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 either Artest or O'Neal had to go...

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

  • #16
    Re: If either Artest or O'Neal had to go...

    Originally posted by Jay@Section204
    I know what I'd do, (well, all of you do), but you could certainly get more for JO than Ron. And you'd need to. JO can dominate the low post at each end of the court, but so many of you take that skill for granted as if those players grow on trees.

    The key, though, is Ron. Would whichever low post superstar you got in return for JO get along with Ron, either?

    given everything that has happened...quite possibly so....thats why the real issue is can the past be put in the past and the two of them move on...

    if not, someone that comes in and there is a clean slate between ron and that new player, well things could probably go quite well...

    lets hope jo and ron can find a way to start with a clean slate....much like they were doing before nov 19...and i think the events that evening will only help them come together more...at least i hope..

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: If either Artest or O'Neal had to go...

      Originally posted by foretaz

      lets hope jo and ron can find a way to start with a clean slate....much like they were doing before nov 19...and i think the events that evening will only help them come together more...at least i hope..
      They were??? Do you mean immediately before that and not from the start of the season? Because I was under the impression they had a pretty heated run-in or two that was JO throwing out of, or refusing Ron entry into, the lockerroom just a few days prior to the Mow Down in Motown.

      -Bball
      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

      ------

      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

      -John Wooden

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: If either Artest or O'Neal had to go...

        Originally posted by Bball
        They were??? Do you mean immediately before that and not from the start of the season? Because I was under the impression they had a pretty heated run-in or two that was JO throwing out of, or refusing Ron entry into, the lockerroom just a few days prior to the Mow Down in Motown.

        -Bball

        i was referring primarily to the start they had gotten the team off to...the two of them were playing at a very high level...until that fateful evening...

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: If either Artest or O'Neal had to go...

          Originally posted by Unclebuck
          Well considering J.O would get a lot more in return, they should trade J.O. But I say they need to keep both, force them to get along or go down trying to force them. In other words we have a long way to go before we must trade one or the other. At least for the issue you bring up
          I'm not trying to be a smart *** about this but I have to ask.

          How do you force people to get along? Wouldn't it take a mutual agreement by them to get along?

          How do you force it???


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

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: If either Artest or O'Neal had to go...

            Originally posted by foretaz
            i was referring primarily to the start they had gotten the team off to...the two of them were playing at a very high level...until that fateful evening...
            They weren't at a high level for that early season Clippers game. And that was just prior to some 'activity' between JO and Artest. And that was obviously early early in the year. If they were already feuding do you think they could've put that aside for the entire season?

            -Bball
            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

            ------

            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

            -John Wooden

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: If either Artest or O'Neal had to go...

              Originally posted by Bball
              They weren't at a high level for that early season Clippers game. And that was just prior to some 'activity' between JO and Artest. And that was obviously early early in the year. If they were already feuding do you think they could've put that aside for the entire season?

              -Bball
              ron didnt play that game....

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: If either Artest or O'Neal had to go...

                Originally posted by foretaz
                ron didnt play that game....
                We're getting somewhere now....
                And why didn't Ron play in that game?

                -Bball
                Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                ------

                "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                -John Wooden

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: If either Artest or O'Neal had to go...

                  Originally posted by Bball
                  We're getting somewhere now....
                  And why didn't Ron play in that game?

                  -Bball
                  im not sure where it is we are getting, but we both know why ron didnt play that game

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: If either Artest or O'Neal had to go...

                    I would have to side with sending J.O. down the highway if that came to a head. I think you could get a decent deal for J.O. but not a blockbuster deal. Face it, around the league J.O. isn't held in the same super star rank as Tim Duncan or Kevin Garnett so you couldn't expect to get a player of that caliber without selling your soul as sweetner to get the deal to go thru. I just think J.O. has to be in the Finals to get that bump to super star status.

                    The whole world knows Ronnie's baggage and will just by nature try to bend the Pacers over the table in any Artest deal. No matter now or months to years from now. The second a team actually is serious and ponies up a fair offer for Artest...I think that he will be seriously considered for trade. Till then, J.O. has more value in a deal if the Pacers are looking to make the deal!
                    ...Still "flying casual"
                    @roaminggnome74

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: If either Artest or O'Neal had to go...

