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

ESPN Insider: How the Eastern Conference Stacks up.

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

  • #31
    Re: ESPN Insider: How the Eastern Conference Stacks up.

    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
    I think that if I was rating the east today I'll say Brooklyn first, Miami second, Indiana third and Chicago fourth.
    Remind me, vnzla, was it you or somebody else that was saying earlier this year that chemistry was entirely overrated? I'm thinking it was you... it's very consistent with your posts about Brooklyn.

    I expect the Nets to be good, but not as good as you think. They're gonna have to learn to play together, and that's gonna cost them some games in the regular season. They'll be a beast in the playoffs, though.
    This space for rent.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: ESPN Insider: How the Eastern Conference Stacks up.

      Originally posted by cdash View Post
      Don't compare the NBA to the NFL. NFL playoffs are one and done. The best team wins a best of 7 series more often than not in the NBA. Miami was the best team in the regular season, had one of the best winning streaks in NBA history, have had a bullseye on their back for much of the run, and still won two straight titles. As I said, I think those teams you mentioned have narrowed the gap, but right now, until one of those teams can prove they can do it, Miami is there.
      The difference of our opinion comes where you don't think the Pacers proved they can do it even though they took Miami to 7 without one of their best players.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: ESPN Insider: How the Eastern Conference Stacks up.

        Originally posted by brownjake43 View Post
        The difference of our opinion comes where you don't think the Pacers proved they can do it even though they took Miami to 7 without one of their best players.
        I never once said I don't think the Pacers can do it. Hell, from midseason on last season I was saying I thought Indiana could (and would) beat Miami in a seven game series. Right up until we didn't. I'm just giving Miami the respect that I feel a champion deserves.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: ESPN Insider: How the Eastern Conference Stacks up.

          I got to say, not sure I agree with our position, but really who cares it's way to earlier to feel disrespected. I was struck by how much better the top 4 teams as a whole could be next year. I could see any of those teams reaching the final next year. Nets will have a learning curve but there's a lot of talent and experience there. Bulls with a healthy comeback by all could be pretty scary. Miami is still going to be good but the gap between their talent and the next three is nowhere near as large as it's been over the last couple seasons. We still have some real unknowns as well. I think Paul will take another step but How Big? The same could be said about most of our team except the new guys and West. How is Danny's Health? Do we get better results with this seasons attemp to get a serviceable bench? I was optimistic last year and probably more so this time, but I have know idea. All I can say at this point is the top half looks like it will be very competitive.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: ESPN Insider: How the Eastern Conference Stacks up.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: ESPN Insider: How the Eastern Conference Stacks up.

              Is the ranking based on how they perceived the teams will end up at the end of next season, or is it based on how they assess the strength of the team? Because honestly, there are times when I feel that the team ending in #1 in the East standings doesn't feel like the strongest team in the East (e.g. Chicago Bulls 2010-2011 and 2011-2012).

              Anyway, having not so much change in Miami, I think many will agree that they are #1 in the East. The top 2 to 5 spots are still arguable given the changes from many teams. On paper, the Nets look to be poised as the 2nd strongest but it's hard to assess them because familiarity, chemistry and the new system under Kidd are still undefined. In Chicago's case, we still need to see how Rose will play after a year of absence. Indiana is already a known quantity, and with addition of better talent from last year like DG, they should be ranked higher.

              I understand why they ranked Indiana 4th and I don't feel like they are disrespecting on underestimating our team. They just have a little overestimation of the other teams ranked higher because of major changes, but it happens all of the time really. No surprises here.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: ESPN Insider: How the Eastern Conference Stacks up.

                Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                For those thinking we're disrespected..if you weren't a pacer fan would you still HONESTLY believe the pacers were the clear cut second best team in the league?
                Well, the other thread has a whole bunch of non-Pacer fans calling the Pacers #2 in the East.

                http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthre...ing-respect%29

                So I do think Pacers get plenty of respect. In any case, I agree that pre season rankings don't mean anything in the end.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: ESPN Insider: How the Eastern Conference Stacks up.

                  I don't feel like the Pacers are getting disrespected, and it isn't far fetched to argue that they would be the 4th best team. Still, in the nicest way I can put it, Zach Lowe minded people will put the Pacers second, and Skip Bayless minded people will probably argue both Chicago and Brooklyn will be better. Either way it doesn't matter in the end does it?

                  Look at the playoffs, I thought it was ridiculous that so many people argued the Knicks would beat the Pacers badly in the Playoffs.. (a lot of us thought the Knicks were a very flawed team) but in the end the only thing that mattered is the Pacers won.

