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

Vescey: JO is available

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

  • Vescey: JO is available

    The headline here is wrong, I guess. Whoever wrote the headline needs to read the article

    http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/...ter_vecsey.htm



    NO WAY JERMAINE'S ON THE BLOCK

    By PETER VECSEY

    June 16, 2006 -- MIAMI - If you read a quote by a named Pacers official or an unnamed source denying Jermaine O'Neal is being shopped, do not fall for it. Too many reliable fountains of information claim the All-Star forward is definitely available for a team's best big player, or an elite draft pick and the team's second best player.

    Do not bank on the Raptors to relinquish their pick of the litter for O'Neal. In fact, don't bank on any of the top four draft picks to be traded with Texas center LaMarcus Aldridge rapidly emerging as the favorite to go No. 1, overall.

    As long as I'm disregarding reports, obliterate the one that contends the Raptors are considering swapping coveted duo Charlie Villanueva and Mo Peterson for Jamal Magloire and Mo Williams. The only way Toronto takes Magloire in any deal remotely resembling that one is if the Bucks substitute T.J. Ford for Mo.

    Tell you something else to discount totally that's being floated out there by wastes of space. Wizard owner Abe Pollin, back to work after a month or so of poor health, is not holding off on extending Eddie Jordan's contract in order to pounce on Larry Brown when (not if) the Knicks finally cut the umbilical cord. Washington is very pleased with how Jordan has guided the team to two straight postseasons and has every intention of retaining him past next season.

    Jordan, by the way, isn't the only rising lame duck coach. Also in that position are Mike Dunleavy, Mike Fratello, Rick Carlisle, Sam Mitchell, Bob Hill, Bernie Bickerstaff, Byron Scott and George Karl, who's down for one more year, at which time Denver has a three-year option.

    *

    Column contributor Joe Belfiore feels it was a little tacky of commissioner David Stern to join the Heat crowd behind the basket and wave those pom-poms when the Mavericks' Dirk Nowitzki admittedly "short-armed" his Game 3-deciding free throw.

    As mentioned previously, I cast my MVP vote for Dirk. Evidently, I think he can play a little bit. At the same time, ABC's color (uncoordinated) studio analyst Mark Jackson should have his mouth washed out with German chocolate cake for stating Dirk is better than Larry Bird. Not only would Bird have the layup that would've tied the game, underlines column contributor Kevin Heller, "he would've slipped on a blindfold and drained the winning free throw."

    *

    The Nuggets are prepared to trade any player on their roster exempting Carmelo Anthony. Any team can have Kenyon Martin essentially for nothing, no joke, if you classify $71 million over the next five seasons nothing . . . Orlando is looking to obtain an established off guard in case it loses DeShawn Stevenson to free agency.

    With the Hawks' ownership seemingly in question, it figures to be difficult for GM Billy Knight to make a command decision such as the possible acquisition of Allen Iverson, who'd be an instant gravitational pull in the stands. He's exactly what the incredibly athletic Hawks need to improve dramatically in the standings as well. Naturally, Marvin Williams or Josh Smith would have to part of any exchange program.

    *

    Look for Timberwolves GM Jim Stack, a Pacers assistant under Isiah Thomas, to assume a lot of the same duties in New York when Brown leaves and the team president takes over as coach . . . The agent for Mr. Miami, "I'll sacrifice-everything-to-win-a-title-as-long-as-I'm-well-comensated-for-it," has been alerting teams client Alonzo Mourning is about to become a free agent. Shocking that ABC's hard-hitting Game 3 halftime feature on the Organ Groaner never mentioned anything like that.

    *

    The Lakers are looking at Kwame Brown exclusively as a center, meaning Andrew Bynum can be had. The question is, for what/ Since he has no college experience and only one unrevealing year of pro ball, nobody really knows what the New Jersey 7-footer is worth . . . If you believe the media (I never have), the Knicks have placed a gag order on Next Town Brown - a natural progression from the gag season he placed on the rest of us.

    peter.vecsey@nypost.com

  • #2
    Re: Vescey: JO is available

    Originally posted by Unclebuck
    The headline here is wrong, I guess. Whoever wrote the headline needs to read the article

    http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/...ter_vecsey.htm



    NO WAY JERMAINE'S ON THE BLOCK

    By PETER VECSEY

    June 16, 2006 -- MIAMI - If you read a quote by a named Pacers official or an unnamed source denying Jermaine O'Neal is being shopped, do not fall for it. Too many reliable fountains of information claim the All-Star forward is definitely available for a team's best big player, or an elite draft pick and the team's second best player.

