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

More nonsense!

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

  • More nonsense!

    a trade that sends jo back to portland for zach randolph-a cheap mans jo....might be interesting....

    if u included aj or something similar u could probably even get randolph, ratliff and jarrett jack and a pick....

    if u throw tinsley into that scenario u probaby have to send telfair back here...not really sure bout that idea....

    incidentally, if the clippers acquire shareef it might make brand a bit more available....

    i know brand isnt the player jo is....

    and ive stated id much rather keep jo and have he and artest lead this team to titles....but its slow and this is speculation and strictly hypothetical

  • #2
    Re: What player(s) would you take for JO?

    Originally posted by diamonddave00
    Have to agree with UB. Brand has put up great stats but has yet to play for a winner in the NBA.

    To me at pf , I'd only rank Duncan and KG above Jermaine.

    Amare Stoudamire is more athletic but still a very weak defender. Amare has the potential to be better but he isn't yet.

    Chris Bosh , is still too physically weak , can still be manhandled inside. But he appears to have the potential to improve and will get bigger.

    At this point on a contender I'll stick with JO over any pf except Duncan and KG. Ask me the same question in a year or two , may be a far different answer tho.
    well in all fairness to brand....he got drafted by the bulls who were at their all time worst....then traded to the clippers....say it again the clippers....i doubt the fate of either of those teams wouldve been changed much if they had jo instead of brand....

    and brand did play for a pretty good 'playoff' team in college...

    and not that it really matters....but hes 'buds' with artest

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: What player(s) would you take for JO?

      Originally posted by diamonddave00
      foretaz , a couple little notes on cheap - poor mans JO- Zach Randolph. He signed a new 6 year deal totalling $83 million last season.He also had knee surgery last winter.

      Another check with anyone in Marion area, for a little background check on Zach Randolph , his being involved in shooting incedent last summer is not his 1st brush with the law.

      Plus Zach . plays ABSOLUTELY NO DEFENSE, he is also even more of a black whole than JO when he gets the ball on offense.

      As for Theo Ratliff , Theo gives you 5 ppg and 5 rpg for the low , low cost of $11,666,000 each of the next 3 years.

      I really don't think 22 mil this season and even more the next 3 years is worth that risk.
      im aware of these things....

      yes...zach just signed a new deal...but hes still making 6 mill a year less than jo....

      zach is not the defender jo is...no question....as stated...there are only 2 players in this league that have similar qualities on both ends...kg and duncan...with brand being just a notch below...

      this whole premise is based on taking a slight downgrade at the position while improving the team....and its speculation and talk...thats all...im discussing it ....not necessarily advocating it....

      as far as ratliff goes...hes overpriced...like most big men in this league....though i dont think a front line of ratliff, randolph and artest would be the worst thing in the world...not sure its a championship lineup either....

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: What player(s) would you take for JO?

        Originally posted by Unclebuck
        If the Pacers were to trade Ron for Peja and J.O for Dirk, my worst nightmare would come true. It would be 1991 all over again. A soft team that cannot play defense.

        That won't happen

        ...ummm yea...i think i would literally puke if they did that....i cant see them under any circumstances trading the both of them....none....

        it would only be the very small circumstance that they might trade one of them...

        namely the original premise of this thread...jo deciding he simply cannot coexist with ron in a manner that would be conducive to winning a championship....and the pacers for many reasons, not the least of which is the fantastic bargain ron is, decide that ron is completely trustworthy and want to shop JO....

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: What player(s) would you take for JO?

          Lets see you want Zach Randolph , an undersized pf , who plays no defense and doesn't pass at all. Theo Ratliff a non scoring ,quickly aging player .

          I'm sorry Zach Randolph , back ground, questionable knee , questionable work habits. Zach is already 270 lbs on his 6'9 frame with a bad knee , can't see that being a good health risk. He is all of 2 1/2 years younger than Jermaine tho. I'll be intrested to see what kind of shape Randolph is in this season.

          I'm guessing its plain to see I'm not a big fan of Zach Randolph , so I may not be seeing it objectively .

          Okay lets see Zach and Ratliff make 22.3 mil this year, Jermaine makes 16.4 .