                      Originally posted by Vicious Tyrant
                      It seems to me JO and Artest don't complement each others games too well.

                      Now there I disagree. As Rick Carlisle said on his radio show last season, J.O and Artest form a Shaq like dominance when they are on the court together.

                      I think they fit together just fine. Ron provides the physicalness than J.O lacks, defensively they complement each other very well, and offensively, they take turns punishing the opponents.

                      One thing to keep in mind. It is very rare, extremely rare to have your two best players be your two best offensive players and your two best (probably) defensive players.


                      So I say you exhaust every avenue every possibility of getting J.O and Ron to play together. We are no where near the point where we've tried everything.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: If either Artest or O'Neal had to go...

                        Originally posted by Peck
                        I'm not trying to be a smart *** about this but I have to ask.

                        How do you force people to get along? Wouldn't it take a mutual agreement by them to get along?

                        How do you force it???

                        You tell them that is their job to get along (on the court, I don't care about off the court) Everyone is depending on you two to get along, the city, coaches, front office, teammates, PD forum. If needed you tell them we aren't trading either of you so you might as well make the most of it.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: If either Artest or O'Neal had to go...

                          Originally posted by foretaz
                          im not sure where it is we are getting, but we both know why ron didnt play that game
                          Because Artest quit on the team. Subsequently JO fueded with him over the issue including the lockerroom incident already mentioned.

                          Is this the 'clean slate' you referred to?

                          -Bball
                          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                          ------

                          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: If either Artest or O'Neal had to go...

                            Originally posted by Bball
                            Because Artest quit on the team. Subsequently JO fueded with him over the issue including the lockerroom incident already mentioned.

                            Is this the 'clean slate' you referred to?

                            -Bball

                            its my opinion that they did start off the season with a clean slate...

                            yes, and the ron threw a monkey wrench into things....with his little detour...

                            prior to the detour, they looked very good...

                            following that detour, they looked very good...losing only the ot game to philly in philly if my memory serves me correctly...

                            its not always going to be a bed of roses...not unlike a family, there will be situations that come up that have to be overcome, no matter who is at fault

                            the key is whether u are together or not....if u are u get past these things together and move on...and are better for them....

                            im not so naive that there will not be disagreements or problems...in fact i hope there are...if theres not, then i would question peoples desire...

                            the key is how u handle these when they come up....as was stated back then, it was dealt with, internally and people moved on...i have a feeling everyone learned from that situation....

                            im not really what ur point is ur trying to drive at....if its that there was a problem early in the season...we all know that..and we know what it was...and who was responsible...

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: If either Artest or O'Neal had to go...

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck
                              You tell them that is their job to get along (on the court, I don't care about off the court) Everyone is depending on you two to get along, the city, coaches, front office, teammates, PD forum. If needed you tell them we aren't trading either of you so you might as well make the most of it.
                              im not sure that forcing it is the word i would use, but..

                              finding a way so that everyone involved can gain the right appreciation for what the real priorities are....finding some sort of common ground...and being able to agree on said priorities and then finding a way to work towards a common goal...

                              i think everyone has a much deeper appreciation for each other and what is at stake after all that transpired last year...

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: If either Artest or O'Neal had to go...

                                Really the botton line is that if either are traded for a player other than a top 15 player then it will be a bad trade. I would argue it needs to be a top 10 player.

                                Someone name for me the last good trade involving a top 10 player or even a top 15 player.

                                The Lakers killed their franchise when they traded Shaq.

                                When the Suns traded Kidd it took them what 4 years to recover and only then when they got lucky and acquired Nash.

                                The fact of the matter is very few top 10 players are ever traded. I realize we can argue about who is top 10 or 15 and who isn't. But if a team has one of those top 10 players I don't think they ever should be traded unless you get another top 10 player in return.

                                Besides Shaq and Kidd none of the others have been traded.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X