    Do not bank on the Raptors to relinquish their pick of the litter for O'Neal. In fact, don't bank on any of the top four draft picks to be traded with Texas center LaMarcus Aldridge rapidly emerging as the favorite to go No. 1, overall.

    As long as I'm disregarding reports, obliterate the one that contends the Raptors are considering swapping coveted duo Charlie Villanueva and Mo Peterson for Jamal Magloire and Mo Williams. The only way Toronto takes Magloire in any deal remotely resembling that one is if the Bucks substitute T.J. Ford for Mo.

    Tell you something else to discount totally that's being floated out there by wastes of space. Wizard owner Abe Pollin, back to work after a month or so of poor health, is not holding off on extending Eddie Jordan's contract in order to pounce on Larry Brown when (not if) the Knicks finally cut the umbilical cord. Washington is very pleased with how Jordan has guided the team to two straight postseasons and has every intention of retaining him past next season.

    Jordan, by the way, isn't the only rising lame duck coach. Also in that position are Mike Dunleavy, Mike Fratello, Rick Carlisle, Sam Mitchell, Bob Hill, Bernie Bickerstaff, Byron Scott and George Karl, who's down for one more year, at which time Denver has a three-year option.

    *

    Column contributor Joe Belfiore feels it was a little tacky of commissioner David Stern to join the Heat crowd behind the basket and wave those pom-poms when the Mavericks' Dirk Nowitzki admittedly "short-armed" his Game 3-deciding free throw.

    As mentioned previously, I cast my MVP vote for Dirk. Evidently, I think he can play a little bit. At the same time, ABC's color (uncoordinated) studio analyst Mark Jackson should have his mouth washed out with German chocolate cake for stating Dirk is better than Larry Bird. Not only would Bird have the layup that would've tied the game, underlines column contributor Kevin Heller, "he would've slipped on a blindfold and drained the winning free throw."

    *

    The Nuggets are prepared to trade any player on their roster exempting Carmelo Anthony. Any team can have Kenyon Martin essentially for nothing, no joke, if you classify $71 million over the next five seasons nothing . . . Orlando is looking to obtain an established off guard in case it loses DeShawn Stevenson to free agency.

    With the Hawks' ownership seemingly in question, it figures to be difficult for GM Billy Knight to make a command decision such as the possible acquisition of Allen Iverson, who'd be an instant gravitational pull in the stands. He's exactly what the incredibly athletic Hawks need to improve dramatically in the standings as well. Naturally, Marvin Williams or Josh Smith would have to part of any exchange program.

    *

    Look for Timberwolves GM Jim Stack, a Pacers assistant under Isiah Thomas, to assume a lot of the same duties in New York when Brown leaves and the team president takes over as coach . . . The agent for Mr. Miami, "I'll sacrifice-everything-to-win-a-title-as-long-as-I'm-well-comensated-for-it," has been alerting teams client Alonzo Mourning is about to become a free agent. Shocking that ABC's hard-hitting Game 3 halftime feature on the Organ Groaner never mentioned anything like that.

    *

    The Lakers are looking at Kwame Brown exclusively as a center, meaning Andrew Bynum can be had. The question is, for what/ Since he has no college experience and only one unrevealing year of pro ball, nobody really knows what the New Jersey 7-footer is worth . . . If you believe the media (I never have), the Knicks have placed a gag order on Next Town Brown - a natural progression from the gag season he placed on the rest of us.

    peter.vecsey@nypost.com

    Decipher that bolded area please.


    and if he did that, Der Fuhrer should be fired immediately. Any impression of favoritism, etc etc.
    Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Vescey: JO is available

      I absolutely hate Vecsey's writing. It always such a messy collaboration of quips that it's difficult to decipher.

      And as for the bit about Stern, if that's actually true... :shakehead

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Vescey: JO is available

        Peter Vecsey is my dad
        *removed* Just keep politics and religion completely out of it, please.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Vescey: JO is available

          I don't believe anything I read in the press this time of year.

          Versey does seem to get inside info on the Pacers.

          But that doesn't mean it's true.

