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

Paul Pierce

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

  • #16
    Re: Paul Pierce

    Originally posted by WEST
    Sorry, the Artest to Manning analogy wasn't the brightest thing I've ever said. I do think though if Artest had played in the Boston series the Pacers would have eaisly beaten them like last year. Last year Artest shut down PP in the playoffs and still scored. I do agree that Artest was the biggest part of the Pacers meltdown in Detroit last year in the ECF, but lets hope he come back next year more mature.
    See, I agree that Artest did a great job on PP last year. However PP did not have the amount of options then like he did this year. And those options cause problems for the Pacers' team D, no matter who is on Pierce. So I would just throw it up in the air to say whether or not he would have done as good of a job this year or not.

    But if PP came here he would have many options, even better ones than in Boston. 1) JO 2) Jax 3) Tins 4) the Jones) 5)good screen setting by Dale 6) possibly David Harrison.

    PP would relish the chance to play on a real contender, IMO he would be the championship move.
    House Name: Pacers

    House Sigil:



    House Words: "We Kneel To No King"

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Paul Pierce

      Originally posted by Diamond Dave
      Fine, even though historically as a Pacer Ron Artest has had multiple meltdowns in each full season and I believe next year will be no different, we will act like he is gonna come back and contribute. Well the way I see it the Pacer main problems right now are a lack of scoring. We go an at least one 6 min scoring drout each game and it kills us. We need a scorer. Yes I know Artest scored 20 a game, but he is not a go to guy like PP is. PP is a guy that can decide he is going to score and do it. Ron is not that type of player.
      Well if you ASSUME that, then maybe PP pulls a Winslow Jr and gets hurt in an accident this offseason. Watching his actions in game 6 shows me that he's just as capable of doing something stupid in the playoffs.

      Ron is that type of player. PP relies on jumpshots, where Ron goes to the post. I'd take my chances with post move, than a pull up shot with a defender in his face.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right. ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Paul Pierce

        If we were trading for PP, Boston would want a lot more. Probably something like SJax, Foster, Pollard (expiring contract) plus maybe a 1st pick 2005 and a first pick 2007 for Pierce and crap throw-ins.

        In other words, it would take a lot to entice Boston to give up PP.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Paul Pierce

          If the Celtics deal Pierce, they'll probably try to package him with either Lafrentz or Blount. In addition to getting rid of there contracts, it will open up more PT for Al Jefferson.
          #DBAP

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Paul Pierce

            Originally posted by Since86
            Well if you ASSUME that, then maybe PP pulls a Winslow Jr and gets hurt in an accident this offseason. Watching his actions in game 6 shows me that he's just as capable of doing something stupid in the playoffs.

            Ron is that type of player. PP relies on jumpshots, where Ron goes to the post. I'd take my chances with post move, than a pull up shot with a defender in his face.
            If PP relied on just jumpshots he wouldn't go to the line a gazillion times. Isn't that half of what we ***** about Reggie, that he take to many threes and as a result never goes the line? As far as the car accident thing, obviously anything and everything is a possibility in this world. However somethings such as an Artest meltdown is has a higher probability than other things such as PP suffering season ending injuries due to a car wreck.

            And I have no idea why you want to live with Artests offense, I cringe everytime he tries to drive. He has poor ball handling ability, as no stop and go ability as he just continously bulls his way in with his head down and when he shoots it is often from his hip in some out of control scoop shot. Can he score? Yes. Anything like PP? No.
            House Name: Pacers

            House Sigil:



            House Words: "We Kneel To No King"

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Paul Pierce

              Originally posted by beast23
              If we were trading for PP, Boston would want a lot more. Probably something like SJax, Foster, Pollard (expiring contract) plus maybe a 1st pick 2005 and a first pick 2007 for Pierce and crap throw-ins.

              In other words, it would take a lot to entice Boston to give up PP.
              Don't know if it works but,

              Ron Artest, Scot Pollard, 2005 1st Rounder, and 2006 2nd Rounder

              for

              Paul Pierce, Tony Allen, and 2005 2nd Rounder

              In a heartbeat.

              Don't think they'd do it though.
              House Name: Pacers

              House Sigil:



              House Words: "We Kneel To No King"

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Paul Pierce

                Originally posted by Diamond Dave
                And I have no idea why you want to live with Artests offense, I cringe everytime he tries to drive. He has poor ball handling ability, as no stop and go ability as he just continously bulls his way in with his head down and when he shoots it is often from his hip in some out of control scoop shot. Can he score? Yes. Anything like PP? No.
                That's where we differ. I don't find Artest's ball-handling abilities to be poor, but perhaps average.

