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

I don't really want a trade

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

  • I don't really want a trade

    Well I do sorta, but I wanted to set the record straight during all this trade talk. I've been mentioning situations in which I could see a JO, Danny or even Foster deal being helpful, something that I would be "for".

    But as an across the board catch all disclaimer let me say that I really do look forward to watching all 3 of those players in action when I watch games. I've enjoyed JO and would love to see him return this season, Danny is coming along very nicely, and Jeff has been my fav Pacer since Jax left (that's Jax and not Jack, so calm down haters).

    Add to that mix Shawne even though he's still horribly green right now. Those are still my 4 favorite Pacers, all the ones most likely to be used to fix some of the problems with this team. Since I want the team fixed my pragmatic side is all for dealing them. But my fanboy side is going to miss them if they are moved.


    Frankly I think the team is F'd either way, at least for a few more seasons.

  • #2
    Re: I don't really want a trade

    The team is fine - we just need to shed the dead "injury" weight (you know who I'm talking about) so that the guys we actually have can play 70+ games together.

    Start with consistency, then make slow deliberate moves to improve the roster.

    I agreed at least in principle with your "stand pat" position last summer. I do not agree with it now. But it's just my opinion.
    “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


    • #3
      Re: I don't really want a trade

      Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
      The team is fine - we just need to shed the dead "injury" weight (you know who I'm talking about) so that the guys we actually have can play 70+ games together.

      I actually never thought of it that way. That's a direction we could look at going that won't cost us money.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: I don't really want a trade

        Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
        The team is fine - we just need to shed the dead "injury" weight (you know who I'm talking about) so that the guys we actually have can play 70+ games together.

        Start with consistency, then make slow deliberate moves to improve the roster.
        That's a great point. Consistency is so important and overlooked these days, but I think it's a great starting point for this bunch of guys. When you look back at the last few seasons, consistency is not a word that comes to mind. I'd love to see what some of the younger core group of players can do when they're getting consistent minutes, and know they'll be getting those minutes each and every night.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: I don't really want a trade

          Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
          The team is fine - we just need to shed the dead "injury" weight (you know who I'm talking about) so that the guys we actually have can play 70+ games together.
          21-32 is fine? You have very low standards.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: I don't really want a trade

            Originally posted by Kofi View Post
            21-32 is fine? You have very low standards.
            ROFL

            I've been called out for a lot of things in my day, but having low standards? Yeah, you definitely don't know who you're talking to.

            Nice try though.

            EDIT: where on earth did I say I was satisfied with the record?
            “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


            • #7
              Re: I don't really want a trade

              I'm not saying "stand pat" and I wasn't saying it in the summer per se. The Stand Pat icon was because the team was so screwed on what moves it could make it had NO OTHER CHOICE (not a smart one at least). I wish it had or did now.

              And in fact what I'm saying here is that I actually approve of a lot of these trade ideas, including Foster to Utah, JO to NJ or GS or using Danny to get something nice. It's just that if any of these guys IS used in a deal I'm going to miss them being Pacers.

              I hate that JO is injured, but that's because I want to see him play and at his level. If Ike gets injured I'm not that bothered. I'm not all that upset about Tins being out anymore either (I used to really like his game).

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: I don't really want a trade

                Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
                ROFL

                I've been called out for a lot of things in my day, but having low standards? Yeah, you definitely don't know who you're talking to.

                Nice try though.

                EDIT: where on earth did I say I was satisfied with the record?
                You said the team is fine. The team is 21-32. What exactly do you find fine about this team? I'm not being a jerk, I'm just curious as to how anyone can be optimistic about this current team.
                Last edited by Kofi; 02-20-2008, 06:12 PM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: I don't really want a trade

                  Originally posted by Kofi View Post
                  You said the team is fine. The team is 21-32. What exactly do you find fine about this team?
                  Scalper prices? Parking space? Crowd control? The wear and tear rate of seats? Concession lines?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: I don't really want a trade

                    If anything...I'm all for making a trade......just as long as it makes sense, it doesn't adversely affect our Salary cap, we do not get ripped off and it actually fits what we are trying to do.

