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

  • #61
    Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

    Originally posted by BillS View Post
    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.
    I think the players would have figured out the fans discontent by seeing them leave the fieldhouse with a lot of time left on the clock.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
      I think the players would have figured out the fans discontent by seeing them leave the fieldhouse with a lot of time left on the clock.
      How much do they notice that when they are focused inward? They probably aren't looking around the stands unless something - like booing - calls their attention to it.

      GHill noticed the stands last year because while they were winning, they were focused outward, which is normal.
      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


      • #63
        Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

        That tied the lowest first half output of a home team ever (at least in the shot clock era (as far as I can tell)). Again, I didn't boo, but if you play the worst scoring home team 1st half of basketball in the shot clock era you have to expect to hear something unpleasant.

        http://www.basketball-reference.com/...=&order_by=pts
        PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
          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.
          Ok, but I never made any judgments about anyone. Not sure what you mean about 'being experienced enough'? I made no attempt at all to say anything of the sort. All I said was, some people have been in professional situations where your 'performance' is viewed live by a paying audience, and some have not.

          That was why I initially commented in this thread, because Ichi made the comment:
          "Would be funny to see how some of the posters here that support the booing would be able to take it "

          And I simply responded to it looking through the lens of a performer. But when all the replies to that response, and the general vibe of the board most days seems to take a "these guys are famous rich dudes who play a game for a living... Get over it and 'Man Up'" or whatever, I am sorry but it hits a bit of a nerve with me AS someone who has to fight against those types of attitudes in my own personal line of work.

          We're all Pacers fans, I'm not trying to antagonize anyone here. But please realize that 'entertainers' of all kinds do tend to (not always, of course) have very visceral and emotionally impactful reactions to how their 'performances' are received by their audience.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

            Originally posted by TMJ31 View Post
            Ok, but I never made any judgments about anyone. Not sure what you mean about 'being experienced enough'? I made no attempt at all to say anything of the sort. All I said was, some people have been in professional situations where your 'performance' is viewed live by a paying audience, and some have not..
            Which is a comment about the experiences they've been though. Whether or not people have been in a professional setting, where their performance is viewed live is irrelevant to the conversation.


            Originally posted by TMJ31 View Post
            We're all Pacers fans, I'm not trying to antagonize anyone here. But please realize that 'entertainers' of all kinds do tend to (not always, of course) have very visceral and emotionally impactful reactions to how their 'performances' are received by their audience.
            Saying "flame on" is definitely antagonizing.
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

              Originally posted by TMJ31 View Post
              We're all Pacers fans, I'm not trying to antagonize anyone here. But please realize that 'entertainers' of all kinds do tend to (not always, of course) have very visceral and emotionally impactful reactions to how their 'performances' are received by their audience.
              As performers, that's what we are going for - those visceral reactions. Of course, we're hoping for the GOOD ones, but we're putting ourselves out there and risking the bad ones.

              I feel the same way about ballplayers. As long as the reaction is appropriate to the level of expectation they themselves have set, they should be prepared for it. Not "unaffected" - I wouldn't boo if I didn't hope the emotion I express by doing so wasn't going to be received - but they get wild cheers and kudos when they do well. To not expect the opposite when doing poorly is unrealistic. The "I understand..." is all well and good, but the point of the booing wasn't to "help" the players (and it has been fairly obvious that the sell-out crowd cheering loudly hasn't helped much recently, either). It was to express our opinion of their play, the same as going nuts after a slam-dunk "and-1" does.
              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


              • #67
                Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                Which is a comment about the experiences they've been though. Whether or not people have been in a professional setting, where their performance is viewed live is irrelevant to the conversation.




                Saying "flame on" is definitely antagonizing.

                Fair enough, I apologize for the Johnny Storm pic.

                I've just seen SO much of this sentiment on the board it's wearing thin on me.

                And I suppose I just disagree with your first statement. It's easy to throw insults and mock performers. But try being that performer and it may shift that perspective a bit.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

                  Originally posted by BillS View Post
                  As performers, that's what we are going for - those visceral reactions. Of course, we're hoping for the GOOD ones, but we're putting ourselves out there and risking the bad ones.

                  I feel the same way about ballplayers. As long as the reaction is appropriate to the level of expectation they themselves have set, they should be prepared for it. Not "unaffected" - I wouldn't boo if I didn't hope the emotion I express by doing so wasn't going to be received - but they get wild cheers and kudos when they do well. To not expect the opposite when doing poorly is unrealistic. The "I understand..." is all well and good, but the point of the booing wasn't to "help" the players (and it has been fairly obvious that the sell-out crowd cheering loudly hasn't helped much recently, either). It was to express our opinion of their play, the same as going nuts after a slam-dunk "and-1" does.
                  Yeah, I totally agree with where you're coming from. Really, I do.

