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

Post Game Thread Pacers Mavericks

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

  • Re: Post Game Thread Pacers Mavericks

    Originally posted by AesopRockOn View Post
    From a strict win/loss perspective, this game doesn't fit with the four game losing streak in that the previous three losses were against top defensive teams. (All top 9 in DE, with Houston turnt up in 2014.) Dallas is the 22nd ranked defense in the league, getting by on their top 3 (!) offense. We should have scored way over 100 tonight. The defense hasn't been good, but the issue is still the offense, evidenced by the paltry output in Dallas.

    Yeah, the defense has let up, which is correctable I should hope. But the offense has been awful.

    Comment


    • Re: Post Game Thread Pacers Mavericks

      If I hear one more thing about Granger, I'm going to kill myself. He was flat out bad since coming back from injury. Turner ahs been good and bad, but I think most would rather him then DG. Granger is done. Sorry to say it is what it is.
      Dear P_George,
      You have received an infraction at Pacers Digest.

      Reason: Unacceptable Comment and/or Content

      Comment


      • Re: Post Game Thread Pacers Mavericks

        Originally posted by P_George View Post
        If I hear one more thing about Granger, I'm going to kill myself. He was flat out bad since coming back from injury. Turner ahs been good and bad, but I think most would rather him then DG. Granger is done. Sorry to say it is what it is.
        And yet again, completely missing the point.

        Comment


        • Re: Post Game Thread Pacers Mavericks

          Originally posted by TMJ31 View Post
          And yet again, completely missing the point.
          if granger getting traded affected the players that much, they weren't mentally strong enough to win it all from the start. if that's the case i was overvaluing this team.

          Comment


          • Re: Post Game Thread Pacers Mavericks

            Originally posted by 31Since1990 View Post
            Fire Frank.
            Worst post of the year material.



            Originally posted by 31Since1990 View Post
            Meanwhile the guy we LOL'ed about being better than PG just had back to back 40 point games.
            Well, if anyone needed to be told you're tolling... now they know for sure you are.
            "I have never taken the high road, but I tell other people to ’cause then there’s more room for me on the low road."

            Comment


            • Re: Post Game Thread Pacers Mavericks

              Originally posted by P_George View Post
              If I hear one more thing about Granger, I'm going to kill myself.
              This doesn't even qualify as first world problems. Just qualifies as sad.
              "I have never taken the high road, but I tell other people to ’cause then there’s more room for me on the low road."

              Comment


              • Re: Post Game Thread Pacers Mavericks

                Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                Well Larry always said coaches had a 3 year window and then players started tuning them out...Frank has been here 3 years now when one considers he took over midseason of the 2011-12 season, so......
                He took over midseason of 2010-11, so it's actually his fourth season.

                Comment


                • Re: Post Game Thread Pacers Mavericks

                  Negatives:
                  -Scola. I have no clue what happened to the Scola for the first quarter of the year, because that man bolstered our bench unit a ton. Now he's a complete liability out there. Cope deserves a shot. Defenses respect the hell out of him. We aren't losing much in terms of defense and rebounding, Scola is a complete sieve in that aspect.
                  -I love David West, but I have no idea why we kept going to him when the rest of our starters were having solid games. West was pretty awful tonight, not just missing shots, but it seemed like he turned it over a fair amount of times too.
                  -I think PG sits a little too long and comes in too late in the 2nd quarter.
                  -Our perimeter defense, while improved somewhat tonight, has been very disappointing past few games.

                  Obviously losing 4 in a row is never good, but I'm strangely confident we'll put it back together. We have plenty of time to bounce back before the postseason.
                  //

                  Comment


                  • Re: Post Game Thread Pacers Mavericks

                    Originally posted by xtacy View Post
                    if granger getting traded affected the players that much, they weren't mentally strong enough to win it all from the start. if that's the case i was overvaluing this team.
                    I don't get this line of thinking at all. I understand the argument, but it doesn't make much sense. I actually think they were too mentally strong in the beginning. They thought they could do it on their own without Bynum and without trading Granger. They didn't want any external reinforcement. It's not that they weren't mentally strong. It might even be just the opposite. They reacted negatively to roster adjustments because they were especially "mentally strong" about their abilities as previously constructed.

                    And second, the mentally strong argument fails to answer concerns about fit and timing. You take any team that's been together for years, and shake up the roster mid season (in Granger's case, with ~20 games to go), you can't expect players to just keep rolling like nothing happened. Changes to the roster take time to adjust to, especially for a team that was already tight-knit in the first place. Aside from Sheed to the Pistons, how many teams made major adjustments at the deadline and won the championship? It's a little unrealistic to just bring people together and expect them to connect chemistry wise right off the bat. This isn't even considering whether the new players actually fit into the system, culture, roles, etc. It's a huge gamble, especially when you're at the top of the standings. That the gamble isn't paying off shouldn't come as any surprise, at least if one watched Turner's game in Philly.

                    Again, this isn't saying Granger was some savior holding everyone together. It's simply saying the trade was unnecessary, especially after the team already had enough on their plate with incorporating Bynum, whose insertion into the lineup will once again require adaptions all with less than 20 games left. While the trade might have looked good on paper considering Turner's age, 1) Turner's game is a poor fit for our roster and system 2) he's not even half the player Lance is/could be in the future so as Lance insurance, it's a particularly useless move (not to mention, Larry stressed this as a win-now move).

