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

Rumblings at Conseco today?

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 6
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 template Next
  • #1

    Rumblings at Conseco today?

    Found this on the RATS board, interesting stuff if there is any truth to it-
    http://www2.indystar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=137003

    From Pacer35

    "I talked to an associate of mine who works for the Pacer Orgainization yesterday. I debated on putting this on the message board from then to now as I'm not really sure what to make of it. The associate of mine has been with the Pacers for over 25 years and is not a vendor or a rent a worker he actually on the Pacers payroll.

    To make a long story as short as possible, there were multiple player meetings in the upper offices at Conseco. Why is this important? Because the associate who told me said that that is the first time players were going up to talk to "suits" other than just Donnie and Larry or whomever was in charge of player personel. I do know that Jermaine was in these meetings (could have been to discuss the groin tear) and David Harrison for sure. The rest off the players I will not name because I'm not really sure if thats right. (to name them at this time).

    My associate also said that there was a margin of urgency that he could see and feel about the upper offices as there were many "suits" that he had never seen there before today. Some he was sure were lawyers, and maybe a couple of player and/or managment agents.

    My friend also was under the impression thatthe dealing isn't over yet for the Pacers. The only player he said that had a margin of security was Tinsley because of him being BYC. His value is in the summer to be moved.

    These are just speculation of rumblings that have been heard throughout the Pacer empire...That the pacers and the nuggets are tryig to hook up for a Stephen Jackson & Antony Johnson going for Andre Miller & a draft pick.

    One other rumbling was Scott Pollard & Fred Jones going to the Lakers for Devon George, Aaron McKie and Brian Cook.

    Mind you that these are just things being passed around, and I'm trying to be very serious here and not punk anyone. I'm not saying that this is what is happining, I'm just saying these are items being thrown around."

    *ADDED THE REST OF PACER35'S POSTS*
    "Man, I'm just like Ron-Ron, Bi-Polar...........

    The thing about all of this is that players have never come up to the main offices or conference rooms for meetings. There was also some dicussion about the Bender retirement thing moving forward, as his contract, much like Terrell Brandons could be added to any deal as a sweetner. Thats a 7 million dollar sweetner.

    The other thing is that how can you not make other moves to show Peja that the Franchise wants hime here. I also was told that the european movement is a carefully planned construction. The Pacer brass (namely Bird) wants players who understand the fundamentals. Pass-Defend & shoot and not crossover, crossover and throw the ball away or gamble for steals as your defense.

    One other thing, DOnnie is still running the show. He has to sign off on any deal. Larry Bird still really has no clue as to what he really is supposed to be doing. His opinion and contacts is all the PAcers are requiring from him....he has no idea of how to negotiate with other GM's throughout the league.

    I forgot to add one more trade rumbling that the Pacers are trying very hard to obtain Mickael Pietrus from Golden State for Fred Jones...again this is heresay, but would work according to the CBA.

    I will be calling my friend early next week to find out if anything else is about to happen, if it already hasn't."

    "Tinsley isn't going anywhere until this summer as the Pacers can only get back half of his salary since he's BYC. I also know that the Pacers for whatever reason do not want David Wesley or Moochie Norris regardless of their contarct status.

    I also do know that the Rick Carlise stepping down has not even been a topic for discussion. The Pacers want Rick long term...and feel like he is going to be the coach for a number of years. If anything look for one of the assistants to step down or away.

    Stephen Jackson is happy being with the Pacers, but is having a problem with Ricks system, actually the same problem that Ron-Ron was having. But that is yesterdays news as the offense I do know for a fact is being revamped or is going back to what we ran when Reggie was still here.

    Finally If any of you have paid any attention to the job Donnie has done around here for the last 20 years do you actually think he will walk away from the franchise in the "shape" that its in right now......Things and moves are going to happen, we might just have to wait to right after the All star break when the GMs are meeting.

    Say what you will, changes are coming and we will all be VERY happy with them, and yes, maybe I do know something that I can't tell...."

    "In all fairness to Harrison, heres a big "kid" who is trying to compete with men. Yes, he's a little soft when it comes to knowing positon and a little over zealous when it comes to guarding someone.

    But he is 7' and 285lbs and thats not something you can teach. What the PAcers will be doing in the off season is the same thing thatthey did with Rik Smits. They will send HArrison to the "over rated" big mans camp and then bring in Bill Walton to work with this kid on his positioning and passing skills. The kid can score, he just needs to refine his all around game.

    Before the end of the season the light will come on in Grangers head, and he won't be getting these crazy ticky tack fouls and busted in the mouth everytime he turns around. This kid is a rare talent, he just needs seasoning.

    One other thing about trading the stars...

    Wilt was traded.......
    Kareem was traded.........
    Shaq was traded
    Barkley was traded........
    Pippen was traded........
    Drexler was traded.........

    Michael and the Mailman didn't finish their careers with the teams that drafted them...

    ANYONE CAN BE TRADED no matter what owners say!

    Garnett will get tired sooner or later, my bet is sooner. Wouldn't you like to see a Garnett for Jermaine and a player to be named later."

    "I don't think the meetings were of trade nature, that would be one on one with agents in hand in Donnies office.

    I do think that players were brought in to talk about "things", to get a happier, hands on approach with the indiviual you might say.

    Larry is always there, he's constantly asking Donnie, do you take sweet in low in this? Who should cater this? And the most important...Did you pay the valet in the corporate restroom?

    To which Donnie replies... "What Valet"?

