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

Trade proposal on a Kings board

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

  • Trade proposal on a Kings board

    Please don't shoot me. I'm just the messenger... and I'm curious to see what you guys would think of the following trade idea posted on a Kings board. Remember, it's NOT my idea!

    I would really like to see some article from Indiana speaking about Ron Artest. If they are saying things such as "next season with Ron Back" or "If we would have had Ron". If I don't see statments such as that, then i don't feel Artest is desired in Indiana any longer. that being said and Petrie and the whole Kings organization saying we need defense so bad. Shouldn't we be putting together some combos to get the Defensive Player of the Year. Not to mention he is by no means a liability on offense, he is an easy 15-20 guy in our lineup of Bibby, Peja, and Miller. So if Indiana is frustrated with Ron and don't want his services any longer then Petrie should be on the phone night and day becuase of the problem we have this guy is the best one out there at pluging that hole. Don't settle for less go for THE one.

    Kenny Thomas and Corlis Williamson to Indiana

    Ron Artest and Johnathan Bender to Sacramento

    why the kings do it. Defense at the 2, toughness, no loss in offense

    why the Pacers do it. get 2 quality SF/PF guys to fill voids so O'neal can play center if need be and they lack no offense, also to get rid of a guy that has brought alot of unwanted attention to the organization. and 3 to get rid of an undesired contract in Johnathan Bender.

    Now sure we take a hit to cap with bender but we get better quality at the 2 and Kenny's 5 year undesired contract is gone.
    Comments? I know what I predicted most of you would say but I'm curious to see if I was right...

    Thanks.
    NBA basketball - taking my breath away since 1963.

  • #2
    Re: Trade proposal on a Kings board

    The hell out of here with that ****,I dont think even Jay would do that deal.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Trade proposal on a Kings board



      This should be entertaining....

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

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

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Trade proposal on a Kings board

        Originally posted by VF21
        Please don't shoot me. I'm just the messenger... and I'm curious to see what you guys would think of the following trade idea posted on a Kings board. Remember, it's NOT my idea!



        Comments? I know what I predicted most of you would say but I'm curious to see if I was right...

        Thanks.

        tellem the only way we do that deal is if they throw in ostertag and we will ship them oneal as well.....

        seriously....naaa...nevermind...its not worth it.....

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Trade proposal on a Kings board

          Originally posted by Jermaniac
          The hell out of here with that ****,I dont think Jay would do that deal.
          Oh, I'm sure, Soup would do the deal.
          Super Bowl XLI Champions
          2000 Eastern Conference Champions




          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Trade proposal on a Kings board

            I would only do this deal if you agree to take Jermaine's contract thats the only way.

            Ron,Jermaine,2 future first rounders for Williamson,Kenny Thomas and Eddie House

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Trade proposal on a Kings board

              actually if theyre looking for defense....jack and f. jones are good defenders....tell u what....ship us b. miller and peja and ur defensive troubles are fixed....that sounds about like deal the kid proposed so they shouldnt have too many problems with it....

              and if pushed we might take bobby jackson instead of peja....but only as a last resort to get the deal done....

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Trade proposal on a Kings board

                Just go back and delete the post.

                Thats like us asking the kings to trade Peja and Miller for Pollard, Bender, and Croshere.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Trade proposal on a Kings board

                  Originally posted by Jermaniac
                  The hell out of here with that ****,I dont think even Jay would do that deal.

                  lmfao!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Trade proposal on a Kings board

                    Aw, come on. Don't dismiss it so quickly. The poor guy who posted it is SERIOUS. I've argued until my fingers are sore...I finally told him I would post his suggestion here and see what Pacer fans had to say.

                    Personally, I'd give you Peja and whatever else it takes to get the job done but that's just me. I'm sick and tired of the "Pookie Princess" and his pouty little comments about mean ol' Webber, how the organization disrespected Vlade, etc. Peja will break your heart. He's broken ours every year...AND made the ridiculous comment about wanting to be traded to "any team" because Vlade chose to go to LA. You want Peja? I'll drive him to the airport... Unfortunately, he seems to be Petrie's golden boy and I'm stuck pretending his lack of effort doesn't bother me.

                    Oops. Hmmmm. Apparently there's still some residual anger left over after all the drama we went through this season.

                    NBA basketball - taking my breath away since 1963.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Trade proposal on a Kings board

                      You kiddin me right? Last year it was Artest for Peja...your tellin me Artest has fallen so much that we can get 2 okay sf's for him and Bender? Williamson is a bench player, same with Thomas. I would trade Bender for Williamson, but not Artest and Bender for both of them. No way.
                      Sorry, I didn't know advertising was illegal here. Someone call the cops!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Trade proposal on a Kings board

                        [Peck]

                        KINGS GET:
                        Ron Artest
                        Scot Pollard
                        Jonathan Bender

                        PACERS GET:
                        Brad Miller

                        [/Peck]

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Trade proposal on a Kings board

                          Btw, the Kings are only allowed to rape us once a decade, thank you very much.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Trade proposal on a Kings board

                            Hey, I don't think Artest has fallen. This guy says "just say you own a team and you pay a guy 7 mill a year for 3 min a game and another that gets suspended every year. and someone offered to take that off your hands for Bjax Kenny and corliss"

                            In his little universe, apparently, you guys are righteously indignant about Ron Artest and willing to trade him for basically a bag of chips and a half-full jar of salsa...

                            I'm not saying Artest has fallen so much. He is. What I'm trying to find out is if ANY of you harbor so much anger towards Ron that you'll ship him out for chump change.
                            NBA basketball - taking my breath away since 1963.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Trade proposal on a Kings board

                              Originally posted by Shade
                              Btw, the Kings are only allowed to rape us once a decade, thank you very much.
                              May I quote you back on my board?
                              NBA basketball - taking my breath away since 1963.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X