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

Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

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

  • #46
    Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

    Originally posted by TinManJoshua View Post
    You try to hamfist a heart surgery.
    I mean in the matter of emotions. It's good to be sensitive in a tough part of someone's life. Few and far between though.
    There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

      Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
      I mean in the matter of emotions. It's good to be sensitive in a tough part of someone's life. Few and far between though.
      I agree to an extent. Being sensitive isn't a bad thing in certain situations, but being overly sensitive a lot of the time can cause a problem.

      It'll be ok. People can have different kinds of personalities and still be wildly successful in their fields. Being sensitive about something isn't a sign of overall weakness.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

        Originally posted by billrusselmuscle View Post
        George Hill didn't say they didn't deserve to be booed. He just said it doesn't help.

        My question is, if you know the team feeds off of positive energy, is it more important to make a point and boo or help the team?
        right, the players already know they are playing bad. They don't need fans booing to figure it out.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

          Originally posted by TinManJoshua View Post
          I agree to an extent. Being sensitive isn't a bad thing in certain situations, but being overly sensitive a lot of the time can cause a problem.

          It'll be ok. People can have different kinds of personalities and still be wildly successful in their fields. Being sensitive about something isn't a sign of overall weakness.
          I mean people are always sensitive about something. I really don't think Hill was being sensitive, I was just responding to the comment.
          There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            right, the players already know they are playing bad. They don't need fans booing to figure it out.
            I think they might need the booing to remember why playing well is more than just for money in their own pockets. For some people that might have been the only game they could get to all year.
            BillS

            A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
            Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

              What they could do (but likely never will) is to apologize for everything that has been going on, tell us that they are doing everything in their power to right the ship, and humbly implore us as fans to not give up on them even in the roughest of times. Saying that booing is not going to help, or that it is not deserved and uncalled for, while being a true expression of the feelings of the players, is simply going to intensify future home booing events when they DO deserve them.

              The fact that two of the Pacers are now on public record with statements against the booing while not taking ownership of what precipitated it is symptomatic of the lack of maturity and feelings of entitlement that have been on display on the court for the last 2 months.

              The players are human beings and got emotionally defensive as a result. I get that.

              What is difficult to swallow is the feeling that these players are now trying to dictate to us as fans how we should react to what had to be one of the very worst on court displays of basketball in franchise history, especially when most fans know that there ARE locker room issues that were manifesting themselves in a very unprofessional manner at best. At worst, it wasn't even as good as simply going through the motions like preseason games are during the little time players that have guaranteed roster spots are on the court.

              It is my hope that the players are being made aware that the fans caring enough to boo is actually a better thing than the alternative - the fans doing the Miami shuffle and simply leaving with quite a few not returning in the future. I don't think PG particularly remembers much about playing (or even being on the bench when he should have been on the court developing as a player) in front of about 2,000 fans on weeknights during the O'B era. Roy probably does, and likely takes the booing to heart. I doubt that GH ever experienced that in San Antonio.

              I would suggest that either the players improve their play and on court demeanor and keep their mouths shut in the media, or that they petition the NBA to permit them to wear Bose noise cancelling headphones during games.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

                Originally posted by Ichi View Post
                Would be funny to see how some of the posters here that support the booing would be able to take it

                Some folks just don't understand what it's like to have a highly visible 'entertainment' job. That's ok, nothing wrong with that of course, but try to show some empathy.

                I'm an Actor, I work a lot on the stage. Now, I haven't yet performed in front of 18,000 people live, but I've had quite a few potentially "embarrassing" moments in front of live crowds (either intentional or not) - It's not easy folks.

                Again, I'll repeat a sentiment I've shared many times in many threads over the past month or so.

                Just because these guys are professional, wealthy athletes does not make them robots or automatons emotionally.

                Sorry that some people refuse to accept that. But it's just the way it is.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                  right, the players already know they are playing bad. They don't need fans booing to figure it out.
                  Thing is, fans were booing the effort, not the players. They have to understand the difference. If they don't, the coaching staff has to teach them the difference.

