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

If Ron were inevitably going to be traded...

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

  • Re: If Ron were inevitably going to be traded...

    Originally posted by Jay@Section204
    I think some of you guys are overestimating seriously overestimating JJ.

    I like the kid, but yeeessh. Forget Ron from this whole discussion. I'd trade JJ for Dunleavey every day of the week and twice on Sunday.


    Now that I agree with.

    I like Dunleavy, and he likely would do very, very well in Carlisle's system. His defense would drive me up a wall though

    Comment


    • Re: If Ron were inevitably going to be traded...

      Originally posted by foretaz

      only one problem....none of the teams even think for a moment of doing these deals....and therein lies the problem.....

      as i said before....i wouldnt have minded the tmac deal....though tmac makes 9 million a year more and i have a hard time seeing where we arent better off keeping ron and getting another substantial player for that 9 million.....

      but if it has to be done thats something u can live with...but just as the magic wouldnt do it....no other team is gonna do it either....they know the market is very limited for ron...so theyre not gonna give anything near equal value...cause they deem him a risk that they dont have to take....

      just like with tmac last year....on the rare opportunity u have a player of that caliber that wants out....there are gonna be other deals out there that are safer for a team than ron artest....which is one of the reasons hes only making 6 million....so where i sit, given that fact....u just do ur very best to find a way to make him work, and realize the alternative is mike dunleavy or something even worse....u trade for dunleavy and it wont be long before many realize the foolishness in their thoughts...and though they might not admit it, theyd be longing for the days where they had to put up with whatever antics he brings in exchange for all the positives and the chance to win the title that he brings
      You're right....given their situations....there would be very little reason for Utah and Phoenix's GMs to trade for Artest.

      My main point is that because there isn't too many players that I would trade Artest for....given his salary and the expected "craziness" that comes with the territory. Just like there was an opportunity for the Pacers to get a player on the level of TMac.....if a situation like that ever occured for the Pacers to get either AK47 or Marion...I would jump on it....despite the expected cost to make the trade work salarywise.

      If we can't get either of these 2 players....then I will live with what Artest provides....solid offense and great defense with a hint of "craziness" mixed in for the occasional outburst that gets him suspended for a game or two.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • Re: If Ron were inevitably going to be traded...

        Originally posted by Unclebuck
        Now that I agree with.

        I like Dunleavy, and he likely would do very, very well in Carlisle's system. His defense would drive me up a wall though
        Watching him play in the Bay Area.....he is not very good if he is relied on to be a starter. But as a backup SF....DunDun would be a pretty solid backup player....even a good fit as a 6th man. He would be a good offensive punch off the bench if given 20+ minutes a game.

        You just have to ignore that he is completely lost on the defensive end. But if we got used to that with Croshere...then we can get used to it with DunDun.
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • Re: If Ron were inevitably going to be traded...

          Originally posted by vapacersfan
          or season
          -10 points for obvious response.

          Comment


          • Re: If Ron were inevitably going to be traded...

            Originally posted by CableKC
            You're right....given their situations....there would be very little reason for Utah and Phoenix's GMs to trade for Artest.

            My main point is that because there isn't too many players that I would trade Artest for....given his salary and the expected "craziness" that comes with the territory. Just like there was an opportunity for the Pacers to get a player on the level of TMac.....if a situation like that ever occured for the Pacers to get either AK47 or Marion...I would jump on it....despite the expected cost to make the trade work salarywise.

            If we can't get either of these 2 players....then I will live with what Artest provides....solid offense and great defense with a hint of "craziness" mixed in for the occasional outburst that gets him suspended for a game or two.
            though, some here will absolutely hate this argument....its one i agree with, though have been reluctant to say because i know how it will go over....

            he makes 6 million a year....anyone similar makes, for the most part, two to 3 times what he makes....

            its a bargain that doesnt come without a price....u find a way to minimize and eliminate as much of the downside as u can....and realize what comes with the total package....

            like ive said...what u can get for the additional 6-12 million he doesnt make can go along way in helping win a title....

            not unlike the high performance luxury cars that require more attention and are more expensive to maintain, ron comes with an added cost that must be factored in...

            but id rather drive a ferrari that needs constant tuneups and has a leaking tire that i constantly have to be aware of than drive a chevy.....

            and yes...i can already hear the blowout comments coming...

            Comment


            • Re: If Ron were inevitably going to be traded...

              Originally posted by CableKC
              Watching him play in the Bay Area.....he is not very good if he is relied on to be a starter. But as a backup SF....DunDun would be a pretty solid backup player....even a good fit as a 6th man. He would be a good offensive punch off the bench if given 20+ minutes a game.

              You just have to ignore that he is completely lost on the defensive end. But if we got used to that with Croshere...then we can get used to it with DunDun.
              i couldnt agree more...hes at best a 6th man....to contemplate him as a starter when we have one of the top 2 small forwards in the game is just something i want no part of....

              there is no way you go from one of the best to a quality backup and be as good....certainly not with this team....

              like i said...u go from instant title contender to instant also ran...

              Comment


              • Re: If Ron were inevitably going to be traded...

                Originally posted by foretaz
                i couldnt agree more...hes at best a 6th man....to contemplate him as a starter when we have one of the top 2 small forwards in the game is just something i want no part of....

                there is no way you go from one of the best to a quality backup and be as good....certainly not with this team....

                like i said...u go from instant title contender to instant also ran...
                in one move we become the clippers...

                Comment


                • Re: If Ron were inevitably going to be traded...

                  Wow, that was crazy.
                  You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                  Comment


                  • Re: If Ron were inevitably going to be traded...

