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

Ray Allen wants 20 million bucks a year!

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

  • Ray Allen wants 20 million bucks a year!

    he wants Kobe money.

    He's a good player, but he ain't all that.

    http://www.tribnet.com/sports/basket...-5458058c.html

    Allen asking Sonics for deal worth $100 million
    FRANK HUGHES; The News Tribune

    Citing the recently signed contract of Los Angeles Lakers star Kobe Bryant, Ray Allen has told the Seattle SuperSonics he wants a contract extension worth $100 million over five seasons, according to sources.

    In early August, Bryant, after visiting several teams, signed a contract with the Lakers worth $136 million over six seasons.

    Allen's reasoning, according to sources, is that while he may not be as good as Bryant, he still is an All-Star and is not worth considerably less, a fact bolstered by the virtually one-on-one shootout Allen and Bryant had Jan. 2, a game that Allen ultimately won for the Sonics in the final seconds when he split two defenders for a scoop shot, his 35th point. Bryant scored 32 points in that game, overshadowing Gary Payton's return to Seattle.

    The Sonics are believed to be offering close to $70 million over five seasons, with a starting salary of around $11 million.

    If Allen's contract demands were extended to six seasons, it would be a contract worth $126 million. If the Sonics' offer was extended to six seasons, it would be worth $86.6 million.

    Sonics general manager Rick Sund is on vacation and unavailable for comment, a team spokesperson said.

    Sources say that Allen is adamant about his demands and that he is willing to play out the final season of his contract without an extension and go into next summer as an unrestricted free agent, able to sign with any team.

    Allen's stance comes after a summer in which he has seen seemingly exorbitant contracts bestowed upon marginal players, including a seven-year, $73 million contract to Erick Dampier with Dallas, five years and $41.6 million to Adonal Foyle with Golden State and six years and $34 million to Brian Cardinal with Memphis. Those three, all frontcourt players, combined to average 25 points and 20 rebounds per game last season. Allen averaged 23 points, 5.1 rebounds and 4.8 assists.

    Meanwhile, the Sonics are taking a more fiscally responsible approach in the hopes they can avoid a luxury tax and possibly sign another player next summer to add to their core.

    They are hoping Allen is not willing to risk losing money because of a probable change to the collective bargaining agreement, which will be renegotiated.

    The question, of course, is whether the Sonics will trade Allen if they feel he is not likely to accept their offer. It is a question that will hover over the organization until the February trade deadline.

    If the Sonics are unable to sign Allen to an extension, they will have only $22 million committed to salaries next summer, meaning they could have about $25 million for free agency.

    Also, if Allen wants to maximize his value, he would need to work out a sign-and-trade deal next summer, something the Sonics have the ability to control.

    Frank Hughes: 253-597-8742, ext. 6120
    frank.hughes@mail.tribnet.com

    (Published 12:54AM, September 8th, 2004)
    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

  • #2
    Re: Ray Allen wants 20 million bucks a year!

    Allen is worth more than 70 mil. over 5 years.
    "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

    "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Ray Allen wants 20 million bucks a year!

      Actually, thats $21 million bucks a year.....

      It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

      Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
      Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
      NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Ray Allen wants 20 million bucks a year!

        Not worth the money. And I like him.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Ray Allen wants 20 million bucks a year!

          Originally posted by Arcadian
          Allen is worth more than 70 mil. over 5 years.
          Bullcrap. NOBODY is worth 70M a year.

          So Ray rationalizes that although Kobe is better, he's not THAT much lower in the food chain than Kobe, therefore he's worth $100M.

          Juhesius.

          I'm a 50+ year old man that is working toward retirement. I have a wonderful house that is fully paid off, but need my nest egg before I can retire.

          The problem we have in trying to budget for retirement is that we really don't know when we have "enough". You give me 300K and I really don't believe that would be enough for me. You give me $1M and I know that would be enough to put in a tax-free investment to support me for the rest of my years.

          Pro players? They need to get a clue.

          When they have more money than they can possibly spend anyway, is there really an appreciable difference between $136M and even $25M?

          You always hear them talking about the fans and "thanking" the fans. We play for the fans. The fans this... the fans that.

          If they really wanted to do something in return for the fans, then maybe they need to start thinking about playing for less.


          [edit=98=1094852393][/edit]
          [edit=98=1094852456][/edit]

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Ray Allen wants 20 million bucks a year!

            Compared to what other top shooting guards are making Ray Allen is worth more than 70 mil. over 5 years.

            Granted NBA players do get paid more than their contributions to society are worth but that is a completely different issue.

            "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

            "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Ray Allen wants 20 million bucks a year!

              He got game but he ain't got $100 million worth

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Ray Allen wants 20 million bucks a year!

                So basically, the players should play for less, so the owners can charge the same amount, and pocket the difference?

                Oh yeah, REEEEEEAL intelligent.....

                It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Ray Allen wants 20 million bucks a year!

                  Originally posted by Arcadian
                  Allen is worth more than 70 mil. over 5 years.
                  But not 100mil over 5 years.
                  This space for rent.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Ray Allen wants 20 million bucks a year!

                    I agree Allen isn't worth 100 mil.

                    Why isn't the title of the article "Seattle only willing to give 70 mil."?

                    Because Seattle leaked his demands to make him appear unreasonable?

                    It's negotiation if Allen's agent didn't try to get 100 million he should be fired.

                    "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

                    "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Ray Allen wants 20 million bucks a year!

                      Originally posted by Kstat
                      So basically, the players should play for less, so the owners can charge the same amount, and pocket the difference?

                      Oh yeah, REEEEEEAL intelligent.....

                      I agree totally!!! I just don't get why everyone whines about the money pro-athletes make but think it is ok for Actors/actresses to break the bank. Athletes make far less then most mainstream actors, but are far more charitible then actors.
                      ...Still "flying casual"
                      @roaminggnome74

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Ray Allen wants 20 million bucks a year!

                        Watch next week he'll demand to be traded.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Ray Allen wants 20 million bucks a year!

                          Originally posted by Destined4Greatness
                          Watch next week he'll demand to be traded.

                          Super Bowl XLI Champions
                          2000 Eastern Conference Champions




                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Ray Allen wants 20 million bucks a year!

                            Originally posted by Roaming
                            Originally posted by Kstat
                            So basically, the players should play for less, so the owners can charge the same amount, and pocket the difference?

                            Oh yeah, REEEEEEAL intelligent.....

                            I agree totally!!! I just don't get why everyone whines about the money pro-athletes make but think it is ok for Actors/actresses to break the bank. Athletes make far less then most mainstream actors, but are far more charitible then actors.
                            Actually, I wanted to respond to Kstat, but I'm just very short on time.

                            Kstat -

                            My post and your response probably would lead to a decent philosophical discussion of player salaries, management and player/union greed, and whether anything ever will / ever can be done about it. Oh, and the role of the fan in the mix.

                            If it's alright with you, I'll probably pursue it in a few weeks. Just don't have the time now though.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X