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

2012 NBA rumors thread part II

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

  • #76
    Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

    Just a second round pick for him?


    Moving Boris Diaw (30 percent chance, at best): Diaw has been benched and he's good as gone. It's a matter of whether by trade, a buyout or when his contract expires at the end of the season.

    Diaw has trade value, since he's an expiring contract with a $9 million cap value. Playoff teams could "rent'' him for the rest of the season. The problem is few, if any, teams could/would absorb a $9 million salary without sending a comparable salary to the Bobcats. And that scuttles most trades.

    The Bobcats won't take on salary responsibility beyond this season unless that player is both young and a keeper. Why would a team give up a young keeper for Diaw if the alternative is waiting until Diaw is waived, and then sign him for a minimum salary?

    I'm guessing the only trade that works is Diaw for another expiring contract. If you could also squeeze a second-round pick out of that transaction, the Bobcats would be doing well.

    Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/201...#storylink=cpy
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

      The Blazers asking price for Jamal Crawford is now pretty evident. Yesterday, a report surfaced that the Pacers were not willing to trade A.J. Price and a first-rounder to the Blazers. CBSSports is claiming that Portland is asking for a similar deal from the Timberwolves and Clippers http://www.iamagm.com/news/2012/03/0....first.rounder
      LOL Blazers. If you can't get a first round pick and AJ from a team that really wanted Crawford, the likelihood of getting a first round pick and Bledsoe or Ridnour from teams that weren't really bidding for Crawford over the summer..good luck.

      Seems like first team willing to give up a first round pick and cheap point guard will get Crawford.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

        Whatever happens, at least we won't have to wait much longer. Just 1 more week and it's over.

        I think NO will cave and accept a 2nd rounder for Kaman.

        It would be nice to pull off another trade to at least upgrade the SF spot. I just don't think we are going to get a new point, though that's what we truly need.

        Though it would be terrific to get a guy like Josh Smith or Rondo, there'd have to be another team involved, cause I don't think the Pacers can do it alone, it'd cost too much on our end. I think the Timberwolves could be a great facilitator. They have Beasley and other pieces and you know how much they love draft picks.
        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


        • #79
          Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

          Why aren't the Pacers looking at Agent 0? He'd probably be cheap and wouldn't cost. Grab him and Kaman, then try and get a backup SF.
          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


          • #80
            Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

            Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
            Why aren't the Pacers looking at Agent 0? He'd probably be cheap and wouldn't cost. Grab him and Kaman, then try and get a backup SF.
            No thanks to agent 0.
            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

              Originally posted by Sookie View Post
              LOL Blazers. If you can't get a first round pick and AJ from a team that really wanted Crawford, the likelihood of getting a first round pick and Bledsoe or Ridnour from teams that weren't really bidding for Crawford over the summer..good luck.

              Seems like first team willing to give up a first round pick and cheap point guard will get Crawford.
              Yeah I would only give them a pick if they include Felton.
              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

                Felton and Wallace on the trade block?


                http://mobile.blazersedge.com/2012/3...lace-difficult
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

                  Bogut could be available for a steep price, according to Marc Stein

                  http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/pos...er-untouchable

                  For the first time since the Milwaukee Bucks made him the No. 1 overall pick in the 2005 NBA Draft, they’re not saying no when teams ask if center Andrew Bogut is available via trade.

                  NBA front-office sources say that the Bucks, who have always swatted away trade inquiries for Bogut in the past, are now listening to pitches for the 7-foot Australian, who is said to be intrigued by the prospect of a fresh start elsewhere after more than two years of injury misfortune and teamwide tension under coach Scott Skiles over the past two disappointing seasons.

                  This development, though, comes with a crucial caveat:

                  Sources say that the Bucks, at least for the moment, are insisting that any team that trades for Bogut take on the disgruntled Stephen Jackson as part of the trade.

                  And that’s what is bound to keep Bogut in Milwaukee past Thursday’s 3 p.m. trade deadline more than his latest health setback, after he suffered a fractured left ankle against Houston on Jan. 25 after landing on the Rockets’ Samuel Dalembert in the lane.

                  Jackson’s feelings about Skiles and his desire to leave Brewtown are known worldwide, but finding a team willing to take on the outspoken 33-year-old when he’s guaranteed just over $10 million next season is problematic to say the least.

                  “The price (for Bogut) is high,” one interested suitor told ESPN.com this week.

                  Sources say that the Washington Wizards are among the teams to express the strongest interest in Bogut, which might be another indication that the Wiz are prepared to part with the enigmatic JaVale McGee, if not before the deadline than during the offseason.

                  It remains to be seen whether Bogut can return this season after his injury was recently deemed to be healing well and thus not requiring surgery. Bogut was hoping for an injury-free season to reclaim his status as one of the league’s top five centers after he was clearly still hampered in 2011-12 by the severe arm injuries inflicted by his nasty fall from the rim late in the 2009-10 season. The 27-year-old still managed to earn 2010 All-NBA Third Team honors even after the fall thanks to his emergence that season as a top-shelf defensive anchor with a blossoming offensive game.
                  Bogut and SJax for McGee and Rashard's contract? It's a lot of money for Wiz to take on.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

                    A Kaman update...