                  I kind of like that people underestimat the Pacers actually, makes the wins, at least to me, more fun.
                  Last edited by mattie; 07-26-2013, 04:49 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: ESPN Insider: How the Eastern Conference Stacks up.

                    Oh and Chicago and Brooklyn can both be truly great teams this season, but they definitely have some issues to iron out. First when Chiago was a 60 win team a couple years ago, that was with a loaded bench. They've lost some of their bench talent. In the mean time Noah has gotten better which may make up some of the difference, but even then they were a flawed team in the first place. Because of their defensive intensity and Derrick Rose, they can win a lot of games, but their offense lives and dies by Derrick Rose. Which is fine, until he has to face 6'8" plus forwards who are as quick as him (See: George, Paul; James, LeBron) and he gets shut down.

                    Brooklyn looks good, and they probably will be very good but their problem is they aren't as talented as they sound. Once you realize KG may not actually be able to play PF anymore. (we'll see, don't shoot me for saying it, just saying he's slowed down a lot). Pierce isn't the same, JJ was never as good as people thought he was, which leaves them depending on their two best players, Deron and Lopez. That's fine, both are very talented. But to put it in perspective as what they're up against: The Pacers two best players, PG and Hibbert, are both better their best two. I'm noting this just to put their talent into perspective. They have a lot of names, but as far as actual talent, I'd argue the Pacers have more. (Deron, Pierce, and KG have all seen better days).

                    I'm still not convinced Brooklyn will be able to play defense. Deron and Lopez will always be weak points, can KG make up for their weaknesses? We could all see that happen for sure. I also wouldn't be surprised if their defense simply fails. They do not have a lot of strong points on defense.

                    Anywho, the road to the Finals goes through the Heat, so we'll see if anyone is up for the challenge in less than a year. (I think the Pacers will, but that's another story)
                    Last edited by mattie; 07-26-2013, 04:55 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: ESPN Insider: How the Eastern Conference Stacks up.

                      In my opinion if you are going to assume that Rose comes back healthy, you got to assume Granger comes back healthy. If Granger comes back healthy this team is clearly better than the Bulls even with a healthy Rose.

                      Anyways as pointed out by 15th parallel standings and strength are not always equal. Circumstances could cause a slightly worse team to have a better record at the end of the season than a slightly better team. When you are talking about the best teams in a conference the difference is always slight. It isn't unreasonable to think the Nets or Bulls or even the Knicks would have a better record than the Pacers, but I do think it is a mistake to think they are actually better than the Pacers, especially if Granger comes back healthy.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: ESPN Insider: How the Eastern Conference Stacks up.

                        I just hope the team has better aspirations than 2nd or 3rd or whatever. Home court has to be the goal. All those games last year where they just didn't show up, didn't give the effort, yada-yada ............. 2 or 3 games thru a season can be the difference between #1 & #2 seeding. Give the Pacers home court against the Heat last year and it just might have ended differently.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: ESPN Insider: How the Eastern Conference Stacks up.

                          Home court is the goal. David West stated as much during his re-signing press conference.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: ESPN Insider: How the Eastern Conference Stacks up.

                            Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                            Home court is the goal. David West stated as much during his re-signing press conference.
                            Home court is always the goal, I don't see why it would even be a question.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: ESPN Insider: How the Eastern Conference Stacks up.

                              Big Roy said it best! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcEKc9fLI2s
                              In Indiana Basketball is not just a game...it's a way of life!

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: ESPN Insider: How the Eastern Conference Stacks up.

                                Originally posted by cdash View Post
                                I never once said I don't think the Pacers can do it. Hell, from midseason on last season I was saying I thought Indiana could (and would) beat Miami in a seven game series. Right up until we didn't. I'm just giving Miami the respect that I feel a champion deserves.
                                "Until one of those teams prove they can do it" was your exact quote. When you are just a few plays away without one of your best players that is pretty good proof. I just don't think Miami is as obvious as a #1 as people think. I actually have the Bulls right there with them as well. As I said earlier, Bulls were the one seed when Rose went down. Since then Butler has become an excellent player, while Wades game begins to dwindle down. I just don't think the gap was too big to begin with and if you are willing to admit Pacers and Bulls 'closed' the gap a bit then it is hard to say Miami is the 'clear' favorite to me. Just my opinion I guess.

                                If I had to group teams I would put Miami, Chicago, Indiana all in the same group, with Nets at 4, Knicks at 5. I think differently in that I believe 1-3 are all interchangeable while most think 2-4 are.
                                Last edited by brownjake43; 07-26-2013, 11:45 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X