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

Thoughts on the trade

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

  • Thoughts on the trade

    Like I said before I dont like Peja he is soft, I didnt want him here. But he is here, No sense of *****ing about it now.

    What have these Pacers always wanted? A shooter like Peja, we tryed with Jack and Sarunas and both of them didnt fit the role. Jack does great in other parts of the game but he is very streaky with his shot.

    But look at the positives of Peja, the guy is one of the best shooters in the NBA. He was hitting 20 a game with CWebb helping him out now he has JO to take the pressure of him.

    His defense? Look at Saras he sucks on defense but he doesnt suck as much as he did before because of Rick's defensive system that can hide that. Sure we may not hold opponents to 90 ppg anymore but they wont hold us to 92 ppg either.

    If Peja turns out to suck, we just let him go at the end of the year and let Danny step in and start. Its not all bad guys.

  • #2
    Re: Thoughts on the trade

    Well put.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Thoughts on the trade

      JO does not pass as well as C-Webb. Still got to admit our team is instantly back to #2 in the east with a full roster. Now if we can get our heads out of our asses soon, look out.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Thoughts on the trade

        I said this a long time ago when everyone was down on him defensively. The guy has some quick feet for a small forward and made a few decent defensive plays in the playoffs a while back. He actually stopped 3-4 guys from hitting the game winner in a series of games in the playoffs a while back.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Thoughts on the trade

          You are right..we get something from nothing
          However I don't like the deal.it's because we need to keep waiting the champion again in the next few years...

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Thoughts on the trade

            Oh my god, I agree completely with Jermaniac. There is no emoticon to describe my emotions.
            Play Mafia!
            Twitter

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Thoughts on the trade

              Originally posted by Jermaniac
              Like I said before I dont like Peja he is soft, I didnt want him here. But he is here, No sense of *****ing about it now.
              I agree with you here. I don't like it as much as I would have loved a Pietrus/Biedrins deal....but I will live with it simply cuz we have no choice. I seriously believe that Walsh/Bird wasn't getting the offers that they wanted and decided to pull the trigger on this offer/deal.

              Originally posted by Jermaniac
              What have these Pacers always wanted? A shooter like Peja, we tryed with Jack and Sarunas and both of them didnt fit the role. Jack does great in other parts of the game but he is very streaky with his shot.

              But look at the positives of Peja, the guy is one of the best shooters in the NBA. He was hitting 20 a game with CWebb helping him out now he has JO to take the pressure of him.

              His defense? Look at Saras he sucks on defense but he doesnt suck as much as he did before because of Rick's defensive system that can hide that. Sure we may not hold opponents to 90 ppg anymore but they wont hold us to 92 ppg either.

              If Peja turns out to suck, we just let him go at the end of the year and let Danny step in and start. Its not all bad guys.
              I was thinking of this ever since I heard the liklihood on Jim Rome's show this morning. I think that the offer that the Pacers put up to the Kings FINALLY happened cuz it met several requirements that Walsh/Bird were looking for:

              A ) Get a starting quality player that can help us out this season.
              B ) Get a player with a matching salary that would allow us to trade Artest without trading Foster/Croshere/AJ/Freddie


              The 3rd and 4th requirements that I think Walsh/Bird wanted ( but finally came to the conclusion that they can't get ) was that they wanted ( C ) a starting quality impact player that they can lock in for 2 to 3 years and ( D ) at least a young prospect out of this.

              That's why I think they went after Maggette as it met 3 of the 4 requirements in trading Artest. But I think getting a player that can provide immediate help while not trading away Foster/Croshere/AJ/Freddie ( any of which would have to be included if the salaries didn't match ). It has become apparent with the absense of Artest that players like Foster, Croshere, AJ and Freddie play key roles on the team that I think that Walsh/Bird wanted to keep. All this means that Walsh/Bird wanted to make a serious run at the Playoffs THIS SEASON.

