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

6/25 - Draft Day Fallout

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

  • 6/25 - Draft Day Fallout

    Friday, June 25, 2004

    Did the Magic blow it?

    By Chad Ford
    ESPN Insider


    Also see: Ford's Draft Grades | 2005 Sneak Peek

    It was supposed to be unpredictable. Crazy. Filled with trades, rumors and innuendo. It was going to shock us, thrill us and ultimately redistribute the base of power in the league.

    Instead, Thursday night's draft pretty much played according to form. There were a few surprises here or there, but nothing like what we saw in last year's draft.

    There were no huge trades. No stunning picks. No major shake-ups. Even the guys who fell (with the possible exception of Sergey Monya) were the guys who were supposed to fall.

    When the draft did deviate from the script a little bit? Here's a look at how things look the morning after the NBA draft.

    Q: Does the fact that the Magic took Dwight Howard over Emeka Okafor mean that Tracy McGrady is as good as gone?

    Yes. But I'm not sure it had to be that way. When the Magic traded with Denver for the draft rights to Jameer Nelson, the whole Howard over Okafor thing started bothering me.

    McGrady says he prefers to stay with the Magic, but wants out because the team is rebuilding. The Magic landed the No. 1 pick and, as we found out later, the No. 20 pick in the draft. To play a little revisionist history . . .had they taken Okafor at No. 1 and still landed Nelson at No. 20 . . . wouldn't that have been enough to make the Magic a serious playoff team -- especially in the ultra-weak Southeastern Conference?

    Hear me out. You take Nelson at the point. McGrady at the two. Grant Hill and Pat Garrity at the three. Juwan Howard and Drew Gooden at the four and Okafor at the five. Isn't that a playoff team?

    The word from Hill's camp is that he's finally healthy and will be ready to play this year. We obviously know that Hill will never return to his former glory. But even 20 minutes a night of a rusty Hill is better than what the Magic have had the last four years. Garrity missed almost all of last season and the Magic really missed his lights-out shooting.

    Throwing Nelson and Okafor into the mix changees everything. Those two guys are winners. They play hard every minute. They're leaders. They both have the ability to pick their team up and carry it to the finish line. Their bellies are on fire and their hearts are enormous.

    The Magic were terrible last year because they lacked presence. They lacked defensive intensity. They lacked any will to win. Nelson and Okafor carry that in abundance. It can become contagious, just ask the Pistons.

    Couldn't GM John Weisbrod have gone to T-Mac and said, "Look, I know you want out. Let's see how this team plays for a few months. If we're bad, you'll get your trade. If we're good, you get your wish."

    I think they'd be much, much improved from last year.

    In other words, why the rush to trade T-Mac? Why not try to build a winner and keep him. If you fail, the market will always be good for a player of McGrady's character. If you win, then you get to keep T-Mac and Okafor.

    Instead, Weisbrod chose Howard and sealed T-Mac's fate. This is what's bothering me. In essence, the Magic are choosing to replace McGrady with Howard. McGrady is a proven commodity. He's a scoring machine. An all-star. Howard is a bundle of hopes and projections. If all goes according to plan, he will, someday, become a player like McGrady. But why trade the real thing for a work in serious progress?

    I think John Weisbrod could've saved the Magic on draft night. Maybe he did. But with T-Mac ready to bolt and Howard looking a few years away, I think the Magic could be in worse shape than ever.

    Q: So T-Mac's gone? Apparently. Thursday night, sources claimed that the Magic and Rockets had resumed talks. Weisbrod is claiming that Steve Francis would go to the Magic along with Kelvin Cato and Cuttino Mobley for McGrady, Juwan Howard, Reece Gaines and Tyronn Lue. Rockets owner Les Alexander told the Houston Chronicle on Thursday that they were nearing in on a deal.

    "We think we have a trade that will benefit the team," Alexander said. "We also think it is a good trade for Orlando. They are terrific players we're trading. We'd like to get it done. I think we're going to get it done. But who knows? It's not up to me."

    The Orlando Sentinel reported that Francis has dropped his objections to playing for the Magic.

    "I couldn't say we're closer to anything but this was a good first step," Weisbrod said. "I do like the determination, conviction I hear from Steve."

    Weisbrod also said he will continue talking to other teams interested in McGrady. The Suns appear to have dropped out of the bidding. The Pacers are still interested and may have held up doing a deal with Chicago or Cleveland on Thursday in an effort to preserve their assets for a T-Mac trade.

    "We could still go in another direction with this, but I do like what I heard tonight," Weisbrod said. "We meshed."

    Q: What happened to all of those trades that the Bulls were talking about?

    Ladies and Gentleman, Bulls GM John Paxson.

    "One thing I'd like to dispel is this sentiment that we didn't do what we intended," Paxson told the Chicago Tribune. "That's not the case at all.

