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

Pacers Wolves Hornets

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

  • Pacers Wolves Hornets

    Wolves Trade: Wes Johnson, Brad Miller
    Receive: Chris Kaman

    Pacers Trade: A.J Price, 2012 1st, cap space
    Receive: Wes Johnson, Brad Miller

    Hornets Trade: Chris Kaman
    Receive: A.J Price, 2012 1st from Pacers

    Our new rotation:
    Collison/Hill
    George/Johnson
    Granger/Jones
    West/Hansbrough
    Hibbert/Miller/Foster

    Miller&Foster are both injury prone, so together they count as 1 player. He's an expiring as well.
    Wes is a young, promising SG/SF, but is really underachieving so far for the Wolves. Still, he would be a decent role player for us, and with luck might even live up to his potential.

    What do you guys think?
    Last edited by yoadknux; 01-31-2012, 12:44 PM.
    Originally posted by Piston Prince
    Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
    "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

  • #2
    Re: Pacers Wolves Hornets

    Originally posted by yoadknux View Post
    Wolves Trade: Wes Johnson, Brad Miller
    Receive: Chris Kaman

    Pacers Trade: A.J Price, unprotected 1st, cap space
    Receive: Wes Johnson, Brad Miller

    Hornets Trade: Chris Kaman
    Receive: A.J Price, unprotected 1st from Pacers

    Our new rotation:
    Collison/Hill
    George/Johnson
    Granger/Jones
    West/Hansbrough
    Hibbert/Miller/Foster

    Miller&Foster are both injury prone, so together they count as 1 player. He's an expiring as well.
    Wes is a young, promising SG/SF, but is really underachieving so far for the Wolves. Still, he would be a decent role player for us, and with luck might even live up to his potential.

    What do you guys think?
    Wes obviously needs a change of scenery. We do need a backup 3. That could open to the door to trading DJ or just keeping his minutes to the 2 spot. That also means that Lance's playing time will be garbage minutes only.

    I like it though. Does Brad have anything left though? I still want to go after Robin Lopez, but I'm sure the Suns want to keep him.
    First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Pacers Wolves Hornets

      Brad is probably too old to get real minutes, but he's a vet and could probably split his minutes with Jeff/Lou. This is good front court depth imo.

      And about Wes, I think he's a bit like Mayo. Really talented, but just can't seem to fit in his team. In his case, I think he also doesn't really know whether he's a 2 or a 3, having him off the bench with DJ means he could swing both positions (since DJ can play SG/SF..). We gain 2 good backups, one of them is old and expiring and the other young on a rookie deal. (though a big one)

      The Hornets will probably do this trade. They shed salary and get a first round pick.

      The Wolves are the question mark here. I think they will do it. Wes isn't a major piece for them (He has to split minutes with Beas and D-Will.. and doesn't seem to be their SG solution). With Rubio improving and Love becoming their franchise guy, a good center is their missing piece. With Kaman they could actually make the playoffs for the first time in a long time, which could be exciting for them.
      Originally posted by Piston Prince
      Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
      "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Pacers Wolves Hornets

        I wouldnt give up an unprotected 1st though
        "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Pacers Wolves Hornets

          Wolves should be giving Pacers a 1st unprotected to take that mess off their hands and allowing them to improve their team with a legit starting center, while the Pacers do not improve at all!!

          Brad has played his 1st game of the year yesterday for 8 minutes, he's coming off a bad knee. No thank you!
          Wes seems to be a 4th pick Bust to this point and I don't think he is worth a 1st.

          Serious, the Wolves would be celebrating, drinking bubblies.



          .
          Last edited by Pacer Fan; 01-30-2012, 09:27 PM.
          Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Pacers Wolves Hornets

            Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
            I wouldnt give up an unprotected 1st though
            Why not? I'm pretty sure it will be in the 20s

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Pacers Wolves Hornets

              Originally posted by Winner View Post
              Why not? I'm pretty sure it will be in the 20s

              Why would we give a 1st and Aj Price to the Hornets and they give nothing to the Hornets? I would rather get Kaman for ourselves and they can Keep their Gimp washed up Miller and the 2010 4th pick Bust that has a hefty contract for sucking.

              Pacers have a choice...Kaman or Miller and Wes for a 1st and Price? I'll take Kaman.

              In fact, it might be possible to give them a couple 2nd rnd picks instead of a first.