              But I think that Walsh/Bird started this by hoping that we can get young prospects that could help us out in the future and at the same time get a player that can help us out this season. As the weeks dragged on, it became clear that they maybe able to do one but not the other.....leading us to a straight-up Peja for Artest deal.

              I still don't think we can beat the Pistons without making a few more adjustments <<< COUGH COUGH Trade SJax and Tinsley COUGH COUGH >> but at least we can FINALLY get this behind us and move on with our lives.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Thoughts on the trade

                Originally posted by Pig Nash
                Oh my god, I agree completely with Jermaniac. There is no emoticon to describe my emotions.
                High five my friend

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Thoughts on the trade

                  Play Mafia!
                  Twitter

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Thoughts on the trade

                    Hey guys,
                    first off congratulations on finaly ending the saga. i am from La and get to see the kings quite a bit. I really think you guys got hosed!!! Artest by far a superiordefender, He aslo has better offensive game. I am a Laker fan obviously and i am not saying we had a better offer. What i am saying is its hard to believe walsh waited this long to do a deal, and this is what it ends up to be. Peja 3 years ago was a good deal, peja today is a player on the downslope of his career with nothing to give to you guys but a jump shot he is averaging about 16 per this year. Anyway good luck but I really think Sac town got the better end of this deal.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Thoughts on the trade

                      Originally posted by purplengoldjonez
                      Hey guys,
                      first off congratulations on finaly ending the saga. i am from La and get to see the kings quite a bit. I really think you guys got hosed!!! Artest by far a superiordefender, He aslo has better offensive game. I am a Laker fan obviously and i am not saying we had a better offer. What i am saying is its hard to believe walsh waited this long to do a deal, and this is what it ends up to be. Peja 3 years ago was a good deal, peja today is a player on the downslope of his career with nothing to give to you guys but a jump shot he is averaging about 16 per this year. Anyway good luck but I really think Sac town got the better end of this deal.
                      Short term...its hard to tell......long term.....you're probably right. It was becoming very apparent that this whole trade situation was decaying the very fabric of the team. In terms of why it dragged on this long is beyond me....but not knowing whether a player would be moved the next day was causing a problem for the team as a whole. This doesn't even take into account what toll it took on Pacer fans ( like us ).

                      All of us....players and fans alike...had to simply move on.

                      This deal for Artest for Peja....despite it not being the optimal choice in the opinion of the members here at PD....is infinitely better then anything the Lakers could have offered us IF it is true that the Lakers did not want to part with either Bynum or Odom. I may not like getting Peja...but I would have taken him before taking on Kwame+George for Artest+Croshere/Foster.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Thoughts on the trade

                        Originally posted by purplengoldjonez
                        Anyway good luck but I really think Sac town got the better end of this deal.
                        Today? Perhaps.

                        But when Ron goes "Tru Warier" on them it sure won't seem that way.
                        "I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
                        -Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Thoughts on the trade

                          Originally posted by purplengoldjonez
                          Hey guys,
                          first off congratulations on finaly ending the saga. i am from La and get to see the kings quite a bit. I really think you guys got hosed!!! Artest by far a superiordefender, He aslo has better offensive game. I am a Laker fan obviously and i am not saying we had a better offer. What i am saying is its hard to believe walsh waited this long to do a deal, and this is what it ends up to be. Peja 3 years ago was a good deal, peja today is a player on the downslope of his career with nothing to give to you guys but a jump shot he is averaging about 16 per this year. Anyway good luck but I really think Sac town got the better end of this deal.
                          Any team would have got a better deal talent wise. HOwever, if
                          he turns around and chokes Kobe with his big toe then your going
                          to have to come back and tell us we got hosed.

                          This trade in no way puts use back at the number 2 spot in the East.
                          It may put us back into the playoffs but some more trades need
                          to be done because Jax is going pop a blood vessel over this.
                          This trade will either make or break RC.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Thoughts on the trade

                            If this is true... .

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Thoughts on the trade

                              I wish we would of got Kwame instead of Peja, so I could become a Laker fan.
                              *removed* Just keep politics and religion completely out of it, please.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X