                    But as Nuntius said, there's nothing to do but wait and see how it all ends. I expect them to play better in the next five games against poor East teams, but the playoffs are another story. The clock is ticking for them to find their identity again.
                    2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

                    Comment


                    • Re: Post Game Thread Pacers Mavericks

                      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                      No doubt. I read these posts about Copeland being the savior and I about smh off my shoulders. This team has serious issues having lost 4 games in a row and while they weren't completely blown out they look disorganized on offense. They look unfocused on defense. There's something else going on with this team. Nobody is talking though. I think Bird ticked off some of them. JMHO.

                      Issues yes, can Copeland save the team? No, but when the bench is outscored 41-4 that's coache's fault. 1 game maybe. But they got outscored by like 40 vs golden state as well. He has to try something different. The bench play is issue #1.
                      Then starting 5 defense which teams have adjusted the pick then make the call mid paint.
                      1 - 2, Tinsley's coming for you.
                      3 - 4, You're not a team no more.
                      5 - 6, He's gonna plead the 5th.
                      7 - 8, He's gonna stay out late.



                      Comment


                      • Re: Post Game Thread Pacers Mavericks

                        Offense showed some signs of life. Really a product of Lance, PG & GHill playing well on that end.

                        Defense was not good. Able to stay in the game mostly because Dirk was not Dirk last night. Poor rebounding effort as well. Not used to seeing a guy like Vince Carter out compete our guys on the glass.

                        The next five games are an opportunity to get right. Pacers need to capitolize because the four games after that inlude two with Chicago, Memphis on the road and the Heat. Will not be pretty navigating that four game stretch playing like they are now.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Post Game Thread Pacers Mavericks

                          So our bench unit attempts just 9 shots last night and Copeland still only gets ONE MINUTE of playing time? That's just coaching stubbornness on an inexcusable level. I like Vogel and I'm certainly not one of those people who is jumping off of a cliff, but come on, you gotta show some flexibility and throw Cope out there when the other bench players aren't doing squat.

                          Pacerized was correct when he worried that we wouldn't use Turner right. He's standing around like Granger did. What happened to getting him the ball and letting him create? 3 shot attempts? Come on.

                          PG/Lance/Hill combine for 68 points on 23/40 shooting and we still lose. That's a shame.

                          Scola was a complete bum, which is just sad considering how damn good he looked at the beginning of the season.

                          If you would have told me before the game that Dirk would shoot just 3-14, I would have loved our chances. This Dallas team is solid and I think that they could be a headache to deal with in the playoffs.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Post Game Thread Pacers Mavericks

                            Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                            So our bench unit attempts just 9 shots last night and Copeland still only gets ONE MINUTE of playing time? That's just coaching stubbornness on an inexcusable level. I like Vogel and I'm certainly not one of those people who is jumping off of a cliff, but come on, you gotta show some flexibility and throw Cope out there when the other bench players aren't doing squat.

                            Pacerized was correct when he worried that we wouldn't use Turner right. He's standing around like Granger did. What happened to getting him the ball and letting him create? 3 shot attempts? Come on.

                            PG/Lance/Hill combine for 68 points on 23/40 shooting and we still lose. That's a shame.

                            Scola was a complete bum, which is just sad considering how damn good he looked at the beginning of the season.

                            If you would have told me before the game that Dirk would shoot just 3-14, I would have loved our chances. This Dallas team is solid and I think that they could be a headache to deal with in the playoffs.

                            All true & Hibbert shot really well. The bench is issue A. Defense should be the issue right now we're working on but we can't compete with most NBA teams when the bench gets blasted by 30-40 points a night. That is insane to me.
                            Fire Vogel? No. I was absolutely on the fire JOB bandwagon, but Vogel had us in the ECF last year & had the team taking a step each year. He has the team still (although luckily) in the top spot out East. That is good. Now continuing his same rotations is insanity. Same thing wanting different results, you know insanity? Hopefully he reads the 41-4 bench travesty or whatever the final tally was & finally adjusts. You have to adjust in this league.
                            1 - 2, Tinsley's coming for you.
                            3 - 4, You're not a team no more.
                            5 - 6, He's gonna plead the 5th.
                            7 - 8, He's gonna stay out late.



                            Comment


                            • Re: Post Game Thread Pacers Mavericks

                              The bench got roasted bad -35 or so vs the Warriors also. The bench has been a hole in the boat after our 1st 20 games. The nose of the boat has just cracked off now.

                              On the bright side Paul George & all the starters minutes do seem to go up in the Playoffs. So hopefully no more sitting 10 minutes in the 2nd. Still, Bird said sign West & improve the bench were goals. No question the bench has better talent now but yet is even worse. That can't be making Bird happy. Does he wonder if Gerald Green was held back afterall? Yet in still you dont tell a coach who to play. It undermines what little authority pro sports coaches have.
                              Last edited by larry; 03-10-2014, 06:27 AM. Reason: spelling
                              1 - 2, Tinsley's coming for you.
                              3 - 4, You're not a team no more.
                              5 - 6, He's gonna plead the 5th.
                              7 - 8, He's gonna stay out late.



                              Comment


                              • Re: Post Game Thread Pacers Mavericks

                                4 game losing streak? At least Turner and Allen should feel more at home now.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X