                    Originally posted by SoupIsGood
                    Wow, that was crazy.
                    Yeah I know, who the heck talks to themselves nowadays?
                    You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                    Comment


                    • Re: If Ron were inevitably going to be traded...

                      Originally posted by SoupIsGood
                      Yeah I know, who the heck talks to themselves nowadays?
                      Exactly what I was thinking!
                      You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                      Comment


                      • Re: If Ron were inevitably going to be traded...

                        :finger:

                        Comment


                        • Re: If Ron were inevitably going to be traded...

                          Originally posted by foretaz
                          in one move we become the clippers...

                          Ok, that tears it right there.

                          Uncle Buck you have now officially been outdone. You don't need that break to go recharge your batterys because you are now officially normal.

                          This post by Fortaz just summed up, in 7 words, what he truely thinks of the Pacers.

                          People do you understand he just said if we remove Ron Artest & replace him with a 13 ppg scorer we will be the L.A. Clippers, not to mention he called us also rans.

                          You've just proven that you are first & formost a Ron Artest fan. I hate to break the news to you but the Pacers lost Ron Artest this season & got nothing in return & we were not also rans or the Clippers.

                          Suaveness wouldn't even go this far & he would go pretty far. Hell, you realize you are making U.B. sit at home right now & disagree with you about Ron Artest. Because even he wouldn't say this.

                          I can't beleive you just said this....

                          Or am I misunderstanding you?


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

                          Comment


                          • Re: If Ron were inevitably going to be traded...

                            Two Points:

                            1. I find it hilarious that people grant that Artest's trade value is low ie. he is currently rated fairly lowly by opposing GM's, yet continue trumpet his cause as if they know better.

                            2. Some maybe argumentative, however I am concerned more for those whom whittle away their days combing message boards for anything which maybe critical of Ron Artest. Tired after the Cold War? May I suggest applying for work in China? We here at Pacersdigest have perhaps the greatest collection of censors ever seen.

                            - oh and as I guess this may be interpreted as somewhat critical of the unchecked cult of the Artest I assume there must be something wrong with me; how dare I dispute anyones opinion...

                            brb better make sure my picture of Mao is hung straight
                            "I’m your favorite player’s favorite player. And it’s not enough for me for him to know that. I want the world to know that." -- Michael Beasley

                            Comment


                            • Re: If Ron were inevitably going to be traded...

                              Originally posted by Peck
                              Ok, that tears it right there.

                              Uncle Buck you have now officially been outdone. You don't need that break to go recharge your batterys because you are now officially normal.

                              This post by Fortaz just summed up, in 7 words, what he truely thinks of the Pacers.

                              People do you understand he just said if we remove Ron Artest & replace him with a 13 ppg scorer we will be the L.A. Clippers, not to mention he called us also rans.

                              You've just proven that you are first & formost a Ron Artest fan. I hate to break the news to you but the Pacers lost Ron Artest this season & got nothing in return & we were not also rans or the Clippers.

                              Suaveness wouldn't even go this far & he would go pretty far. Hell, you realize you are making U.B. sit at home right now & disagree with you about Ron Artest. Because even he wouldn't say this.

                              I can't beleive you just said this....

                              Or am I misunderstanding you?
                              actually, while i might be exaggerating a bit, its not so farfetched....the clippers have a great power forward in brand-we have jo....they have a very talented point guard in livingston...we would have jt...

                              after that....what? nothing all that special....and please dont tell me mike dunleavy...as has since been discussed....he would make a good sixth man...

                              steven jackson would be a good six man on many teams as well....

                              center is our deepest yet least talented position....

                              as i said....a starting lineup of

                              dale
                              jo
                              dunleavy
                              jackson
                              jt

                              is not gonna inspire fear into too many people...

                              yes...the bench is decent...not much consolance if ur starting 5 cant beat many teams though....im sure our great coaching staff would find a way to get that team into the playoffs...



                              my point really is this....that team has zero shot at winning a title none...as do the clippers...i have zero desire to struggle into the playoffs with an assured 1st round loss just because of a dislike for a certain player....

                              and if u think that starting five has any better chance at winning a title than the clipper, then i would be disappointed....i would say the clippers starting 5 might very well be more talented with maggette...but it really doesnt matter...

                              neither team would stand a chance to win a title...

                              Comment


                              • Re: If Ron were inevitably going to be traded...

                                But yet change one player & we are instant title contenders????

                                If that is your contention then you are saying that Ron Artest is the single most important player on our team, hell maybe the entire NBA.

                                You obviously think very little of Jermaine O'neal, btw you may be right there I'm not sure.

                                You obvously don't think very much of Jamaal Tinsley. I happen to think very highly of Jamaal but don't trust him myself.

                                You obviously don't think very much about Jackson, oh wait you already said that so I guess that makes sense. I disagree with you on this one but reasonble people can disagree.

                                You don't think much of our centers. Ok, I won't disagree much with you here.

                                But I do NOT believe that Ron Artest, all by himself, determines if we are the champions or not.

                                Now let me ask you a question.

                                Since you obviously don't beleive that Jermaine O'Neal is a franchise player, I mean how can you if you beleive that a player not named Jermaine O'Neal carries our team, do you think it was a mistake to give him that max. contract?

                                Second part to that question. Do you think the Pacers would have been better off letting J.O. walk or maybe doing a sign & trade and in turn re-sign Brad Miller for less money & focusing soley on Ron Artest as the franchise?

                                I don't think I made that last point very clear so let me try to simplify. Instead of giving J.O. that huge deal, should they have let him go & gotten a couple other complimentry players to go around Ron & keep Brad with him?


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

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X