    "Our goal was to get two players out of the draft. If we could've done something to acquire a veteran, we obviously were going to go that route. But some things we had out there fell through."

    What exactly fell through. The biggest deal was with the Pacers, who negotiated with the Bulls well into draft night. The Pacers were dangling Al Harrington, but the hang-ups came on what the Bulls were offering in return. The Pacers wanted the No. 3 pick. The Bulls wanted the Pacers to take on Eddie Robinson's salary. They also had serious talks with the Sonics, according to sources. In the end, however, nothing happened, and Paxson is apparently OK with that.

    Q: So with the Bulls drafting yet another guard, where does that leave Jamal Crawford?

    Crawford's agent, Aaron Goodwin, told Insider that Crawford's first choice is still to play for the Bulls. But the writing is on the wall here. The Bulls believe he'll get an offer above the mid-level exception and it sounds like they don't want to pay it. While Crawford would be a great big guard in their otherwise small lineup, I think the chances are good you'll see him bolt to a team like the Bobcats, who have a lot of cap room.

    Q: Why did the Mavs take a point guard, Devin Harris, with No. 5? Is Steve Nash gone or is Harris going to be traded again?

    Mark Cuban claims that the team plans to keep Harris. Let's wait and see. They were hoping Shaun Livingston fell to them here, but switched gears and grabbed Harris after the Clippers drafted Livingston at No. 4. The Mavs spent the entire morning on Thursday calling every team in the league offering the No. 5 for more assets.

    However, after the pick was made, Donnie Nelson claimed that Harris will stay in Big D. "Devin Harris is staying put as the Mavericks point guard of the future."

    So that means Nash is gone, right?

    "Steve Nash, along with Michael Finley and Dirk Nowitzki, is the heart and soul of the Mavericks," said Donnie Nelson, president of basketball operations. "We don't take that lightly. We're not kicking him to the side of the curb."

    Tell that to his agent. Nash can explore free agency this summer and some believe there's a small chance he'll choose to sign with the Suns instead of the Mavericks.

    "It sounds like they're going in a different direction," his agent, Bill Duffy, said. "We'll have to work with it, if that's the case."

    If Nash and Harris are staying . . . how do they woo Shaq? The same way they always do -- by trading Dirk Nowitzki. The Lakers insist it's the only way. Cuban claims it won't happen. It may be time to start scribbling the Mavs off the Shaq list.

    Q: If the Nets can't afford the No. 22 pick, how can they afford to re-sign Kenyon Martin?

    It's clear that new owner Bruce Ratner is in cost-cutting mode right now. The Nets are in the process of slashing payroll, which doesn't bode well for Martin's hopes of getting a max contract this summer.

    The word around the league Thursday night was that the Nets are shopping both Martin and Jason Kidd in effort to cut cap. They don't want to move both. Just one should get their cap under control.

    The Nuggets and Nets seriously discussed a deal that would send Nene Hilario to New Jersey for Martin in a sign-and-trade. The Nuggets have the cap space to eat Martin's larger deal.

    Sources also claim that the team has explored moving Kidd. Maybe that's why San Antonio has been frantically clearing cap. A Tony Parker-for-Kidd swap, the same one that was mentioned so prominently last summer when Kidd was a free agent, may make more sense now. A swap like that would give the Nets a point guard and the extra cap room to re-sign Martin and Richard Jefferson next year.

    New Jersey GM Rod Thorn, for his part, denies that he's shopping anyone.

    "We are not shopping anybody around," Thorn told the New York Daily News. "We talk about guys all the time. People talk to us. So to say we are shopping him or Kenyon or anybody else is not true."

    Q: Sebastian Telfair at No. 13?

    Don't get me started. The Blazers passed on Kirk Snyder, a player who they desperately need, to grab Telfair here. He's going to have to be a great point guard to justify the pick. I think this was one of the worst picks of the night.

    Q: Can you explain to me how the Celtics are going to be any better after this draft?

    That's a tough one. I don't think they got a significant impact player. But that wasn't Danny Ainge's fault. The guys who could've helped them more (especially at center) weren't on the board anymore. I thought the Al Jefferson pick was a solid one at No. 15. Delonte West and Tony Allen are good players, but I don't know how much they help. The bottom line is that if the Celtics lose Mark Blount this summer, it's going to be another long year.

    Q: Only six international players in the first round? Has the backlash started?

    I think so. But it will likely end after this year. As we've been saying for months, this year's crop of high school players was extraordinary, but the group of international players was ordinary at best. The only international player not drafted in the first round who deserved to be was Brazil's Anderson Varejao. However, he did go with the first pick of the second round.

    Next year, the opposite holds true. The high school class of 2005 is very, very weak. The international class, however, is quite strong. When all is said and done, there's a chance that high school kids will get shut out next year. The international kids will get more than six first-round spots.
    Mickael Pietrus Le site officiel
Working...
X