the action with Stephenson / Lowry. Hill and Augustin had nothing for Lowry.

    (still think Lowry would be an excellent starting PG for this team)

    To me, the two positive things that stood out in this game were the dimes from George/Hibbert (that needs to start becoming a bigger part of our game)... and the multiple, strong defensive stops in the last 6-7 minutes of the game.

    It's still weird to see 15 rebounds out of our SG.

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

      Originally posted by beast23 View Post
      It's more than that. West doesn't have to talk about it. He simply welcomes the moment and relishes in it. Quiet leaders don't have to talk about it; they just do what they do. They lead when others need to be led.

      I was pleased with George's overall STATS, well except for his turnovers. 15 RBs is exceptional. BUT, we need more from him offensively, especially while Danny is out. We need for him to find quality opportunities that will lead to 6-7 points per quarter. Tonight, he started out great to the tune of something like 10 points or so in the first 8-9 minutes, then not much for the rest of the game. We are going to need more, especially against a quality opponent.

      Much the same can be said for Hibbert. We need 6-7 points a quarter from him while Danny is out.

      We will get production from West, probably on a pretty consistent basis because he is able to put the team on his back in crunch time... At least as long as we have decent movement in our offense. I really think West will get his 18-20 while Danny is out, and will probably provide his scoring when we need it the most.

      I realize that 6-7 points per quarter is asking a lot from George and Hibbert, but that is what we need to be successful. If not 45 points a game from them, then let's hope that Hill and/or Green can step up when either of George or Hibbert falls short.

      So only 24-28 points for each of them, no big deal...
      Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

        Originally posted by Noodle View Post
        I simply do not see any improvement. When Danny returns it is likely the coaches see what I see, and Stevenson doesn't get much playing time due to his liabilities.

        It wasn't his best outing or his worse, it was actually a decent one for him. So, yeah, I exaggerate a little, but it doesn't change the fact that he mentally weak in terms of learning from his mistakes. It is a road block for him. I want Stevenson to be better, but he is a fundamental mess, still. It's just not there. Hopefully one day he will reach his obvious potential.

        To me, he had a marginally good game on paper, and looked like the same guy who is realizing he is a role player. Not some bench player who's job is to be a 6'5" Allen Iverson. This is good for Stephenson moving forward, but the guy isn't ready still. I still believe he harms this team when he is on the floor.

        BTW, D West had me livid too at one point for the same exact thing, but unlike Stevenson, he scored and provided toughness down the stretch when it counted.

        So yes, you were just angry he was seeing the floor?

        Honestly, I saw exactly the things you said you didn't see from him. He showed little hesitation, and when he got stopped he quickly looked for a ballhandler. He looked to penetrate but didn't force anything. Most importantly, for the first time in a meaningful game he stayed involved in the game as a SG. In the past he would go stand in a corner before running back on defense. But he stayed in the game.

        Just my opinion. But I'm guessing we're gonna disagree because you seem like you would rather him not be on the Pacers.
        Time for a new sig.

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

          How does George Hill's Clutch shot not make the Top 10? SMH.
          There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
            I don't think that's fair. Hibbert sat for a good while, then when he and West came in we went to West every time (with good results).

            Hibbert didn't miss any shots in that final run, we just didn't go to him.
            Yeah, the fourth quarter I don't think there was anything wrong with.

            But in the third quarter he was putting off some off balance shots and it seemed to get in his head. He just wasn't the force he was in the first half. I actually think he scored all 14 of his points in the first half?
            Time for a new sig.

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

              Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
              So yes, you were just angry he was seeing the floor?

              Honestly, I saw exactly the things you said you didn't see from him. He showed little hesitation, and when he got stopped he quickly looked for a ballhandler. He looked to penetrate but didn't force anything. Most importantly, for the first time in a meaningful game he stayed involved in the game as a SG. In the past he would go stand in a corner before running back on defense. But he stayed in the game.

