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

ESPN: Artest saga may shape Francis' future

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    ESPN: Artest saga may shape Francis' future

    Well I'll be - someone who is NOT a GM like yours truly seems to agree with me... bold added by me - because it is what I have been saying for 2 weeks.

    __________________________________________________ _____

    http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/column...ark&id=2291521

    Artest saga may shape Francis' future

    By Mark Kreidler
    Special to ESPN.com

    It's been another great week on the Ron Artest trade front, so long as you aren't counting the part about the Pacers actually, you know … making a trade.

    But, goodness, there were some great rumors. The Warriors came and went and then crept back in. The Clippers got hot until Corey Maggette's bum foot cooled them off. Houston sneaked into the conversation. It was good stuff.

    Of course, that's Artest still sitting over there, doing absolutely nothing. And those are the Indiana Pacers, still winning at a slightly higher rate than they lose, but with no serious prospects of making a run at the elite of the Eastern Conference.

    And this is the emerging truth: Forget equal value for Artest. The Pacers, in the end, are going to be lucky to make a deal that gives them any future to look forward to -- and in the present, they have no part of an NBA Finals conversation.

    Can we all now agree that it was a giant botch, this whole thing? Indiana's response to Artest's request to be traded, which hardly stacks up at the most outrageous thing ever said or done by the man, has maneuvered the Pacers into a windowless room. It's dark and creepy in there.

    If Orlando's front office is paying the slightest attention to the Artest fiasco (and place no bets), then it will do the right thing with Stevie Francis. Francis committed an arguably greater sin than Artest talking about being moved to another team: He refused to re-enter a game the Magic were losing badly on the road. But after the guard serves a suspension, Orlando's bosses surely see that the clearest path to a future lies in reactivating Francis, getting him back on the court and telling him, "Play your hinders off so that we can make a great deal and get you somewhere you want to be."

    Oh, if only Indiana had come to the same conclusion about Artest. Instead, the Pacers, from Larry Bird on through, took the publicly noble step of refusing to allow Artest back on campus, as it were. He's banned for life. The Pacers had had enough.

    It must have felt wonderful, and no doubt a little righteous. It was a response widely applauded by many people, even by great sports fans who tired of Artest's act and had seen one chapter too many of his Me, Myself and I book in progress.

    And it's killing the Pacers. Just killing them.

    Indiana will ultimately deal Artest, but that's only because the Pacers have left themselves no real choice. Artest even opened the door some weeks back for them to let him in, at least long enough to re-establish his market value, and they refused. It surely felt like the upright thing to do, but in the cold world of business in the NBA, the result was this: Every team in the league now knew that Bird and Co. had to move Artest -- and no one in his right mind was going to offer equal value, or anything close to it.

    Thus, the current steaming pile of possibilities. The Clippers were willing to part with damaged goods in Maggette, whose left foot is so suspect that the Pacers wouldn't bite. The Warriors would give other players, but not Ike Diogu, the one the Pacers wanted. Houston won't give up Yao Ming or Tracy McGrady, so the Rockets reportedly are trying to come up with some combination of players (in concert with other teams) that Indiana might want.

    Meanwhile, the Pacers chug on. They hit the weekend at 19-14 overall and just 8-10 on the road. They're a decent, but hardly uninspiring, 9-7 within the Eastern Conference.

    It could never be as simple as this, of course, but consider: When they punched Artest's ticket and sent him away, the Pacers also sent off the floor the NBA's leader in steals and their own second-leading scorer (at 19.4 points per game). That's how you go from potential conference finalist to playoff entry with a chance to advance a round.

    Indiana has no choice at this point but to wait patiently as the Feb. 23 trade deadline approaches, and hope that a great deal for Artest somehow puts itself together. Other teams in the East are certainly happy enough that they can play the Pacers without facing Artest. Nobody on that side of the league is in any hurry to do a deal.

    In a parallel universe, the Pacers' brass might have bit its collective tongue one last time in December, ignored Artest's latest look-at-me moment, and quietly pursued every possible trade for the troubled talent. Dunno what the end result might have been, but it couldn't have been more problematic than what the franchise is facing right now. You watching, Orlando? This, for future reference, is a tough lesson in how something that feels so right can go so wrong.

    Mark Kreidler is a columnist for the Sacramento Bee and a regular contributor to ESPN.com. Reach him at mkreidler@sacbee.com.
    Heywoode says... work hard man.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: ESPN: Artest saga may shape Francis' future

    I totally agree with this.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: ESPN: Artest saga may shape Francis' future

      The premise of the article I don't agree with.

      Whether Artest was playing now or not would not have any impact on the trades offers the Pacers would be getting. Because everyone knows the Pacers are trading Artest anyway whether he is active or not.

      What are all the other teams dumb.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: ESPN: Artest saga may shape Francis' future

        Yes, let's put a man who said he hopes he never plays another game for us again back in uniform and on the floor. That'll go over GREAT in a locker room already suffering major chemistry issues.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: ESPN: Artest saga may shape Francis' future

          Originally posted by Shade
          Yes, let's put a man who said he hopes he never plays another game for us again back in uniform and on the floor. That'll go over GREAT in a locker room already suffering major chemistry issues.