    There are issues on this team that have not been brought up and I think that this is a way to get it out in the open and move past it. Ron kind of did leave this team split on a lot of different fronts. Where on the court Ron would make certain players look really good and keepers (as long as Ron was here), now you have to look at moving them....did someone say Tinsley??? no, that wasn't me...."
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Rumblings at Conseco today?

    Stephen Jackson & Antony Johnson going for Andre Miller & a draft pick.
    YES!

    Scott Pollard & Fred Jones going to the Lakers for Devon George, Aaron McKie and Brian Cook.
    NO!

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Rumblings at Conseco today?

      Yes that is interesting. I thought someone has mentioned in the past that Pacer35 is Da Smash from the old RATS core. If that's right then what is posted is not BS. Smash knew some people on the inside.....
      You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Rumblings at Conseco today?

        Andre Miller and draft pick sounds good but I don't want Cook, George and McKie.

        If we get Miller then we'll have Tinsley, Miller, Jasikevicious (sp?) and Gill at PG

        If we do these trades and Tinsley goes up on the block this summer then we should be trading him for a SG if at all possible.

        Does McKie have an expiring contract because no way we see him as our starter at SG. We're losing our starting and backup SG and only getting McKie at the position. I think we all know what the Pacers need in the draft if those deals occur.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Rumblings at Conseco today?

          Yes to Miller/Draft Pick

          No to the Lakers deal.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Rumblings at Conseco today?

            The ONLY problem with the Nuggets trade would be that we'd have a serious problem at the 2/3 spots. We'd have Peja, Danger, and Freddie. That's it. I really don't want to see Runi at the 2 again.

            If we keep Fred and make a move for another SG or SF (preferrably SG), we should be okay.

            This is it, folks. Time to rebuild.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Rumblings at Conseco today?

              Originally posted by JBones19
              Found this on the RATS board, interesting stuff if there is any truth to it-
              http://www2.indystar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=137003

              From Pacer35

              ... I do know that Jermaine was in these meetings (could have been to discuss the groin tear) and David Harrison for sure. The rest off the players I will not name because I'm not really sure if thats right. (to name them at this time)....

              -J
              So he can name JO and Harrison, but isn't sure if it is right to name the others? That doesn't make sense to me. What am I missing?

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Rumblings at Conseco today?

                Originally posted by RWB
                Yes that is interesting. I thought someone has mentioned in the past that Pacer35 is Da Smash from the old RATS core. If that's right then what is posted is not BS. Smash knew some people on the inside.....

                You are correct.
                Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Rumblings at Conseco today?

                  Originally posted by Tom White
                  So he can name JO and Harrison, but isn't sure if it is right to name the others? That doesn't make sense to me. What am I missing?
                  JO was just due to his injury (no way he's being traded) and Harrison is well liked it seems by management so I wouldn't think he's on the trading block either.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Rumblings at Conseco today?

                    Originally posted by Tom White
                    So he can name JO and Harrison, but isn't sure if it is right to name the others? That doesn't make sense to me. What am I missing?
                    Yeah...that's wierd.....JO ( just like Tinsley ) I can see is okay to name simply cuz I think he's unmoveable for the foreseeable near future ( meaning after this season is done ).

                    But to name Harrison and not anyone else?

                    I would think that it would make sense to not name Harrison at all.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Rumblings at Conseco today?

                      I'm assuming the Denver pick is first round? Given they're doing pretty well and will get the 3rd seed in the west if they stay in that order, their first round pick will be pretty low. Probably lower than our pick. Still, 2 first rounders are always useful.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Rumblings at Conseco today?

                        The Denver trade would be great.

                        If the organization is convinced that Fred Jones will walk, I don't see the harm in the Laker trade either, at least from the perspective of next year. I'm in next year mode already.

                        2 years of Brian Cook (a servicable young backup PF) at a cheap price and one year of the perpetually injured McKie (can be be bought out?) is better than nothing.
                        The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Rumblings at Conseco today?

                          Originally posted by pacertom
                          The Denver trade would be great.

                          If the organization is convinced that Fred Jones will walk, I don't see the harm in the Laker trade either, at least from the perspective of next year. I'm in next year mode already.

                          2 years of Brian Cook at a cheap price and one year of the perpetually injured McKie (can be be bought out?) is better than nothing.
                          No it isn't. I'd rather have Freddie walk than another leech.

                          All 3 of those players suck, and I'd rather not give Rick the opportunity to play any of them significant minutes.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Rumblings at Conseco today?

                            Originally posted by JBones19
                            My friend also was under the impression thatthe dealing isn't over yet for the Pacers. The only player he said that had a margin of security was Tinsley because of him being BYC. His value is in the summer to be moved.
                            Tinsly's value may be in the dumper, but if the Pacers wanted to clean house they could easily trade Tinsley. The new 125 percent differential allowable in trades has made it much easier to trade BYC players.

                            These are just speculation of rumblings that have been heard throughout the Pacer empire...That the pacers and the nuggets are tryig to hook up for a Stephen Jackson & Antony Johnson going for Andre Miller & a draft pick.
                            I wouldn't need the draft pick - but wouldn't do the deal unless Tins was also going somewhere else. Is it supposed to help chemistry by having Jamaal and Andre on the same team?

                            One other rumbling was Scott Pollard & Fred Jones going to the Lakers for Devon George, Aaron McKie and Brian Cook.
                            The difficulty in re-signing Fred we are likely to face and the need for help at power forward make that a trade worth thinking about doing, if it's offered.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Rumblings at Conseco today?

                              I would suggest you go read the entire thread over there. Unless you are used to talking with him do not interact with him. He does not suffer fools well.

                              I suggest lurking the thread.
                              Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 template Next
                              Working...
                              X