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

Woj: Pacers assessing trade market for Paul George

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

  • Re: Woj: Pacers assessing trade market for Paul George

    Originally posted by PR07 View Post
    Because there's a big difference!

    Pacers could've offered the Cavs Rodney Stuckey and Al Jefferson for LeBron before the trade deadline and then told Windhorst, but does that mean LeBron was seriously shopped? No, it just means that a team made an offer.
    I'm with you, it's all rumors. My point is who cares if it's true or not? What's the point?

    Comment


    • Re: Woj: Pacers assessing trade market for Paul George

      Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
      I'm with you, it's all rumors. My point is who cares if it's true or not? What's the point?
      At this point, you're right, it probably doesn't matter. What's done is done, so whether Pacers shopped or teams, agents just leaked b/s, Paul George is going to think what he wants to think either way--unless maybe Bird and him have some sort of meeting to clear the air.

      Comment


      • Re: Woj: Pacers assessing trade market for Paul George

        Originally posted by PR07 View Post
        This is the report too:

        Pacers listened to offers (which is exactly what I just said), but not seriously shopped:


        So are we saying that there is conflict between Bird and the Simons? The Simons might be open to a trade, but Bird is saying no way to anything? That's how this reads.

        Seriously though, this is all "good cop", "bad cop" stuff that is played all the time to fool people who simply don't know how these games work. The Pacers, including Bird, were shopping Paul. They probably know they need to deal him this summer and wanted to get ahead of the game and see if it could be done now.

        BTW, nobody messes with this unless they are seriously considering a move for some reason. We didn't have that with Reggie because there wasn't a reason. We didn't have that with Granger until he was injured. I really think people need to yank the rose colored glasses off...or shall I say blue & gold colored glasses off...and face the fact the Pacers are seriously concerned about the situation and want to get value out of Paul George before he pulls a Durant and takes off for LA.

        Comment


        • Re: Woj: Pacers assessing trade market for Paul George

          Originally posted by PR07 View Post
          Because there's a big difference!

          Pacers could've offered the Cavs Rodney Stuckey and Al Jefferson for LeBron before the trade deadline and then told Windhorst, but does that mean LeBron was seriously shopped? No, it just means that a team made an offer.
          And you are saying all this because you are missing the reports or don't care to listen to them, the day before the trade deadline there were not PG rumors because the Pacers kept telling teams no, but then something changed(the dinner) and the Pacers opened the phone lines to listen to offers BIG DIFFERENCE.


          Here is the report from woj who is a million times better than Kravitz:






          "Assessing", 'Listening", "answering the phone" is all the same bs.
          Last edited by vnzla81; 02-25-2017, 04:27 PM.
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • Re: Woj: Pacers assessing trade market for Paul George

            Why in the world would a team "assess the trade market" for an all-star 2-way player? How would Paul NOT fit on the Pacers?

            Isn't it far more likely they know they are not contending any time soon and don't want to lose that talent? In fact, they may desperately be interested in getting a return for Paul so they don't have to tank when he walks to LA, Cleveland or GS?

            Comment


            • Re: Woj: Pacers assessing trade market for Paul George

              Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
              Why in the world would a team "assess the trade market" for an all-star 2-way player? How would Paul NOT fit on the Pacers?

              Isn't it far more likely they know they are not contending any time soon and don't want to lose that talent? In fact, they may desperately be interested in getting a return for Paul so they don't have to tank when he walks to LA, Cleveland or GS?
              Why is this so confusing?

              PG said he is not 100% going to sign with Pacers.

              Since PG didn't say what Durant, Boogie and other players normally say, it's possible the Pacers listened to offers.

              It's not a big deal. I understand people freaking out, but we're a game and days removed and everything is fine.

              My guess we know exactly what's going to happen this summer and we can still get a fat package from LA or some stupid GM if we go that route. But my guess is he stays.

              But one thing is clear, if we checked market or not, it doesn't matter.

              Comment


              • Re: Woj: Pacers assessing trade market for Paul George

                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                Reliable? LOL


                Give me Woj/Brian Windhorst over Kravitz any time of the day, guys like Kravitz/Wells/Doyel/Montie never have inside information.


                Also the "seriously" part doesn't mean he wasn't shopped that is the part you keep missing out of this whole thing.
                Adam Schefter was wrong about Peyton Mannings neck surgeries. JM--freaking--V was right.

                While they are known for insider info---they can quickly fall into a narrative based on expectations, opinions, and intentional misinformation. Today it is all about what people want to led you to believe as truth and rarely about finding out what is true.

                Comment


                • Re: Woj: Pacers assessing trade market for Paul George

                  Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                  Why is this so confusing?

                  PG said he is not 100% going to sign with Pacers.

                  Since PG didn't say what Durant, Boogie and other players normally say, it's possible the Pacers listened to offers.

                  It's not a big deal. I understand people freaking out, but we're a game and days removed and everything is fine.

                  My guess we know exactly what's going to happen this summer and we can still get a fat package from LA or some stupid GM if we go that route. But my guess is he stays.

