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

Announce JO trade - Good idea?

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

  • Announce JO trade - Good idea?

    There has been alot of talk about how bad it would be to announce that JO is being traded.

    Now, normally conventional wisdom says going public with a player on the block a bad idea. But I don't think it is.

    JO is a former All-Star and onetime MVP candidate. There are many teams out there that feel like a post presence will make them contenders. If JO is publically on the block, fanbases in Chicago, LA, Washington, Cleveland, Denver, etc. will be yelling at their GMs to do what it takes to get a deal done. And since there is a ticking clock on the deal, I think we will have motivated buyers. No GM will be able to argue that they had to chance to get Jermaine. Everyone would, and everyone would know it.

    Also, we don't have to worry about JO tanking as a result of the impending trade since it is the offseason. That's a huge reason why secrects are kept, but it's not a factor this time.

    The Sixers did the same thing, and they got Andre Miller, two 1sts, and cap room. Isn't that similar to what we want?
    The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
    http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
    RSS Feed
    Subscribe via iTunes


  • #2
    Re: Announce JO trade - Good idea?

    Originally posted by FlavaDave View Post
    The Sixers did the same thing, and they got Andre Miller, two 1sts, and cap room. Isn't that similar to what we want?
    Well i'm sure the Pacers would love to get more than that. But honestly, we probably won't.

    Stars are hard to trade. Jermaine is worth much more to us than say Boston, or LA, or whoever we may trade him to. Especially when you consider the difficulty of matching Jermaine's salary. The fact that he will be coming off of surgery is going to hurt his value.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Announce JO trade - Good idea?

      Originally posted by FlavaDave View Post
      The Sixers did the same thing, and they got Andre Miller, two 1sts, and cap room. Isn't that similar to what we want?
      I think that this was a unique situation. I would argue that if there wasn't a Knicks/Nugget's brawl ( and therefore Carmello wasn't suspended ) that the Nugget's wouldn't have given up so much to get him.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Announce JO trade - Good idea?

        Yes it worked for Philly but it did not work for LA when they traded Shaq.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Announce JO trade - Good idea?

          Shaq was 32 and coming off his worst season in the NBA. In other words he was pretty obviously starting his decline already. Same cannot be said for JO.

          The Lakers got two up and coming All Stars and a first rounder. They really didn't make out too badly. Their fault that they traded Butler for Kwame Brown.

          Also, the knee surgery JO is having is minor. It won't affect his value at all.

          Whatever the Pacers get from JO in a rebuilding effort will be good. I'm pretty sure of that. What I hope, though, is that some team gets wild/desperate and overpays.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Announce JO trade - Good idea?

            Donnie was adamant that Ron going public really, really hurt his ability to get value for him. Everybody knows JO's available, getting offers will not be a problem. But if you go public, the press starts saying we're trying to get rid of him, he's to blame for all our problems, he's injury prone, etc, and his market value goes down.

            Also, if it's public, than the press starts talking to Jermaine. Whose to say he won't muck up a deal like when Ron supposedly cost us Kevin Martin with Peja?
            Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Announce JO trade - Good idea?

              Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
              Also, if it's public, than the press starts talking to Jermaine. Whose to say he won't muck up a deal like when Ron supposedly cost us Kevin Martin with Peja?
              I don't think I'll ever get over that.
              “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

              “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Announce JO trade - Good idea?

                Originally posted by Ragnar View Post
                Yes it worked for Philly but it did not work for LA when they traded Shaq.
                Or for Orlando when they traded Shaq
                Sometimes a player's greatest challenge is coming to grips with his role on the team. -- Scottie Pippen

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Announce JO trade - Good idea?

                  Originally posted by jcouts View Post
                  Or for Orlando when they traded Shaq
                  Didn't he to go the Lakers as a free agent for something like a 7 year, $120 million contract?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Announce JO trade - Good idea?

                    I'd normally say that giving any hint that the pacers might trade JO would hurt his trade value, but I'm not so sure that matters much anymore. I think most teams know that the pacers want to trade JO, so maybe if the Pacers did announce they were intending to trade him, it could spark a bidding war. The problem is if they can't trade him it would be tougher to bring him back

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Announce JO trade - Good idea?

                      I'm not sure why so many people on this board are stuck on the Kevin Martin thing, was'nt it just one guy on this board that had any info about it at all and he said he was'nt even sure about it? It makes zero sense that he would be in the trade, Artest was on the block for along time and time was running out, the Pacers had already talked to the Kings about Artest for Peja and the Maloof's said no(they said as much in interviews after the trade).Then the Maloof's changed thier minds and when for it, so why would they go from not wanting to do it to wanting to throw in one of thier good young players aswell? And you can ask any Kings fan everyone around there already knew Martin was turning into something nice at that time.


                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Announce JO trade - Good idea?

                        The Pacers will have more leverage with trading JO after the playoffs. All but one team will lose their last game and many will feel a player like JO is enough to "get them over the top". ....and JO will likely go to a contender...a team in the playoffs right now. So, we will not hear anything until at least late May IMO.

                        But go ahead. Let the speculation run wild!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Announce JO trade - Good idea?

                          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                          I'd normally say that giving any hint that the pacers might trade JO would hurt his trade value, but I'm not so sure that matters much anymore. I think most teams know that the pacers want to trade JO, so maybe if the Pacers did announce they were intending to trade him, it could spark a bidding war. The problem is if they can't trade him it would be tougher to bring him back
                          I'm inclined to agree mostly with your last point.

                          We're not going to "sell low" on JO just to get rid of him I don't believe. We're not just putting him out there like an old car with a "Best offer" sign on his back. We're trying to get something in return we definitely want. If no one offers something the front office wants (which is a possibility given his injury history), we need to be able to bring him back.

                          Like you say, every team knows he's available. There should be a bidding war anyway. And every sportswriter, analyst, pundit and talking head knows he's avaliable. So he's gonna be right at the top of every "Available Superstar" list.

                          I see no reason to publicly burn our bridge with JO.
                          Read my Pacers blog:
                          8points9seconds.com

                          Follow my twitter:

                          @8pts9secs

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Announce JO trade - Good idea?

                            That would be the dumbest thing ever done by any franchise in the history of sports.

                            No offense FlavaDave.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Announce JO trade - Good idea?

                              I doubt there will be any trades involving draft picks until after the lottery order is established.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X