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

2020-21 Indiana Athletics thread

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

  • BobbyMac
    replied
    Better days are coming!

    Leave a comment:


  • Sollozzo
    replied
    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post

    *with our offensive players.

    Our offense produced top 5 amount of open 3's in the country I think this season.

    But how much of that is because teams let IU have the open 3?

    If I'm playing IU, I'm swarming multiple players at TJD all day long and daring the rest of the team to shoot as many wide open 3's as they want.

    I do have faith in us to execute with better players, but I'd take that stat with a grain of salt because I certainly don't think many teams were losing sleep about IU getting open 3's.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trader Joe
    replied
    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post

    In that Michigan game, they actually did shoot incredibly well from 3, which shows what they were capable of when they did shoot well.

    But in a game like last night, no hope for a comeback with our offense.
    *with our offensive players.

    Our offense produced top 5 amount of open 3's in the country I think this season.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sollozzo
    replied
    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post

    we're all affected by the iu travel malaise lol
    In that Michigan game, they actually did shoot incredibly well from 3, which shows what they were capable of when they did shoot well.

    But in a game like last night, no hope for a comeback with our offense.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bball
    replied
    I hope I dont have to eat my words, but St Mary's seem to be a classy team and coach.
    Last edited by Bball; 03-20-2022, 02:10 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trader Joe
    replied
    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post

    True, that was a bad post.
    we're all affected by the iu travel malaise lol

    Leave a comment:


  • Sollozzo
    replied
    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post

    They literally came back from 17 down a week ago
    True, that was a bad post.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trader Joe
    replied
    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
    They played a lot of games, but part of that is their own fault for having such a mediocre season which caused them to play a play-in game on the heels having to play super hard in the Big 10 tourney just so they could make the play in game.

    It was the same story most of the season: couldn’t shoot reliably.

    Woodson needs to recruit almost exclusively based on a player’s ability to shoot and score, especially when looking at the 1-3 spots. Defense and toughness are much easier to coach into players since a lot of that is purely effort. Im confident that Woodson will always do a decent job of coaching up a solid defensive team that players hard, but a player must have some sort of natural ability and talent when it comes to shooting and scoring.
    He turned us into one of the best defensive teams in the country starting KOpp and Stewart. You're correct, there's no reason to worry about that side of this team. I have faith in his system.

    A lot of guys have to look in the mirror, Galloway is a big one. His energy and unique talents are great, but if the guy can't shoot even a little from the outside it makes it very hard to rely on him night in and night out.

    Geronimo I think can and should make a huge leap. He looked poised for another big game lastg night, but then either lost his legs or I think more likely with him he got too far ahead of himself and picked up 3 really dumb fouls and never recovered.

    Lander, I have no idea what to make of him. It'd be easy to say Woodson should have gotten him more minutes, but if a former 5 star recruit can't play his way onto the court consistently, it's tough for me to blame the coach.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trader Joe
    replied
    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
    We are light years away from being any sort of respectable NCAA contender.

    The Wyoming game was telling. Wyoming mostly sucked - a sloppy turnover prone team.....yet we still had to grind it out to get an 8 point win against them, and needed a perfect game form TJD to do it.

    This team is truly one of the worst offensive teams I’ve seen at any level of basketball. Downright awful.
    Talent wise, yes, system wise, no. We produced some of the best shots in basketball all season long, both from 3 and around the rim. Yeah we need the players to execute it, but they aren't as far away as you'd think.

    The 4 position is the one that must change. Race Thompson is a nice kid and a hard working player, but his fit next to TJD this whole season was square peg into a round hole and his attempt to become an outside shooter to make it work was nice to see, but ultimately futile because it's just not his game.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trader Joe
    replied
    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
    People were complaining about Michigan being seeded over IU. The committee got it right- Michigan is better than IU. A couple of Big 10 tourney games (which no one cares at all about unless you win the entire thing) doesn’t change it.
    Let's slow down here too.

    They beat a Colorado St team that came from a conference that just got swept out of the tournament in two days and had no business being a 6 seed. Mountain West ended up being the most overrated conference in the country, how they got more bids than the Pac 12 or A-10 is mind boggling.

    Let's see how Michigan would have done winning a play in in Dayton and then flying across the country to play 30 hours later.

    That being said, I have Michigan in my Sweet 16 and almost put them in the Elite 8. They have talent, but just like IU they have massive achillies heel that can totally blow them up in certain games.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trader Joe
    replied
    Obviously not the way anyone wanted to end the season. St Mary's was going to be tough either way, experienced, well coached, and unafraid of anyone, but there is no doubt the travel situation didn't help. Those guys were not rotating the way they usually do.

    Shooting has to be the number 1 offseason priority. Kopp and Stewart just didn't get it done, Stewart I think is still dealing with the emotional adjustment of losing his father suddenly which I think is understandable.

    Overall, I think the season was a success but still left alot to be improved which I think is about what we all probably woudl have expected at the start of the year.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trader Joe
    replied
    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post

    Nah, IU is the type of team that teams have comebacks against...:not the other way around. You have to shoot to have a comeback and IU cannot do that.
    They literally came back from 17 down a week ago

    Leave a comment:


  • Sollozzo
    replied
    They played a lot of games, but part of that is their own fault for having such a mediocre season which caused them to play a play-in game on the heels having to play super hard in the Big 10 tourney just so they could make the play in game.

    It was the same story most of the season: couldn’t shoot reliably.

    Woodson needs to recruit almost exclusively based on a player’s ability to shoot and score, especially when looking at the 1-3 spots. Defense and toughness are much easier to coach into players since a lot of that is purely effort. Im confident that Woodson will always do a decent job of coaching up a solid defensive team that players hard, but a player must have some sort of natural ability and talent when it comes to shooting and scoring.
    Last edited by Sollozzo; 03-18-2022, 12:20 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • clownskull
    replied
    kent sterling brought up a valid point that iu had played 5 games in 8 days while st. mary's hadn't played in 9 days. that's a big difference. one team was tired and the other was well-rested.
    even still, iu played against a much better squad last night and even if they had been rested, they still lose because they cannot shoot. no surprise kopp and phinessy scored zilch last night. kopp was supposed to help us in the shooting dept. this year but, he was pretty useless most of the year. phin... he needs to meet with a sports psychologist or something because his shooting is simply awful and he's a liability if he can't hit anything. i see lander wasn't injured but just didn't play. i wouldn't be surprised if he transfers as i doubt he gets any uptick in playing time next year.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bball
    replied
    What are the current mock drafts proposing for TJD? At one point, I'm not sure coming out was even a legitimate option for him, but his play in the BTT and the play in game had to help him.

    Still, he hasn't shown an outside shot, nor even a midrange shot, and that has to hurt his NBA stock because it's hard to project him being a true, in the paint, center in the NBA. He'll have to play PF and not get swallowed up by real centers and deal with stretch forwards and all of that.

    That said, I'm not going to be surprised to see a lot of guys hit the portal. And it's probably going to be some surprising names staying and going. So who knows? Woodson's inconsistent use of the bench is going to cost him some players IMO. At least mixed in with riding the NCAAT bubble and a first round blowout loss. All while being relegated to the wrong side of the BT standings. I suspect it will hinge on a domino effect.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X