                  I suppose, from my own personal perspective, it's a matter of being thoughtful and aware in your reactions to things.

                  As an Actor, if I go see my friends, or complete strangers perform a play and I absolutely hate it, I certainly do not make those feelings known during or even after the performance. I applaud at intermission, at the curtain call, and then my wife and I drive home and talk all about the things we thought were awful.

                  There was no need for me to make the Actors and crew who had poured their hearts into that performance feel like crap because I deemed their effort unworthy of my praise.

                  That is the lens I view this whole situation through.

                  Some people may be able to understand and identify with that, and some perhaps not.

                  Life moves on.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

                    Dear George

                    We fans are tired... It is a long season and the back to backs are taking all of our support and stretching it thin... Our cheering ability has certainly suffered, we are just worn down and tired...

                    Excuse making fans...


                    See we can make lame as excuses as well...
                    Abba Zaba, your my only friend.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

                      How do you know I'm not a performer? I've never played in a band, but I've played basketball in front of about 7,000 people. I've had some pretty outlandish things yelled at me, I've been in games where the crowd feels on top of you.

                      It's a blind assumption about complete strangers in order to debunk their position, that may nor may not even be a correct assumption.

                      I'm just sure that GHill has heard much worse. I refuse to believe that he's so thin skinned that a few boos would knock him off his game. If it does, then they have no hope at accomplishing their goals. Then again, it would explain folding like a cheap chair down the stretch.
                      Last edited by Since86; 04-08-2014, 02:41 PM.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

                        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                        How do you know I'm not a performer? I've never played in a band, but I've played basketball in front of about 7,000 people. I've had some pretty outlandish things yelled at me, I've been in games where the crowd feels on top of you.

                        It's a blind assumption about complete strangers in order to debunk their position, that may nor may not even be a correct assumption.

                        I don't know if you are or aren't. My first reply to this thread wasn't even in response to something you had said.

                        When I said things like "some people" will be able to understand and "some won't" or whatever, it's not me making veiled accusations of specific people.

                        I said what I meant.

                        Some people can understand being in that situation, and others can't. I don't mean you specifically. Or maybe I do?! I can't answer that question, only you can.

                        I really have no idea why this has turned into some sort of quasi-confrontation.

                        All I wanted to illustrate was that it's unfair for fans to expect and assume that ALL professional athletes, or ALL performers in general, or whatever, should have the innate ability to just flip a "I care/don't care" switch in their brains as it relates to reactions they get to their various performances.

                        Is that an unreasonable thing to say? I really don't think it is.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

                          Originally posted by TMJ31 View Post
                          All I wanted to illustrate was that it's unfair for fans to expect and assume that ALL professional athletes, or ALL performers in general, or whatever, should have the innate ability to just flip a "I care/don't care" switch in their brains as it relates to reactions they get to their various performances.

                          Is that an unreasonable thing to say? I really don't think it is.
                          But that's not what the expectations are.

                          I hope they do care! I hope it serves as a wake up call that fan support isn't a given, and they shouldn't just expect fans to show up and cheer for them, just because. They're not entitled to cheers or nothing. They have the right to their emotions, and so do the fans.

                          The worst thing in the world for me growing up was for my parents to tell me they were disappointed. Their negative reaction was motivation for me to get my act together. That's what I equate booing with.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

                            Personally, just my opinion but

                            I only boo if I say a severe lack of effort

                            If their playing hard but just missing shots or getting a San Antonio beat down , I don't have a problem and will cheer

                            but if they are "going through the motions" or playing lazy, ya dam right I will boo
                            Sittin on top of the world!

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

                              It seems that Vogel and GH are playing up this whole "They're too tired " angle. Either it is playing some factor into how poorly the Team has been doing....or it's the typical excuse that the Team is using in order to deflect attention from the real issues.

                              From Vogel...or from most Coaches....I can see it as standard "lip service"....the standard "There's nothing wrong here that a day's rest won't cure" response. From GH...who I think is more of a straight forward "Shooter"..... when it comes to speaking to the Media/Public .....I take it somewhat seriously.

                              At most, I think that there maybe some truth to it....and that it does play into what has happened to the Team....but I don't think it is a major but minor concern here ( specifically trust and Team Chemistry in the Starting Lineup, them not being on the same page as Vogel and Vogel not being able to get them to execute the offense/defense properly ).
                              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Holding Court: George Hill talks about team struggles

                                The Pacer fans and players lead the league about complaints of B2B. It's really getting ridiculous. Man up George Hill. Every team has to deal with it.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X