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

Would you want to rent Dwight?

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
    This just made me throw up in my mouth. If this was Shaq in his prime, sure I'd consider it. Because odds are Shaq in his prime would win us a championship or at least get us to one. As good as Howard is, he is nowhere even close to the league of Shaq, and never will be. Sure maybe his defense and rebounding are close to Shaq's, but his offensive game will never even be close.

    Dwight Howard just really isn't that dominant. He can't win in Orlando, and he won't win here. He is nowhere near the level of Shaq and never will be. Only a big man the caliber of Shaq would be worth it, and there are none in the NBA today that are that good.

    So we trade away all of our talent for 22 games and odds we really wouldn't be much better of a team. Orlando would want to rob us. They can keep their greedy asses in cap/lottery hell. SVG said last year we are a sub .500 team because JOB was a good coach and our players suck basically. I really called him out. JOB was holding our players and team back, and not the other way around. So I really hope they burn down there for that smart *** comment.

    I also HATE how last year after their first meeting, Dwight wouldn't even give Roy a slither of love for improving his game either. This dude is everything what is wrong with the sport and I hope that any player that makes millions of dollars and thinks they can just muscle their way to a big market fails. I hope he never wins a ring and I sure don't want it to be here.

    Big middle finger to this idea. Please no more trade our good young talent for a Howard rental, or Granger and Hansbrough for EJ or whatever it is people are talking. Seriously, every trade idea I have seen lately makes us worse. Mayo is not that good, Nash should just retire, I would take Paul George and Granger 10 times out of 10 over EJ, and trading our young core for 22 games of Howard and being left with a huge gap in talent for years to come are the worst ideas ever.
    Wee bit combative eh? It's a website that has alot to do with driving conversation. Don't like it? Don't read it. No one puts a gun to your head to read this part of the forum or if they are so bad, show us a better trade.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

      Orlando has to be willing to accept a low ball offer from a possible rental team. From us, that's Hibbert, a future first, and anyone not named Paul George. If they want more, they can move on to the next team.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

        Just a thought: We could lower the price of what we would have to give up if we were willing to take back Hedo Turkoglu in the deal.

        Edit: Maybe lower the value would be the better way of putting it.
        Last edited by cdash; 12-30-2011, 03:12 PM.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by rexnom View Post
          Orlando has to be willing to accept a low ball offer from a possible rental team. From us, that's Hibbert, a future first, and anyone not named Paul George. If they want more, they can move on to the next team.
          Pretty much my thinking.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

            Originally posted by Dgreenwell3 View Post
            That may be one of the worst perimeter defending teams in the history of basketball..
            Who needs perimeter defense with Dwight Howard? lol.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

              It's an interesting philosophical question for small market teams, really. The question is: since you know you are small market and only get a shot at the title every once in awhile, do you go "all in" with a big move like this, or hope your "building from within" plan works over the long term? It's the Florida Marlins question, right?

              I agree with the earlier comment that it would be better to have a team that is good enough to compete for EC Finals over a 3-5 year stretch, than to have one big year and another stretch of rebuilding.

              However, if there is a way to combine the two ideas - make a "big splash" without necessarily trading away so much that it would result in rebuilding, then you do it. Or... you only do it if Howard stays for at least one more year - to make the Howard/West combo a 2-year plan.

              We should be able to agree that the NBA is primarily a star-driven league. Teams with stars win, and teams without stars don't - and the Pistons were no exception - Billups, Hamilton and Wallace were all very good players in their primes (equivalent to Miller, Jackson and Smits in theirs).

              We have a semi-star (Granger), a budding star (George), and a few very nice complimentary pieces (West, Hansbrough, DC, Hibbert). I think the goal in the NBA is to have at least two stars, preferably three. A Dwight Howard deal (assuming we keep Granger or George) allows us to have two. This would be an improvement, at least over the short term. Long term, it might disrupt everything. I would be excited about it though, if it happened, and so long as we didn't give up every piece we need to go forward.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

                You have to figure that their best current offer is for Lopez and five late first round picks. That is the problem I think with the Magic trying to trade him. All the teams that he is supposedly interested in going to only have very late first round picks, which might as well be a bunch of second rounders in terms of value.

                I just think that the Magic will not end up getting enough value to warrant trading him, unless they can drop a bad contract or two along the way, which we can offer them as well.
                "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Gold View Post
                  Who needs perimeter defense with Dwight Howard? lol.
                  They are these things called jumpshots and they are a large percentage of shots taken in basketball.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

                    Silly idea. Financially, you want to build a team that competes for years. A team that buries the Malice in the Palace. One that brings back attendance and increases value.

                    The Sheed example is plain wrong. He wasn't a rental. This, however, would be seen as exactly that. Your title chances would be 20% at best. The media would not be kind, to put it mildly.

                    It's a fantasy basketball trade.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

                      I wouldn't gut our team for howard when we can just offer him or deron williams a max contract in the offseason and if he comes here great, and if not then oh well. I think we'd be at least considered depending on how this season shakes out I think we'll do better than the nets or the magic end up doing.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

                        Yeah I was trying to use the trade machine but is not letting me do a 3 team trade, the idea was like this:

                        Indiana trades: Roy+DC+picks to Orlando for Howard and Lance+pick for Nash

                        Nash,PG,Danny,West,Howard should do it leaving a bench of Hill,Price,DJ,Tyler,Lou,Foster.
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

                          Originally posted by TheDon View Post
                          I wouldn't gut our team for howard when we can just offer him or deron williams a max contract in the offseason and if he comes here great, and if not then oh well. I think we'd be at least considered depending on how this season shakes out I think we'll do better than the nets or the magic end up doing.
                          They have to take a pay cut because only the team with Bird rights can sign him for 5 years.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

                            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                            Yeah I was trying to use the trade machine but is not letting me do a 3 team trade, the idea was like this:

                            Indiana trades: Roy+DC+picks to Orlando for Howard and Lance+pick for Nash

                            Nash,PG,Danny,West,Howard should do it leaving a bench of Hill,Price,DJ,Tyler,Lou,Foster.
                            Both teams laugh in your face at those packages.

                            Dwight will get more in return and Nash would get a lot more in return.

                            I would rather let Nash retire a sun than get Lance and picks. You seem to forget the only reason people go see the Suns play is to see Nash he is a money maker even if the Suns suck.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

                              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                              The Tyler+Roy+DC for Howard+Nelson works on the trade machine

                              http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine
                              Add a first to that and for sure thats enough for the Magic to do the deal maybe even without it.

                              The interesting thing is that ROy and DC are up for paydays anyway. If you could promise me a Howard would get us into the Finals then sure but my guess is that Howard would be sitting the bench in foul trouble against the Heat.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

                                No way. These superstar demand/team-ups are very specific. They want (1 to play with at least one other superstar and (2 to play in a big market and/or warm climate. If the Pacers do trade for Dwight and even if they somehow make the Finals (very unlikely), even then Dwight will bolt for Dallas or Brooklyn in the summer.

                                Besides, if Orlando is fine with trading Dwight to a team not on his wishlist (New Jersey, LA, Dallas), Chicago will be able to outbid everyone.

                                I think Larry, David and Kevin have decided to build a team based on depth, not superstars. They're not going to risk trading pieces they like for a rental.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X