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

How about Artest to Hornets

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

  • #16
    Re: How about Artest to Hornets

    We where in the Easter Conferance Finals with Ron, we lose him for a season and fall one step back. This team needs Ron or someone close to him if he is traded, not no damn Jamall Magliore. Good God watch some of his games and you will see he is not that damn good.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: How about Artest to Hornets

      Originally posted by tora tora
      I'll take Foster over Magloire anyday.
      I'm not even sure Jeff Foster would agree with that.

      I'm going to assume you'd take Foster of Dale as well, but you'd probably take Magloire over Dale, so what do you think Rick's reasoning was for starting Dale? And where does that put Foster in Rick's eyes?
      House Name: Pacers

      House Sigil:



      House Words: "We Kneel To No King"

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: How about Artest to Hornets

        Originally posted by Diamond Dave
        So this would be just like that time when Brad made the team only because there was no one else?
        Miller even put up better numbers than Magloire did.
        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: How about Artest to Hornets

          Originally posted by Jermaniac
          We where in the Easter Conferance Finals with Ron, we lose him for a season and fall one step back. This team needs Ron or someone close to him if he is traded, not no damn Jamall Magliore. Good God watch some of his games and you will see he is not that damn good.
          Obviously you still think that I just look at NBA.com to watch basketball again. Maybe you should go back and look at my first response to you when you tried to say "I'd never watched more than two games" of Magloire.

          It doesn't matter where you lose to them at, it just matters that 2 years in a row (one with Ron, one without) we have lost to the same EC champs.
          House Name: Pacers

          House Sigil:



          House Words: "We Kneel To No King"

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: How about Artest to Hornets

            Originally posted by Since86
            Miller even put up better numbers than Magloire did.
            Yeah, but Magloire probably put up better numbers than Dale or Rik did.

            Being an All-star isn't all about gaudy numbers. Ask Jalen Rose, he scores around 20 every year. Will never be an all-star.
            House Name: Pacers

            House Sigil:



            House Words: "We Kneel To No King"

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: How about Artest to Hornets

              Originally posted by Diamond Dave
              I'm not even sure Jeff Foster would agree with that.

              He averaged 13 and 11 in his "all-star" season.

              And Ajbry put it best:
              Originally posted by Ajbry
              Foster's numbers [from this year], if given 34 minutes a game, such as Magloire did during his All-Star campaign: 9.1 PPG, 11.7 RPG.

              Also, consider that Magloire was always one of the top offensive options on the Hornets. It's not like they had anyone else, besides Baron Davis, when he was there.

              Nothing too lucrative about him.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: How about Artest to Hornets

                Originally posted by Diamond Dave
                Yeah, but Magloire probably put up better numbers than Dale or Rik did.

                Being an All-star isn't all about gaudy numbers. Ask Jalen Rose, he scores around 20 every year. Will never be an all-star.

                Because he plays a stacked position. Like it or not, numbers get you on the All-Star team. Numbers represent what you do. Brian Cardinal may never make an All-Star team, and he does everything for the Grizz.

                He didn't deserve to be there, end of story. I remember the calling for another PF instead of just handing out a position to someone that wasn't qualified to be there.


                EDIT: Because I haven't said it, I'll say it here. I, for one, love PJ Brown's game and wouldn't be opposed to seeing him play in Indy.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: How about Artest to Hornets

                  Originally posted by Since86
                  Miller even put up better numbers than Magloire did.


                  You couldn't be more wrong.

                  Brad Miller averaged 13.1 points, 8.3 rebounds, 0.6 blocks, and shot and shot 49.3% from the field in 73 games in his 2002-2003 allstar season with the Pacers.

                  In his 2003-2004 allstar season Magloire averaged 13.6 points, 10.3 rebounds, 1 block, and shot 47.3% from the field in ALL 82 GAMES.

                  Tell me how Miller's numbers were "better."

                  In the future, please research your statistics before you make outrageous claims such as that.

                  Your's or anyone's personal opinion about Jamal Magloire being an allstar means absolutely nothing. I could sit here all day and say he was the the most deserving person to make the team while you say he shouldn't have been there at all. Both opinions mean nothing. At the end of the day, he was an allstar. The fact that the coaches selected him means that he deserved to be there. Magloire played EVERY GAME in 2003-2004.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: How about Artest to Hornets

                    I'M looking at Magloire on the defensive end . He's a banger all you have to do is watch tapes of him man handling JO inside.

                    This team needs that at 36 Dale is not able to do that fulltime. David Harrison is not ready. Magloire is only 27 , a solid player . He has an offensive game 13.8 ppg 10.3 rpg in 2003-04 when he was healthy. He also gives you over ablock per game. Let me know the first time Jeff averages a double /double for the season.

                    As for sf , if Jasikevicius is signed - Stephen Jackson plays sf too.

                    Stephen Jackson , Danny Granger and James Jones playing sf doesn't sound bad.

                    P J Brown is Dale's age , he's short term but he's still putting up good numbers as a banging pf/c , here he'd be a back up. You could still sign Dale for depth.

                    A pf/c lineup of O'Neal , Magloire, Brown , Harrison and perhaps Davis matches up well with both the Pistons and Heat.

                    If we made this trade P J Brown , has trade value if you decide to keep Dale. You address sf position there if you feel Jackson , Granger , F.Jones , J.Jones, are not enough at sg/sf.