                  The effort absolutely deserved booing. But I don't think fans are seeing George Hill & Lance on the street and saying "boo, you guys suck!" THAT would be a different story.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

                    the booing was very well deserved. if you don't show any effort on the court, you get booed. simple as that.

                    and the "it's not easy. show some empathy" thing. i know it's not easy. that's why they are making millions and living those dream lives.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

                      Originally posted by billrusselmuscle View Post
                      - Praises the fans, but says booing doesn't help. This is a tough time and the team needs them more now.
                      Originally posted by billrusselmuscle View Post
                      George Hill didn't say they didn't deserve to be booed. He just said it doesn't help.

                      My question is, if you know the team feeds off of positive energy, is it more important to make a point and boo or help the team?
                      I'm operating under the assumption that your summary is accurate, but this "argument" is silly. He praised the fans, and said booing does not help. Didn't say it hurt their feelings, it made them play even worse, or that they cried afterwards. It did not help. He didn't say it was wrong, or that they should stop. It did not help.

                      I don't get the problem with making what, to me, is an obvious statement. Sure they deserved it, but it didn't help them.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

                        If Hill is being honest, then I hope we officially lose the #1 seed ASAP so these guys can take some time off before the playoffs.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

                          Originally posted by TMJ31 View Post
                          Some folks just don't understand what it's like to have a highly visible 'entertainment' job. That's ok, nothing wrong with that of course, but try to show some empathy.

                          I'm an Actor, I work a lot on the stage. Now, I haven't yet performed in front of 18,000 people live, but I've had quite a few potentially "embarrassing" moments in front of live crowds (either intentional or not) - It's not easy folks.

                          Again, I'll repeat a sentiment I've shared many times in many threads over the past month or so.

                          Just because these guys are professional, wealthy athletes does not make them robots or automatons emotionally.

                          Sorry that some people refuse to accept that. But it's just the way it is.

                          No one is asking them to be robots, nor to not have emtions. I find it a little bit ironic to think that we should allow players to have emotions, but then think fans should cheer for craptastic basketball, like a well trained dog.

                          But we can continue running with assumptions of people, and their experiences, just because they have a different opinion.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

                            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                            No one is asking them to be robots, nor to not have emtions. I find it a little bit ironic to think that we should allow players to have emotions, but then think fans should cheer for craptastic basketball, like a well trained dog.

                            But we can continue running with assumptions of people, and their experiences, just because they have a different opinion.
                            I don't take issue with people getting frustrated about the team and their play.

                            *I* am frustrated about the team and their play.

                            The part that bothers me is when people use the "they are rich athletes so they should be able to deal with it because they are rich and famous" excuse to blast people.

                            That's my entire point.

                            Yes, they are wealthy, public figures. That makes them no less vulnerable to the human condition than us wee folk.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

                              Originally posted by TMJ31 View Post
                              I don't take issue with people getting frustrated about the team and their play.

                              *I* am frustrated about the team and their play.

                              The part that bothers me is when people use the "they are rich athletes so they should be able to deal with it because they are rich and famous" excuse to blast people.

                              That's my entire point.

                              Yes, they are wealthy, public figures. That makes them no less vulnerable to the human condition than us wee folk.
                              Booing comes with the territory. They're well compensated for the risk of getting booed.

                              If it was a freshman team out there, yeah, no go on the booing. But grown men who play in front of millions of people on TV, go into arenas with 19,000 fans screaming against them, should be able to handle a few smatterings of boos.

                              And making judgements about complete strangers, about them not being experienced enough, or saying we're "flaming" has no place in the discussion about whether or not booing is okay.
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

                                The fans pay good money to watch the game. They deserve to boo if the team is not giving sufficient effort.

                                When the team started playing with more effort in the second half, the boo birds went away.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X