          So for your idea to work Pacers need to add a 2nd salary for around 5 mil a year thats Foster. Or Pollard .

          Personally I think Portland would jump all over getting Jermaine back with Pollard's expiring contract or Foster for Randolph and Ratliff.

          Sorry foretaz , just can't agree on your idea.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: What player(s) would you take for JO?

            Originally posted by diamonddave00
            Lets see you want Zach Randolph , an undersized pf , who plays no defense and doesn't pass at all. Theo Ratliff a non scoring ,quickly aging player .

            I'm sorry Zach Randolph , back ground, questionable knee , questionable work habits. Zach is already 270 lbs on his 6'9 frame with a bad knee , can't see that being a good health risk. He is all of 2 1/2 years younger than Jermaine tho. I'll be intrested to see what kind of shape Randolph is in this season.

            I'm guessing its plain to see I'm not a big fan of Zach Randolph , so I may not be seeing it objectively .

            Okay lets see Zach and Ratliff make 22.3 mil this year, Jermaine makes 16.4 .

            So for your idea to work Pacers need to add a 2nd salary for around 5 mil a year thats Foster. Or Pollard .

            Personally I think Portland would jump all over getting Jermaine back with Pollard's expiring contract or Foster for Randolph and Ratliff.

            Sorry foretaz , just can't agree on your idea.
            you know...im trying really hard not to argue with u....

            this is supposed to be a hypothetical discussion....

            i think i made it pretty clear that i wouldnt necessarily like this....now didnt i? these types of discussions are interesting...nothing more nothing less...

            and for the record...a 5 million dollar salary wouldnt have to be included....

            aj would be enuff to make it work....

            if ur going to be so argumentative, maybe u should have ur facts straight....

            nevertheless....that wasnt the idea....

            maybe take all that energy you seem to be utilizing to bash an idea and try to create additional scenarios, instead of doing what is very easy and requires very little brain power-finding whats wrong with something....

            its a long known fact...if u want to find something wrong with something, it wont be hard...

            so get with the program, and what the intention was....

            the fun part of these hypothetical discussions is u come up with a bunch of scenarios and then determine which ones u like best and why....

            now...can u play nice???

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: What player(s) would you take for JO?

              Originally posted by foretaz
              -snip-
              maybe take all that energy you seem to be utilizing to bash an idea and try to create additional scenarios, instead of doing what is very easy and requires very little brain power-finding whats wrong with something....

              its a long known fact...if u want to find something wrong with something, it wont be hard...

              so get with the program, and what the intention was....

              the fun part of these hypothetical discussions is u come up with a bunch of scenarios and then determine which ones u like best and why....

              now...can u play nice???
              Was that necessary?

              You do realize that you're just about the only one on here setting "rules" for threads and other posters, by the way?
              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
              And life itself, rushing over me
              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: What player(s) would you take for JO?

                Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                Was that necessary?

                You do realize that you're just about the only one on here setting "rules" for threads and other posters, by the way?
                maybe u should reread the title of the thread....

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: What player(s) would you take for JO?

                  Originally posted by foretaz
                  maybe u should reread the title of the thread....
                  I can read. What's your point?
                  Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                  Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                  Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                  Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                  And life itself, rushing over me
                  Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                  Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: What player(s) would you take for JO?

                    foretaz , all I'm doing is being the opposing voice .

                    I said I'd not deal JO for any power forwards except Duncan and Garnett. At this time , but I also said in a years time than could change.

                    I prefer what I consider quality over quanity.

                    Personally I'd rather deal Artest and Pollard for Shawn Marion , if it came down to choosing JO or Artest as you suggested.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: What player(s) would you take for JO?

                      Originally posted by diamonddave00
                      foretaz , all I'm doing is being the opposing voice .

                      I said I'd not deal JO for any power forwards except Duncan and Garnett. At this time , but I also said in a years time than could change.

                      I prefer what I consider quality over quanity.

