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

The beginning of the end of KG in Minny?

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

  • The beginning of the end of KG in Minny?

    http://www.nypost.com/sports/61050.htm

    NO KEVINS HEAVEN - Peter Vescey

    Timberwolves All-Star Kevin Garnett reportedly exchanged curse-filled comments with team VP of basketball operations Kevin McHale after a recent loss, with K.G. suggesting a trade.

    January 27, 2006 -- Over the past few months, as it became increasingly evident the Timberwolves' imperfections were more than skin deep, numerous teams called to inquire about Kevin Garnett's availability.

    All were told the same thing: We're not even going to discuss it at this time.

    That suited Garnett just fine. In a recent public statement, he maintained his loyalty to the only NBA franchise he's ever carried (11th season, longest continuous service of any player in the wake of Reggie Miller's retirement) since transferring from high school to the pros, and resolved to remain a Wolf man for a life.

    A noble stance considering his team's reduction in rank from perennial playoff participant (eliminated in the '03-04 Western Conference finals) to lottery level last season. Currently, the T'wolves are 19-21, tied with Golden State for ninth in the West.

    Then again, that was before Sunday afternoon's postgame tongue-lashing by Kevin McHale. According to a source who got it straight from a Minnesota player, the Celtics' Hall of Famer and T'wolves VP of basketball operations barged into rookie coach Dwane Casey's locker room and barbecued the whole bunch for Heimliching a 19-point, late-third-quarter lead on national TV to the 76ers.

    "McHale was real mad," said the hearing aide. "He jumped on the team for not finishing strong, for not being aggressive and for playing scared. He accused the team of playing not-to-lose instead of playing to win."

    The wallop of McHale's expletive-deleted tirade was reserved for Garnett, at least that's the feeling he got. So he responded correspondingly. Already frazzled and frustrated by the ghastly loss and 13-point output on 5-for-15 inaccuracy (his lowest since New Year's night in Miami) and dismal production in the fourth quadrant, the last straw was a scolding.

    "I ain't [bleeping] playin' scared," Garnett stormed. "I ain't [bleeping] playin' to lose. I ain't [bleeping] puttin' my head down. I'm [bleeping] tryin' as hard as I can every night."

    Earlier this season, Garnett called out McHale on TNT for doing a poor reconstruction job of the roster - trading Sam Cassell to my Paper Clips for Marko Jaric really bugged him out. This time, Garnett reputedly called him out in front of the team, telling him coarsely what course of action he could take right then and there.

    A T'wolves source denies this happened, or at least didn't hear it himself. He also denies that Garnett subsequently put an exclamation point on his defiance. The soul of his disputed message: "If you don't like how I'm playing, get me the [bleep] out of here, trade my [bleep]."

    Emotional outbursts among teammates and coaches (not so much management) are commonplace behind closed doors in sports. For the most part, it's strictly temporary insanity. Not surprisingly, Garnett left the Off-Target Center that evening without talking to the media, an uncommon occurrence.

    Yet team tension and futility have persisted. The T'wolves have lost two in a row since, a miserable 24-point defeat in Minnesota to the Flip Saunders-coached Pistons and a 20-point wipeout in Memphis.

    Knowing something had to be done to stop the bleeding, McHale shook things up last night by swapping Wally Szczerbiak, Michael Olowokandi and a No. 1 pick for long-coveted Ricky Davis, Mark Blount, Marcus Banks and Justin Reed.

    This just in: The ghost of Hubert Humphrey slunk into the T'Wolves' executive offices and lambasted McHale for dragging his pivot feet on Vietnam.

    Influx of fresh talent aside, if things don't improve noticeably by the time the Feb. 23 trading deadline rolls around, Garnett may very well be next to go.

    My father always said I was no ordinary idiot. While that's debatable, it seems to me, despite averaging 22.2 points (16th overall) and 11.5 rebounds (fifth), K.G. is not good enough in the heart of the matter to salvage McHale's sloping Navy.

    In a week where the league should have been celebrating the second-greatest single-game performance in its history, Bryant Park winds up with the shelf life of left-out Limburger.

    While Matt Winick, the little old schedule-maker, did his best to allow Kobe Bryant and the league to bask in his basket full of (81) points - the Lakers don't play again until tonight against the Warriors - other forces were at work holding down the hype.