          That is another point, but even if we did that every team knows we are trading Artest anyway

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: ESPN: Artest saga may shape Francis' future

            What else would anyone expect from a BSPN writer....

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: ESPN: Artest saga may shape Francis' future

              Originally posted by Unclebuck
              That is another point, but even if we did that every team knows we are trading Artest anyway
              Everyone would know we wanted to trade him... they wouldn't know we HAD to trade him.
              Heywoode says... work hard man.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: ESPN: Artest saga may shape Francis' future

                It must be nice to be a professional columnist. You can write any kind of one-sided drivel you please without any fear of argument or rebuttal.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: ESPN: Artest saga may shape Francis' future

                  Originally posted by Shade
                  It must be nice to be a professional columnist. You can write any kind of one-sided drivel you please without any fear of argument or rebuttal.
                  A columnist's job is to present a position and back it up with opinions - whether PD agrees with them or not.
                  Heywoode says... work hard man.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: ESPN: Artest saga may shape Francis' future

                    Originally posted by Shade
                    Yes, let's put a man who said he hopes he never plays another game for us again back in uniform and on the floor. That'll go over GREAT in a locker room already suffering major chemistry issues.
                    Ding-ding-ding-ding!

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: ESPN: Artest saga may shape Francis' future

                      It would have been/would be a very, very, very bad idea to put ron-ron back on the floor with this team.

                      Even at 9-9 without ron the Pacers are still in the hunt for the 4th seed in the east... just like they would be if ron was playing.

                      This team had several issues at the start of the season... not all of witch had to do with ron.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: ESPN: Artest saga may shape Francis' future

                        This is a leverage argument more than anything
                        Heywoode says... work hard man.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: ESPN: Artest saga may shape Francis' future

                          I don't think this guy has watched us play at all. Ron is not the element that we're missing. We weren't exactly playing well with him. I'm inclined to think that this team didn't fit together very well from the beginning. We need some sort of decison as to what will happen at the PG position, and we need a true perimeter scorer. Ron was good, but didn't bring that.
                          You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: ESPN: Artest saga may shape Francis' future

                            Originally posted by SoupIsGood
                            I don't think this guy has watched us play at all. Ron is not the element that we're missing. We weren't exactly playing well with him. I'm inclined to think that this team didn't fit together very well from the beginning. We need some sort of decison as to what will happen at the PG position, and we need a true perimeter scorer. Ron was good, but didn't bring that.
                            Ron was probably our best 3 point shooter

                            But the article is not about being better - it is about having leverage - or NOT having it
                            Heywoode says... work hard man.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: ESPN: Artest saga may shape Francis' future

                              Originally posted by Doug in OH
                              Can we all now agree that it was a giant botch, this whole thing? Indiana's response to Artest's request to be traded, which hardly stacks up at the most outrageous thing ever said or done by the man, has maneuvered the Pacers into a windowless room. It's dark and creepy in there.
                              It was already dark and creepy because the windows were boarded up on 11/19. The truth is, we would never get equal value for Ron. Ron is a Lebron James level talent who everyone knows is a ticking time bomb. What if we let him play and he goes off again. Obviously, the odds are high that would happen ONCE AGAIN and his value will continue to go down just like it has the last 2 years. What if he does something to be banned from the league....then we get NOTHING?
                              Originally posted by Doug in OH
                              It must have felt wonderful, and no doubt a little righteous. It was a response widely applauded by many people, even by great sports fans who tired of Artest's act and had seen one chapter too many of his Me, Myself and I book in progress.

                              And it's killing the Pacers. Just killing them.
                              This is a short term view and history will record this as the time when the Pacers Org. finally made the right move with Artest. Sure, losing an all star is a setback, but it had to happen sometime and the sooner the better. You need to forget about the days when Ron was a Pacer. He is fools gold!
                              Originally posted by Doug in OH
                              weeks back for them to let him in, at least long enough to re-establish his market value, and they refused.
                              Again, you are assuming he can re-establish his market value. The only thing his value has done over the last two years is go down. There is no reason to believe it would go up.
                              Originally posted by Doug in OH
                              It surely felt like the upright thing to do, but in the cold world of business in the NBA, the result was this: Every team in the league now knew that Bird and Co. had to move Artest -- and no one in his right mind was going to offer equal value, or anything close to it.
                              ....
                              19.4 points per game). That's how you go from potential conference finalist to playoff entry with a chance to advance a round.
                              ...
                              In a parallel universe, the Pacers' brass might have bit its collective tongue one last time in December, ignored Artest's latest look-at-me moment, and quietly pursued every possible trade for the troubled talent. Dunno what the end result might have been, but it couldn't have been more problematic than what the franchise is facing right now. You watching, Orlando? This, for future reference, is a tough lesson in how something that feels so right can go so wrong.
                              Although Ron has depressed his value, particularly on 11/19, his value has not become further depressed because the Pacers are cornered into trading Ron. The truth is, competition between potential suitors in the market will determine his price...not any perceived negotiating advantage they think they have over the Pacers. That would be true if there were only one buyer, but there are many. Teams are competing for his services and his discounted value is difficult to determine....and no one wants to come out on the short end of the stick. That is why there have been very few if any trades...everyone is waiting for this first domino to go. Hopefully the Maggette non-trade is a step toward setting Ron's market value and finalizing the trade.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X