              Kaman is a immediate impact for further success for the remainder of the season and playoffs right now.
              Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

              Comment


              • #8
                I like the idea of getting a young guy that can play the 2 and 3, but you could probably find that with that first round pick.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Pacers Wolves Hornets

                  I still would like Wes. I think he just needs a change. I doubt they are using him properly cause they work through Love. We spread the offense.
                  First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Pacers Wolves Hornets

                    I've added a restriction for the pick. Unprotected pick is too much, and I have changed it to 2012 first round, though I'd give them any general 1st round pick as long as it doesn't extend to unlimited time (for example, a lotto protected could be fine, or any 1st round pick from 2012-2013-2014-2015 as long as we are told ahead which pick they want)

                    About why we should help Minny get Kaman and not just take him: A 1st round pick for a guy who's going to be UFA and just be our backup for the season is too much in my opinion. I think he's a good upgrade but I don't think he's going to stay. In the case of Brad, well, he always liked us, and even though he's old I believe he's still working hard and can get some minutes.
                    About Wes, he's really the main piece here. He's on a rookie contract & we would have team option for him, which means he can be with us for long if we really want it. So really worst case for us in this is trading a 1st round pick for 2 role players that fill a need for us. Best case would be Wes breaking out, giving us the best bench in the league, and could even turn out to be part of our core group.
                    Originally posted by Piston Prince
                    Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
                    "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Pacers Wolves Hornets

                      You do realize Miller has a bumb knee and is a big risk. Wes has a big contract for his production cause he was a 4th pick. 2011 $4,006,080 - 2012 $4,285,560 - 2013 TO $5,421,233 - 2014 QO $7,150,607.

                      Thats 4mil that can be spent to get someone that will produce vs someone that is a long shot hopeful.

                      Wes is not a good shooter thus far, he is not productive at anything except minutes played. His per is 6.02 on 22 minutes of play with a fg% of .368 and 3pt% of .236.

                      Wolves should be giving us a 2nd rnd pick to take 9 mil in bad contracts.

                      I totally get your concept and if Wes even showed a sign of performance I would agree with you, but that just isn't the case.

                      I would do Pekovic and Wes, atleast we would be getting for sure production out of Pek for that 1st pick.

                      Sorry Wolves got a bust in Wes, but we shouldn't have to pay for their bad luck.
                      Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Pacers Wolves Hornets

                        How can Miller hurt? He makes 4.752m$ and is expiring. So bad case is him sucking or getting injured and not getting playing time. Good case is him splitting minutes with Foster, giving us the best front court depth in the league.

                        About Wes, I know that he shot awful last year, and that he shoots even worse this year, but I still think that he's AT LEAST a role player, and we need that. We need a backup 2/3, our wing depth isn't really good.
                        So he either turns out to be a role player and we take on his ~4.5m contract for 1.5 seasons, or he lives up to his potential, finds his game, and we get a future piece.

                        Role player or future starter, we win either way. If we don't find a good deal to add a major piece by the deadline, we should be doing this trade.
                        Originally posted by Piston Prince
                        Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
                        "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Pacers Wolves Hornets

                          Originally posted by Pacer Fan View Post

                          the 2010 4th pick Bust that has a hefty contract for sucking.

                          You may be right about Johnson "in a few years", but don't you think Johnson should have the benefit of a those years b4 being labeled a bust? Not everyone develops at the same rate. Ask Billups and Nash to mention a few who were labeled as busts by talent evaluators such as yourself.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Pacers Wolves Hornets

                            Originally posted by Pacer Fan View Post


                            Sorry Wolves got a bust in Wes, but we shouldn't have to pay for their bad luck.

                            AND YOU KNOW THIS HOW?? If you had prefaced your statement by saying "it looks like the Wolves might have a bust", I might take your post with some credence, but you didn't so I don't. It's nothing more than just your opinion as such. If you don't like the trade fine, but you don't need slam Miller as a Gimp and Johnson as a bust. Geez!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Pacers Wolves Hornets

                              Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
                              I still would like Wes. I think he just needs a change. I doubt they are using him properly cause they work through Love. We spread the offense.
                              I didn't like Wes coming out of Syracuse and nothing he has done in the NBA has changed that opinion. I couldn't believe he was so high on peoples mocks and got drafted that high.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X