                  But one thing is clear, if we checked market or not, it doesn't matter.
                  Your guess is he stays? What he's said is that he wants to contend or he wants out, right? We are not going to contend any time soon, so do you still believe he is staying?

                  Comment


                  • Re: Woj: Pacers assessing trade market for Paul George

                    I think it's time to give it a rest on this one. He wasn't traded and we're soon-to-be 2-0 since the deadline.

                    Worry about it in the offseason

                    All Hail Rakeem

                    Comment


                    • Re: Woj: Pacers assessing trade market for Paul George

                      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                      Your guess is he stays? What he's said is that he wants to contend or he wants out, right? We are not going to contend any time soon, so do you still believe he is staying?
                      He wants to contend yet he didn't want to get traded to the Celtics?

                      I'm not buying it. PG likes being the main guy and an acheivable chance at a legacy being the greatest Pacer ever and a cities biggest star. Not happening in LA.

                      This is just my opinion of course, but I think he is just forcing Simon/Birds hand to spend over cap for a better team. Last night he was talking about why he loves it here. If he wanted to leave it wouldn't be difficult to force a trade to LA even.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Woj: Pacers assessing trade market for Paul George

                        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                        And you are saying all this because you are missing the reports or don't care to listen to them, the day before the trade deadline there were not PG rumors because the Pacers kept telling teams no, but then something changed(the dinner) and the Pacers opened the phone lines to listen to offers BIG DIFFERENCE.


                        Here is the report from woj who is a million times better than Kravitz:


                        "Assessing", 'Listening", "answering the phone" is all the same bs.
                        I don't know about his Pacers info as much, but Kravitz also broke the 'Deflate Gate' controversy and Bill Polian's firing before any mainstream media member, so he's not exactly chopped liver when it comes to Indianapolis connections and breaking news.

                        Additionally, there's a huge difference between listening and shopping. It's called 'shopping' for a reason because you're actively engaging teams--calling them, just like you would go buy Cheerio's and Chips Ahoy cookies at the grocery. I don't doubt that the Pacers listened to offers (they'd be stupid not to), but that's different from 'actively shopping' or whatever conclusion others have jumped to on this board--despite a clear credible report to the contrary.

                        You also assess a trade market for George because you look at what you could get if you move him as a contingency plan. It doesn't mean you're getting into intense trade negotiations, but you also want to weigh whether being able to compete with George until the end of 2018 and maybe the chance of re-signing outweigh a potential massive haul that you could get theoretically now or this offseason. Again, it doesn't mean that the Pacers ever sat down and said, We want player X, Y, and pick Z from the Celtics or anything, they may have just listened to teams...and any team should be interested in a superstar player that could potentially become available. So it doesn't mean that the Pacers were 'shopping' as much as other teams were simply interested, and the Pacers listened instead of straight up saying, "Paul's untouchable,"--like presumably in seasons prior.

                        There's also more players to this than the Pacers that are leaking rumors, as again, agents, and other team's front offices are also leaking 'reports' or 'rumors' to media members to try to gain leverage or potentially strain the Pacers relationship with George.

                        Last edited by PR07; 02-25-2017, 06:58 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Woj: Pacers assessing trade market for Paul George

                          And can we also stop acting like something happened at the dinner:




                          The dinner was described as 'celebratory' and George never delivered any ultimatum, so I don't understand why people keep assuming that something went horribly awry at dinner.

                          Just because the dinner happened, and the Pacers listened to trade offers the next day doesn't mean that there's any direct correlation. It's one again, people looking at A and jumping to C without ever acknowledging B to try to form their narrative.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Woj: Pacers assessing trade market for Paul George

                            Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                            So are we saying that there is conflict between Bird and the Simons? The Simons might be open to a trade, but Bird is saying no way to anything? That's how this reads.

                            Seriously though, this is all "good cop", "bad cop" stuff that is played all the time to fool people who simply don't know how these games work. The Pacers, including Bird, were shopping Paul. They probably know they need to deal him this summer and wanted to get ahead of the game and see if it could be done now.

                            BTW, nobody messes with this unless they are seriously considering a move for some reason. We didn't have that with Reggie because there wasn't a reason. We didn't have that with Granger until he was injured. I really think people need to yank the rose colored glasses off...or shall I say blue & gold colored glasses off...and face the fact the Pacers are seriously concerned about the situation and want to get value out of Paul George before he pulls a Durant and takes off for LA.

                            **** you are right Pacers never had an open auction with Granger and we all know how mad I was about Larry not trading him when his value was high.
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • Re: Woj: Pacers assessing trade market for Paul George

                              [QUOTEhe] Nuggets were essentially warned that George will sign with the Lakers in 2018 if they trade for him. Adrian Wojnarowski/The Vertical
                              [/QUOTE]
                              WOnder what they were offering?

                              Comment


                              • Re: Woj: Pacers assessing trade market for Paul George

                                Here is the rest of the clip from ESPN for those that care



                                Last edited by vnzla81; 02-27-2017, 11:52 AM.
                                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X