              Just my opinion. But I'm guessing we're gonna disagree because you seem like you would rather him not be on the Pacers.
              Dude, it's not emotional to me at all. I want Stephenson to reach his potential. It is a constant disappointment to see it is still not there. I really hope the guy serves me a huge plate of crow one day. I would prefer it to be in a Pacers uniform as well.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                Seems like we waited until rather late in the fourth to bring Roy back in the game.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                  Rewatching the game.

                  First note: Ian Mihinmi should be the first big off the bench. No matter what the situation.

                  And you can't say it isn't possible because the rotation is identical to the 90's Pacers. We have a center who can't play a lot of minutes and West/Davis played similar minutes. AD came in no matter who had to come out. Ian should too.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                    Vogel does a lot of things well, but also makes some huge mistakes with rotations. He needs to figure this out or he'll stunt the growth of the team.

                    second point: PG scored 10 points early, which means he only scored 4 through the rest of the 3 quarters. That's bad. But I'm not too worried.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                      Third point: PG's footwork on defense looks incredible. In his first two seasons he used his athletic ability to make up for the times he was shook. (which isn't a bad thing) Too early to tell but if he moves his feet like that he's going to be incredible on D this season.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                        Nice aggressive drive by PG, not getting the call that all the other slashers in the league get. 3rd year in the league he should be getting that now...

                        Comment


                        • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                          I think its funny that all summer long everyone frets over David West... his contract, his knee, lack of upside, whatever. This guy is the real deal during the season though. I've rolled my eyes and moved along when I've seen that offseason nonsense, but who wants to complain about him tonight?

                          Is my math right... West and Hill combined for 20 in the fourth?

                          Nice start with a gritty road win. I'm more concerned with this team's ability to win gritty games than to blow people out.
                          Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                          Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                          Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                          Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                          And life itself, rushing over me
                          Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                          Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                          Comment


                          • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                            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.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                              Just finished watching the game. Stupid, sloppy 3rd quarter where Toronto obviously out-hustled us everywhere. Those things happen, so as the better team, you have to stay focused and chip away at the deficit and pull out the tough win - and that's what we did.

                              A couple thoughts, player-by-player:

                              Roy looked good. He has gotten smarter, stronger, and more polished. Would like to see some points scored in the second half, but his defense was solid throughout. He's going to earn that contract.

                              Paul George is very close. This time without Danny is going to really propel Paul into the spotlight, and I think he will grow into it. The first half, the way he came out and handled himself, I was impressed. Give him a little time to get more accustomed to that role, and I think he's going to become what we're hoping for. His demeanor and presence on the court has changed, and the more time he gets in this role, the better. (That said, Paul's growth plus Danny's return will be a slight bump in the road, but will make this team GOOOODD)

                              David West.

                              Hope George Hill is not in too much pain and can continue to play. The game-winner is a perfect example of the type of coolness and clutch play that he brings. He's not flashy, but he is good.

                              Hansbrough looked better. More in control, more like a decent back-up big. Mahinmi should be the first big off the bench, though. But we shouldn't try to run the offense through him like he's Roy. DJ had his ups and downs. I saw the good vision, but I also saw the same kind of out of control play that drove us nuts about Collison. The bench as a whole looked like they had never practiced together or run plays. Out of control and sloppy. Frank has to fix that soon if we want our bench to be a strength. I thought they started to play a little better as the game went on.

                              Lance... jury is still out. I want to give him time. He at least looked like he had a place on the court. But how long do we give him to learn the game and catch up to the speed of the NBA? Like I said, I am willing to give him time this season as the whole bench learns to play together.

                              Gritty, ugly, shoulda-been-easier win. On the road, to open the season, against a hungry young team wanting to prove they belong in the playoff hunt, without our leading scorer, and a point guard still not 100%. One and OH! Let's build on it.

                              And oh yeah,

                              DAVID WEST
                              It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

                              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.
                                While ideally he would play D better, I can live with it. Who else would've scored 14 in the 4th? On the other hand, a lot of guys can step up their D.

                                Basically: West is about the only guy who can take over on offense while we have several good defenders.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X