                    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...ook/index.html

                    Sources close to the situation said the Hornets continue to talk to teams about a possible Kaman trade, with the Rockets, Warriors, Heat, Pacers and Celtics among those still interested. The Hornets, sources said, are looking for draft picks or young players to help build their foundation, and the odds appear slim that any of the teams will satisfy the league's demands. The Rockets and Warriors, specifically, continue to pursue Howard and would be hesitant to give up pieces in a Kaman deal first.

                    Rival executives continue to complain that dealing with the Hornets comes with the complication of negotiating with league officials. NBA commissioner/de facto Hornets owner David Stern had said that a deal with a new owner was expected to be finalized by March 1, but it has yet to happen and Stern must approve all trades until the buyer is in place.

                    Meanwhile, sources said the Hornets are considering offering the 29-year-old Kaman an extension if no trade occurs, as they are intrigued about the possibility of pairing him with shooting guard Eric Gordon, a former Clippers teammate. Gordon, who played just two games for New Orleans before a knee injury cost him this season, will be a restricted free agent this summer.

                    As next Thursday's deadline nears, the Hornets are expected to be active beyond Kaman's situation. With veterans like Landry and Ariza more than capable of helping a team during its playoff push, sources said virtually anyone on the roster is available as long as they can net draft picks or young players in return.
                    Pacers still in the running, as expected.

                    NOH to extend Kaman? Surely that's a bluff. What will they do with Mek?

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

                      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                      Felton and Wallace on the trade block?


                      http://mobile.blazersedge.com/2012/3...lace-difficult
                      Not really surprising, since Felton is an upcoming free agent and Wallace can opt out. Same goes for Crawford.

                      With Portland in danger of missing the playoffs again, and with the total writeoffs on Oden and Brandon Roy, it seems like a good time for Portland to go on a full rebuild. There's also talk that they might trade Batum rather than paying him next summer.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

                        I got this from the other thread, that's too much for Ray Allen but is better than giving up a first round pick for Crawford.

                        I WANT RAY ALLEN!! but not for that price

                        Quote:
                        NBA Trade Rumors: Celtics Tried To Move Ray Allen To Pacers?

                        Mar 09 1:48p by Gethin Coolbaugh


                        Read More: Ray Allen (G - BOS), Tyler Hansbrough (F - IND), Indiana Pacers, Boston Celtics

                        Jackie MacMullan's story on the two Big Three's in Boston Celtics lore was quite something (certainly worth a read), but at the very end popped up an interesting nugget about a potential trade that Celtics general manager Danny Ainge attempted to make involving Ray Allen (thanks to CelticsLife.com for bringing this to attention).

                        In talking with Celtics legend and current Indiana Pacers president, Larry Bird, MacMullan provides us with a quote from Larry Legend indicating that he and Ainge had been in talks about sending Allen to Indiana in exchange for Tyler Hansbrough and a first-round pick.


                        "Here's the thing," Bird said. "When Danny and I talked about trading for Ray, he wanted Tyler Hansbrough and a first-round pick. If that's the value he's putting on Ray Allen, he ain't getting it. That tells me he's in no hurry to trade him." (via ESPN Boston)

                        Allen is averaging 14.5 points and shooting 47.2 percent from thee-point range this year.

                        For more Celtics Trade Rumors, visit our trade stream and blog, CelticsBlog.
                        http://boston.sbnation.com/boston-ce...celtics-pacers
                        __________________
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

                          Would love to add Ray Allen... but I don't want to give up both Hans and a first. If Ainge would ask only for the first then it's a no-brainer to me. I've been predicting this move since the start of the season.

                          Alternatively, we could give up Hans, but we'll need a healthy big back. I don't think JO suffices unless he can play.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

                            Yeah the huge thing that people miss with Ray Allen is that he needs a point guard that is going to give him the ball at the right time, who is going to feed him when he is turning the corner ready to shoot? DC? AJ? I don't think so.
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

                              I posted this trade idea a while back, also posted it in the other thread but no one commented...
                              Indiana trades Hans, 1st, Granger, DC
                              Boston trades Allen, Rondo
                              If the asking price is true for Ray, then we add Granger and DC for Rondo... Seems pretty fair to me, right?
                              Paul George would have to move to SF (if this deal happens, I could live with it) and Pierce would move back to SG

                              The DC, Granger and Hans detractors will be happy, and the Rondo, Allen lovers will also...
                              Last edited by TheDavisBrothers; 03-09-2012, 04:44 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

                                Yeah I don't think Boston would do it because they already have Pierce and neither Danny or Pierce can play the 2.
                                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X