                    I would welcome any trade that involves JONeal, Tinsley and/or Murphy that makes sense for us. But since it is near impossible to make such a trade before the trade deadline with JONeal, Tinsley and/or Murphy, since I don't want to move anyone else....I am fine with doing nothing.

                    My hopes for this season has already ended.....so I would prefer that we do nothing...rather then something stupid ( like trade Granger ).
                    Last edited by CableKC; 02-20-2008, 06:15 PM.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: I don't really want a trade

                      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                      Scalper prices? Parking space? Crowd control? The wear and tear rate of seats? Concession lines?
                      Nachos?


                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: I don't really want a trade

                        Originally posted by Kofi View Post
                        You said the team is fine. The team is 21-32. What exactly do you find fine about this team? I'm not being a jerk, I'm just curious as to how anyone can be optimistic about this current team.
                        All I know is that you read the word "fine" and wanted to pick a fight about it. Of all the key words in my post, it was the least important one. Everyone else seemed to take the word "consistent" as the important concept. They were correct, that was the key issue in my post.

                        If you want to talk about the central theme of my post ("start with consistency during a rebuild"), and not just the garnish (the word "fine"), well, then I'll talk. You want to nit-pick my wording like I'm Michelle Obama, well, the discussion isn't going to go far.
                        “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


                        • #13
                          Re: I don't really want a trade

                          Well, if you really don't want a trade, I get the feeling you'll be a happy man for the rest of this season.
                          I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                          -Emiliano Zapata

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: I don't really want a trade

                            Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
                            Well, if you really don't want a trade, I get the feeling you'll be a happy man for the rest of this season.
                            No, I just remain unhappy in the same way as I was last summer, back when I was crazy to see this team as a 25-35 win team.

                            The team isn't going to win much, but at least I don't have to watch Danny, Jeff, Shawne and JO head out the door to go with that. And those are the only pieces available to actually start the damage control process.

                            The frying pan stinks, but at least they aren't jumping into the fire...this time (see last season for how that works out).

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: I don't really want a trade

                              Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                              No, I just remain unhappy in the same way as I was last summer, back when I was crazy to see this team as a 25-35 win team.

                              The team isn't going to win much, but at least I don't have to watch Danny, Jeff, Shawne and JO head out the door to go with that. And those are the only pieces available to actually start the damage control process.

                              The frying pan stinks, but at least they aren't jumping into the fire...this time (see last season for how that works out).
                              Since we're not going anywhere fast this season and TPTB would prefer to keep JONeal rather then have a firesale for him......I would much rather play this season out and see what we can do in the offseason. I've ( like the rest of the Pacer fanbase ) essentially given up on this season.

                              I don't mind not making a move this season......but ask me the same question in the 2008-2009 trade deadline.

                              Based off of what we have seen over the last season....I think that Expiring Contracts...none of which we have now....are becoming valuable trading assets nowadays. At the very least....if you have them....there is a good chance that your team can directly get involved in trade talks or at least be involved as a 3rd team. Marquis and Foster ( who I think has a Player option AFTER the 2008-2009 season ) are going to be Expiring Contracts after the 2008-2009 season. I felt that if we did have some Expiring Contracts this season...that we could have had a better chance at making some trade....but since we don't....I'm looking to next season. It doesn't mean that we have to make a move with them.....but at least IF we saw the need or the opportunity to make a move.....having the option to do so is important.

                              On a related note....I had a question about our Contract situation next season.

                              I was under the impression that we would likely be very close ( if not over ) the Luxury Tax limit with 10 players signed with guaranteed $$$ going into the 2008-2009 season.

                              Does this lessen the chance of TPTB offering Rush a decent contract in the offseason?

                              or

                              Can we still try to sign him for some $3mil contract and then move someone like Marquis or Foster before the 2008-2009 trading deadline and still be under the Luxury Tax threshold?


                              I'm guessing that we won't be able to resign him if we don't make a move now to give us some flexiblility in the 2008-2009 season.
                              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X