    First was the rerouting of Rorschach Artest, whose mood swings have worn out many a mood ring. After a couple days of hiding behind the inexperience and incompetence of his newest agent, Mark Stevens, who did his damnedest to sabotage a trade to the Kings for Peja Stojakovic, he finally consented.

    However, before the Brothers Maloof and Brothers Grimm agreed ,they demanded a personal pow-wow with Artest. How much would you pay for a printed transcript?

    By my count, Artest became the first player in NBA history obliged to take a mental (I'm unsure he has to pass it) before joining a new team.

  • #2
    Re: The beginning of the end of KG in Minny?

    Am I a bad person for wanting us to trade J.O. (and prolly more) for KG?

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: The beginning of the end of KG in Minny?

      Minnesota got two good scorers for one in that deal. They'll be a better team, just not much better.

      Mark Blount will knock down a lot of open shots though, and that should make KG's life a bit easier.

      It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

      Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
      Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
      NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: The beginning of the end of KG in Minny?

        Mchale was questioning KGs passion for the game? I barely even ever catch any of the games but I know he's out there every night giving 100%. Thats what you get when you have Mchale as your GM though. KG is getting older now though...With that said I think he would be a perfect fit for our team because he's a great passer. Not entirely sure if I would trade Jermaine for him though because he's the face of our franchise.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: The beginning of the end of KG in Minny?

          Originally posted by rexnom
          Am I a bad person for wanting us to trade J.O. (and prolly more) for KG?

          No, even though i'm a JO fan i would do JO/ and Tins or Jack for KG in the blink of an eye
          Follow me on Twitter! https://twitter.com/Hookjaw_Rox

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: The beginning of the end of KG in Minny?

            Vecsey

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: The beginning of the end of KG in Minny?

              Jo, Tinsley, Jacko for KG??? That's like winning the Indy powerball!!!!
              http://Twitter.com/dRealSource

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: The beginning of the end of KG in Minny?

                JO and Tinsley, no doubt. I'm not sure getting Jackson really excites them that much.

                Besides, those salaries don't work.
                This space for rent.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: The beginning of the end of KG in Minny?

                  What do you guys think are the chances of something like this actually happening?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: The beginning of the end of KG in Minny?

                    slim to none.
                    Sorry, I didn't know advertising was illegal here. Someone call the cops!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: The beginning of the end of KG in Minny?

                      I think if he ever is traded, no one can make an offer better than JO and Tinsley.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: The beginning of the end of KG in Minny?

                        Originally posted by Hicks
                        I think if he ever is traded, no one can make an offer better than JO and Tinsley.
                        1.) Would they ever trade KG? I mean really go through with it?

                        2.) Would the Pacers ever trade J.O.?

                        Personally I think Minny could trade KG...to start rebuilding or something. Then again, they just took on a huge contract (Blount) for no other apparent reason than providing KG with some help better than Olowakandi. However, I don't think we'll trade J.O. He is the face of the franchise...like Reggie was. Even if this is better for us basketball-wise. However, if there is one trade the fan-base would accept it would be a trade for KG.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: The beginning of the end of KG in Minny?

                          Originally posted by rexnom
                          1.) Would they ever trade KG? I mean really go through with it?

                          2.) Would the Pacers ever trade J.O.?
                          I can't answer #1, but there's been rumblings for a while now that it could happen. It will if KG decides to tell management he thinks he needs a fresh start someplace else.

                          As for #2 absolutely. If LA had said yes, we would have traded him for Shaq a few summers ago. (Other players would have been included to make it work).

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: The beginning of the end of KG in Minny?

                            Originally posted by rexnom
                            1.) Would they ever trade KG? I mean really go through with it?

                            2.) Would the Pacers ever trade J.O.?

                            .... However, if there is one trade the fan-base would accept it would be a trade for KG.
                            KG would fit that bill of the Face of the franchise so fast we wouldn't miss a step from loosing JO.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: The beginning of the end of KG in Minny?

                              If there was ever a way to keep JO through this trade...that'd be soo amazing. JO has really done a lot for this team and community. I'd feel bad trading him, but overall would like to do this.

                              Tinsley+Jack+Pollard+some 1st round draft picks or something. I don't know, just throwing something around.
                              AKA Sactolover05

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X