                      Personally I'd rather deal Artest and Pollard for Shawn Marion , if it came down to choosing JO or Artest as you suggested.
                      thats all fine and well.....but the initial thread has nothing to do with what ur doing...

                      the initial post in this thread said besides the obvious kg and duncan trades...

                      and ur not the opposing voice...as i clearly stated, i never said i would be in favor of any of these ideas....theyre just ideas based on the parameters of the initial post in the thread....

                      if u take a look at this post u just made and then look at the initial post, u will find they are in direct conflict with one another...

                      all i was doing was trying to provide input based on the initial post....seriously...reread the initial post...it almost seems like u never read it

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: What player(s) would you take for JO?

                        DD00 was talking about basketball. Heck, he was talking about a player he wouldn't take for JO. Seems to me that (1) he was on topic, and (2) even if he wasn't totally on-topic, we go on tangents all the time around here and that's fine.

                        You can feel free to stop telling other people how to post at any time.
                        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                        And life itself, rushing over me
                        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: What player(s) would you take for JO?

                          Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                          DD00 was talking about basketball. Heck, he was talking about a player he wouldn't take for JO. Seems to me that (1) he was on topic, and (2) even if he wasn't totally on-topic, we go on tangents all the time around here and that's fine.

                          You can feel free to stop telling other people how to post at any time.

                          :finger:

                          what he was doing was incorrectly telling me what i wanted....u may know how to read but its clear u havent done so in this thread...

                          ive made it abundantly clear i would not be in favor of trading jo....with the exception being trading him for kg....

                          but the initial post-the start of this thread asked about what players we might consider in trading jo for that DONT INCLUDE KG, DUNCAN OR SHAQ.....it also didnt ask about the validity of trading jo.....

                          THAT WAS THE PREMISE.... therefore, using that premise, i participated in the discussion, while alluding to the fact from time to time, that i didnt advocate or favor such things.....

                          only to have people tell me if thats what i want, they disagree....

                          too funny....

                          then when i point out i wasnt in favor of that and wasnt saying thats what i wanted, that i was following the discussion parameter i get the same thing again....

                          at which point i suggested arguing with me with a different set of parameters seems a bit ridiculous and maybe the discussion should be more focused on the actual parameters...

                          now if someone doesnt like those parameters and wants to argue just for the sake of argument, then so be it...im not interested....

                          the topic of the thread, no matter the validity, was a topic i could converse in...and since its slow..i did....

                          if someone doesnt like the parameters...so be it....just dont expect to take issue with me and not get some sort of rebuttal...after all i didnt start the thread...i was just contributing....

                          if someone wants to start another thread disputing the validity of these parameters, i d probably take part in that one too....but there was a thread that kinda dabbled in that, hence i think thats where this thread came from....some people think its good to try and keep threads somewhat on topic...i have no problem with that....others seem intent on taking threads off topic when they dont like the premise....so be it, i guess....

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: What player(s) would you take for JO?

                            Foretaz- I read the title. My comments told you NO PLAYER at PF would I take beyond Tim and Kevin.

                            Then told you why I didn't want Randolph , then said push comes to shove deal Artest not Jermaine.

                            I thought fact I pointed out why I didn't want Brand , Stoudamire ,Nowizki and Bosh at this time was pretty clear too.

                            Just because I don't want to trade JO for what I consider lesser players , is just my side of the discussion.

                            As I said YES I READ THE HEADING.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: What player(s) would you take for JO?

                              Originally posted by diamonddave00
                              Foretaz- I read the title. My comments told you NO PLAYER at PF would I take beyond Tim and Kevin.

                              Then told you why I didn't want Randolph , then said push comes to shove deal Artest not Jermaine.

                              I thought fact I pointed out why I didn't want Brand , Stoudamire ,Nowizki and Bosh at this time was pretty clear too.

                              Just because I don't want to trade JO for what I consider lesser players , is just my side of the discussion.

                              As I said YES I READ THE HEADING.
                              and as ive said like twenty times....not once did i ever say i wanted any of these things...not once...in fact, as ive said...id only want to trade jo for kg...but reread the initial post in this thread...everything that u say here is basically moot...

                              i have no trouble with someone playing devils advocate....only one problem....i wasnt advocating anything...and i stated that numerous times....

                              seriously ....READ THE INITIAL POST

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X