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

Why Artest Wont Be Traded

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

  • #16
    Re: Why Artest Wont Be Traded

    Originally posted by BostonConnection
    Maybe not Artest, but I'm beginning to wonder if behind the purple text and chat room abbreviations lurks someone else familiar...
    "Hey it's Scot Pollard"!!!!!

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Why Artest Wont Be Traded

      Originally posted by Harmonica
      Well, that's the way it was described to me by someone I'm quite certain knows much more about it than you pretend to know, so...whatever.
      oh...lemme guess....more purported info??? is this like the purported cleveland trade? or the purported peja trade...as ive said before...i prefer to play the speculation game based on the fact that i have before me....and have no interest in others that insist on contradicting thes facts with purported info....it serves zero purpose, except it would appear, to inflate certain peoples egos....when such info has been wrong before it kinda speaks a bit to the overall credibility of the source....either way...it really changes nothing...

      the difference between u and i appears to be that i dont purport to know anything other than my own opinion and those events that have already known as facts....

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Why Artest Wont Be Traded

        Originally posted by BostonConnection
        Maybe not Artest, but I'm beginning to wonder if behind the purple text and chat room abbreviations lurks someone else familiar...
        godisthatu?

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Why Artest Wont Be Traded

          Originally posted by foretaz

          the difference between u and i appears to be that i dont purport to know anything other than my own opinion and those events that have already known as facts....
          Well, there ya go.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Why Artest Wont Be Traded

            Originally posted by Harmonica
            Well, there ya go.

            Originally Posted by bulletproof
            Look, one way or another Ron is going to be traded. And to get someone of equal value, we'd have to give up too much. Anyone else close to Ron's level makes $12 million or more. With Peja, it's straight up. It's really a no brainer. As obnoxiousmodesty said, we're not going to find a better player in return for Ron than Peja.

            So come on in, boys, the water's fine.
            can someone help me out....how did this turn out...i believe this comment was made last august....anyone??

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Why Artest Wont Be Traded

              Originally posted by foretaz
              can someone help me out....how did this turn out...i believe this comment was made last august....anyone??

              The trade was agreed upon in principle by both partys.

              It was the younger (Is it Joel????) Maloof brother that backed out of the deal because he decided he wanted to keep Peja & came to the conclusion that moving Weber was a better idea (which they eventually did by the trade deadline). The older brother was not determined on the trade either way so convincing him was not a problem.

              B.P.'s thread on that at the time was on the best info that was available. However he didn't say the trade would occur, he said that Ron would be traded (he just didn't say when or for who ) he did however suggest that this was the best available option.

              Hicks on the other hand.......


              Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Why Artest Wont Be Traded

                Originally posted by Peck
                Hicks on the other hand.......

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Why Artest Wont Be Traded

                  Originally posted by Peck
                  The trade was agreed upon in principle by both partys.

                  It was the younger (Is it Joel????) Maloof brother that backed out of the deal because he decided he wanted to keep Peja & came to the conclusion that moving Weber was a better idea (which they eventually did by the trade deadline). The older brother was not determined on the trade either way so convincing him was not a problem.

                  B.P.'s thread on that at the time was on the best info that was available. However he didn't say the trade would occur, he said that Ron would be traded (he just didn't say when or for who ) he did however suggest that this was the best available option.

                  Hicks on the other hand.......
                  ummm...maybe u should reread again....


                  Originally Posted by bulletproof
                  Look, one way or another Ron is going to be traded.
                  the point is...the best available info...or seemingly for sure purported info....its all the same....speculation at best till it becomes fact....to represent it as anything different is very naive...and somewhat insulting....at least to me..... especially when used in an attempt to say someone is wrong in what their speculating....this shouldnt be a game of i told u so either way....but some come across with a condescending attitude and use such aforementioned speculation as some sort of way to 'put down' what others are speculating.....i find it humorous, almost, that they would do so-for what does it really say about them??? 'my speculation is more accurate than ur speculation'....comical really when u think about it....if ur gonna do that u just better never ever be wrong....

                  and really, even if ur right every time, theres no real place for it....it somewhat contradicts the basic idea of a forum such as this.....

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Why Artest Wont Be Traded

                    Originally posted by Peck
                    The trade was agreed upon in principle by both partys.