          Even if it came from DW, this could just be their way of generating more phone traffic and offers for other players. Ye ol' bait-and-switch.

          And who knows, you might even get somebody offering something you'd take - KG.

          Multiple people on here have mentioned it before, but there is no "superstar" in this draft - nobody who has a great certainty of being better than JO.

          But I'm looking at things on talent and not looking at JOs salary. But I honestly don't think that bothers them. I'm sure they considered that JO might be here for his whole contract.
          You're caught up in the Internet / you think it's such a great asset / but you're wrong, wrong, wrong
          All that fiber optic gear / still cannot take away the fear / like an island song

          - Jimmy Buffett

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Vescey: JO is available

            Maybe its supposed to be, "No way, Jermaine's on the Block."

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Vescey: JO is available

              Obviously, Peter Vescey hasn't viewed the WISH-TV (Ch-8) interview they did w/JO discussing these co-called trade rumors involving him. Talk about a reporter being completely out of the loop.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Vescey: JO is available

                Originally posted by NuffSaid
                Obviously, Peter Vescey hasn't viewed the WISH-TV (Ch-8) interview they did w/JO discussing these co-called trade rumors involving him. Talk about a reporter being completely out of the loop.
                I just wish all of these JO trade rumors would stop. I'd say the chances of us dealing JO are about < 10%.

                What we need to do is focus on upgrading the rest of the roster, particularly the starting C and SG positions.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Vescey: JO is available

                  I'm assuming the quip about Stern was a bit of a gag... implying Stern wanted Dirk to miss to extend this series and get Miami back in it to keep the ratings up and more games to be played.

                  -Bball

                  Originally posted by NuffSaid
                  Obviously, Peter Vescey hasn't viewed the WISH-TV (Ch-8) interview they did w/JO discussing these co-called trade rumors involving him. Talk about a reporter being completely out of the loop.
                  That's more like a player being out of the loop... No way would I ever expect a player to have the final say or knowledge in whether he was being shopped or not.

                  Is there a fire sale for JO? I'd think not...

                  Should the Pacers be seeing what someone wants to offer for JO? I'd hope they are...

                  -Bball
                  Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                  ------

                  "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                  -John Wooden

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Vescey: JO is available

                    so....andrew Bynum is available??? maybe send Tinsley in a package to get bynum. not gonna go into detail on the trade, because i dont feel like it. but very interesting. i know we have harrison and bynum could be a project like harrison, but those are 2 very big bodies. and we had those on the team. haha think about a front court of Bynum and Harrison. if they ever got in the game at the same time....not much driving to the basket on the opposing teams part.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Vescey: JO is available

                      Originally posted by BigDawg44
                      so....andrew Bynum is available??? maybe send Tinsley in a package to get bynum. not gonna go into detail on the trade, because i dont feel like it. but very interesting. i know we have harrison and bynum could be a project like harrison, but those are 2 very big bodies. and we had those on the team. haha think about a front court of Bynum and Harrison. if they ever got in the game at the same time....not much driving to the basket on the opposing teams part.
                      If Bynum's available, you're not going to get him for Tinsley.

                      Not that I wouldn't love to have Bynum.
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Vescey: JO is available

                        Originally posted by NuffSaid
                        Obviously, Peter Vescey hasn't viewed the WISH-TV (Ch-8) interview they did w/JO discussing these co-called trade rumors involving him. Talk about a reporter being completely out of the loop.
                        I didn't see that - so JO thinks he'll be traded?
                        The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Vescey: JO is available

                          Unless someone has video evidence of Stern cheering with the Miami fans I don't believe it. He's not that stupid. Is he?

                          On the chance it is true we'll never know thanks to the power of the almighty Commish.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Vescey: JO is available

                            Of course we want to extend Ediie Jordan's contract, he got us into th eplayoffs, twice. Who said we wanted Larry Brown? He'll turn us in to the Knicks, or did Isaiah do that? MJ did that to us a while back...i'm rambling...
                            STARBURY

                            08 and Beyond

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Vescey: JO is available

                              Originally posted by Robertmto
                              Of course we want to extend Ediie Jordan's contract, he got us into th eplayoffs, twice. Who said we wanted Larry Brown? He'll turn us in to the Knicks, or did Isaiah do that? MJ did that to us a while back...i'm rambling...
                              Rambling? I thought you were giving a Peter Vecsey quote.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X