                    While most think Ron is a lock to be here , I don't . Who knows if the Hornets would even be intrested in Ron with his past history? Adding Granger , in my way of thinking makes trading Artest a more likely occurance.

                    Weither you feel Magloire is All Star quality or not , he is in the top 10 centers in the nba. Scoring 19 points and grabbing 8 rebounds in his all star appearance seems to show he has some talent.

                    In the EAST the 6'11 260 Magloire is a big body that plays defense , boards and can score.

                    Like I said in my inital post I figured it would be hated. But several past successful Pacers trades were hated at first.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: How about Artest to Hornets

                      No FREAKING WAYYYYYY!!! Not only do we give up the best player with the best contract we also give up an ending contract in Pollard which we definitely need given our salary momentarely. On top off all that we also give up our best rebounder, and I don't care if he's light or not Foster does get them.

                      Now Magloire is definitely better than Foster, no doubt, and I don't mind trading for him and giving up quite some, but this is just too much.

                      Regards,

                      Mourning
                      2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                      2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                      2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: How about Artest to Hornets

                        new orleans has clearly stated.....very clearly stated.....in very non-posturing tones, that:

                        pj brown is not leaving....period....

                        so forgetting all the other stuff.....theres nothing really to discuss when it comes to a proposed deal that involves pj brown leaving the hornets....cause hes not leaving......does the untouchable word mean anything?

                        youd be just as good discussing a trade involving lebron....some things just arent happening

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: How about Artest to Hornets

                          Damn, why do they Hornets have to be so bad?

                          I would have no problem trading Ron for Magloire, if we could also get a solid vet who plays defense at the SF spot in return. Right now, I'm not seeing that guy on their roster.

                          I don't care how much I want Ron off this team, I don't want to head into the season with a rookie as our only starting quality SF. Get me a Posey type player, or maybe even slightly worse than a Posey, and it's a done deal.

                          We may as well throw out the Foster-for-Brown portion of the deal, though, that would never happen.

                          Actually, I'm not sure the Hornets would want Ron anyway. If you are looking to rebuild, do you build around a dependable center who is less talented than Ron, or a unreliable forward as talented as Ron? I think they pick the center.
                          You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: How about Artest to Hornets

                            Originally posted by PacerFanAdam
                            You couldn't be more wrong.

                            Brad Miller averaged 13.1 points, 8.3 rebounds, 0.6 blocks, and shot and shot 49.3% from the field in 73 games in his 2002-2003 allstar season with the Pacers.

                            In his 2003-2004 allstar season Magloire averaged 13.6 points, 10.3 rebounds, 1 block, and shot 47.3% from the field in ALL 82 GAMES.

                            Tell me how Miller's numbers were "better."

                            In the future, please research your statistics before you make outrageous claims such as that.

                            Your's or anyone's personal opinion about Jamal Magloire being an allstar means absolutely nothing. I could sit here all day and say he was the the most deserving person to make the team while you say he shouldn't have been there at all. Both opinions mean nothing. At the end of the day, he was an allstar. The fact that the coaches selected him means that he deserved to be there. Magloire played EVERY GAME in 2003-2004.
                            Miller put up those numbers averaging less mins. per game then Magloire. If you put them at equal mins. per game, Miller averaged 14.4pts 11.3rbs and 2.9assists to Magloire 13.6pts 10.3rbs. and .8assists

                            Take those per 48mins., and Miller averages 20.3pts 15.95rbs. 4.09assits.
                            Magloire would of averaged 19.2pts 14.5rbs and 1.13assists.

                            Better numbers? Yes he did. Might want to make sure each are on level playing fields when you compare numbers.
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: How about Artest to Hornets

                              Well only defensive sf they have is George Lynch.

                              Another version that works capwise is.

                              Artest and Pollard for Magloire, Lynch (1yr on contract) and a future #1.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: How about Artest to Hornets

                                Originally posted by Since86
                                Miller put up those numbers averaging less mins. per game then Magloire. If you put them at equal mins. per game, Miller averaged 14.4pts 11.3rbs and 2.9assists to Magloire 13.6pts 10.3rbs. and .8assists

                                Take those per 48mins., and Miller averages 20.3pts 15.95rbs. 4.09assits.
                                Magloire would of averaged 19.2pts 14.5rbs and 1.13assists.

                                Better numbers? Yes he did. Might want to make sure each are on level playing fields when you compare numbers.

                                Per 48 minutes is the most useless statistic in the history of NBA basketball. No player is ever going to play 48 minutes a game, so its a meaningless statistic. If you're using 48 minutes to "prove" one player is better than the other, you don't have much of a case.

                                If a player just plays 2 minutes a game and averages 2 points, you can put a spin on it and say "hey, if this guy played 48 minutes, he'd average 48 points....therefore he's the best"

                                The only stats that matter are the ones that were recorded. Magloires 03-04 allstar stats are slightly better than Brad's 02-03 allstar stats.

                                It doesnt matter anyway. Magloire and Miller were both picked to be allstars. Therefore, they both deserved it. Yours or anyones opinion means nothing. Personal opinions don't determine who "deserves" to be an allstar or not. If the coaches think enough of them to pick them, they deserve to be there.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X