                    It was the younger (Is it Joel????) Maloof brother that backed out of the deal because he decided he wanted to keep Peja & came to the conclusion that moving Weber was a better idea (which they eventually did by the trade deadline). The older brother was not determined on the trade either way so convincing him was not a problem.

                    B.P.'s thread on that at the time was on the best info that was available. However he didn't say the trade would occur, he said that Ron would be traded (he just didn't say when or for who ) he did however suggest that this was the best available option.

                    Hicks on the other hand.......
                    and to be honest...ive read hicks posts regarding the subject as well....his overall attitude was much different.....while ill never condone saying something like this is for sure, the attitude one displays is important, to a degree.....hicks never seemed condescending....like because he claimed to have such info, he was almost better than some....thats not necessarily the same feeling i get from others that do the same....and it appears, in reading lots of old posts, that im not alone in noticing this mentality.....

                    theres a difference in trying to provide fellow fans info that is deemed to be insider info....and therefore appropriate discussion and speculation can follow....however its another thing to be somewhat condescending about it and almost imply that noone else knows what theyre talking about-its speculation-noone is trying to represent it as fact-to try and make it wrong, especially with the use of purported info that may or may not be accurate....well thats a joke if u ask me...

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Why Artest Wont Be Traded

                      Originally posted by foretaz
                      and to be honest...ive read hicks posts regarding the subject as well....his overall attitude was much different.....while ill never condone saying something like this is for sure, the attitude one displays is important, to a degree.....hicks never seemed condescending....like because he claimed to have such info, he was almost better than some....thats not necessarily the same feeling i get from others that do the same....and it appears, in reading lots of old posts, that im not alone in noticing this mentality.....

                      theres a difference in trying to provide fellow fans info that is deemed to be insider info....and therefore appropriate discussion and speculation can follow....however its another thing to be somewhat of an a$$ about it and almost imply that noone else knows what theyre talking about-its speculation-noone is trying to represent it as fact-to try and make it wrong, especially with the use of purported info that may or may not be accurate....well thats a joke if u ask me...
                      ???????

                      Well I guess I never really thought I did this, but if you say so.

                      Generally I don't deal in speculation but there have been times that I have been told something by somebody I trust & if I can I let others know.

                      Sorry if I came across like an *** when doing this because it was never my intention.


                      Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Why Artest Wont Be Traded

                        Originally posted by Peck
                        ???????

                        Well I guess I never really thought I did this, but if you say so.

                        Generally I don't deal in speculation but there have been times that I have been told something by somebody I trust & if I can I let others know.

                        Sorry if I came across like an *** when doing this because it was never my intention.
                        no no no....i wasnt referring to u...damn this internet sometimes...youve never come across like that, in my eyes anyway...i was referring to someone else...i dont have a problem with people sharing info theyve heard and believe to be insider info and reliable....as long as its treated as speculation just like everything else thats not factual is....its fun at times....however i do have a huge problem with someone representing this as facts not in evidence yet...thats lame...

                        and no...once again...uve never done that that im aware of....i havent read every post yet...but im working on it...

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Why Artest Wont Be Traded

                          wheeeww!!!!!! I thought you were talking about me.

                          Sorry about the mixup.


                          Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Why Artest Wont Be Traded

                            Originally posted by Peck
                            wheeeww!!!!!! I thought you were talking about me.

                            Sorry about the mixup.

                            yea i know...i could hear u.....that mother$%##$%^%^$###^%^#&()*^#@%^^% foretaz...who the hell does he think he is....

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Why Artest Wont Be Traded

                              Originally posted by Peck
                              Ok, after carefull consideration & lots of soul serching I've come to a conclusion.

                              You are Ron Artest aren't you.
                              I think RA will be wearing Blue & Gold next year, we need him and unless we get a McGrady or Bogut he's staying. Oh by the way peck that Hulk picture would look better if it had a #32 Pacers Jersey on it. I know theres a few on here that can help with that, just not me.
                              "He wanted to get to that money time. Time when the hardware was on the table. That's when Roger was going to show up. So all we needed to do was stay close"
                              Darnell Hillman (Speaking of former teammate Roger Brown)

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Why Artest Wont Be Traded

                                Originally posted by Peck
                                wheeeww!!!!!! I thought you were talking about me.

                                Sorry about the mixup.

                                It's pure speculation on my part but I would say he was talking about a certain remote viewer.

                                For being as wordy as he is foretaz sometimes nails things in one paragraph!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X