                As for out of control scoop shot, I don't agree with that at all. If it didn't achieve the desired results (scoring and/or drawing fouls) a very significant percentage of the time, I'd be forced to agree. But it's just the opposite. Ron has a variety of playground moves near the basket, that much is true. But when he consistently overpowers his defenders and scores more often than not, I hardly think we can label his moves as out of control.

                But I would take PP for a reasonable trade. Like Reggie, he's fearless. Additionally, he gets to the line more, and has a greater variety of ways to score.

                I think with the addition of PP and the further development of JJ and Freddie that our dependence on Jermaine's post game would be reduced.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Paul Pierce

                  Whew! I thought for a minute this was goikng to be another Artest thread.

                  They will want, at a minimum...Tinsley, and perhaps JJ and someone like Foster. I was going to say Jackson, but with his overall behavior this season he's going to be untradeable.
                  Payton is a FA and TInsley should come cheaper than an aging Payton. JJ has potential, and everyone can use a worker like Jeff....They'd love him in Boston.


                  Ya know, if you look at it, we really don't have that many marketable players.

                  JO....uh, that's for another day
                  Artest....pyrihana
                  Jackson...see Artest
                  Miller....done
                  Tinsley....marketable
                  Bender....yeah right
                  Foster....some value
                  Pollard....may have some throw in value (more next year)
                  JJ.........oh yeah, but not a lot...yet.
                  Freddie.....some throw in value
                  AJ............filler
                  Gill...........filler lite
                  Harrison....uh
                  Edwards......can we get em to hold another dispersal draft?
                  DD..............he either signs here or retires
                  forgot Cro....maybe somebody would value him, but I don't know who...NY or LA???? Nope zeke is in NY that ain't happening.

                  Out of that, show me who relly warrants big time trade value???
                  Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Paul Pierce

                    Well Ron+ wasn't enough for Ainge to give us Pierce last summer, and Pierce's stock continues to be steady or go up and Ron's continues to go down.

                    For that reason alone, I think Danny Ainge is an idiot.
                    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                    And life itself, rushing over me
                    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Paul Pierce

                      If we could get Pierce for Artest I would do it in a second. Pierce does better in every statistical catagory except steals and blocks.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Paul Pierce

                        ergh I dont want Pierce at all.

                        he had a meltdown to rival ron in the 1st round when his team was in a very good position, which concievably could have cost his team a series. sure he is a talented scorer, reasonable defender and rebounder but I dont like his attitude. he wants to be the primary scorer but seems to get very down on his team when things aren't going his way. no way in hell do we trade ron for him. ron tears him apart one on one, atleast when ron melts down in the playoffs its the ecf and its a lil bit justified.

                        i could see memphis offering multiple players for him. i think pierce/gasol could be a very potent combo.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Paul Pierce

                          Originally posted by skyfire
                          ergh I dont want Pierce at all.

                          he had a meltdown to rival ron in the 1st round when his team was in a very good position, which concievably could have cost his team a series. sure he is a talented scorer, reasonable defender and rebounder but I dont like his attitude. he wants to be the primary scorer but seems to get very down on his team when things aren't going his way. no way in hell do we trade ron for him. ron tears him apart one on one, atleast when ron melts down in the playoffs its the ecf and its a lil bit justified.

                          i could see memphis offering multiple players for him. i think pierce/gasol could be a very potent combo.
                          Memphis is a good possibility. A Paul Pierce, Mark Blount, and Marcus Banks for Lorenzen Wright, Jason Williams, James Posey, and a lottery protected 1st rounder works, provided trade rules remain similar. That doesn't seem too outlandish for either team to me.
                          #DBAP

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Paul Pierce

                            Pierce for Artest? Somebody shoot me.... Ron eats Pierce ALIVE.

                            If they're willing to look at Jax and Bender, then let's talk. Of course, I don't think they will be.

                            If I was Ainge I'd sit tight. They can have a great team if they keep the pieces together.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Paul Pierce

                              Ron may eat him alive, but our team will be better than his. The Celtics w/ Artest couldn't handle Pierce AND O'Neal, not to mention Jackson and a healthy Tinsley.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Paul Pierce

                                Originally posted by Hicks
                                Ron may eat him alive, but our team will be better than his. The Celtics w/ Artest couldn't handle Pierce AND O'Neal, not to mention Jackson and a healthy Tinsley.
                                same could be said for a pacer team w/ Artest.
                                Play Mafia!
                                Twitter

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X