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 Peja deal fell through, G. State was ready to increase their offer

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

  • If Peja deal fell through, G. State was ready to increase their offer

    This makes me sick, sick to my stomach. Remember those rumors that came out Tuesday night about a half hour after the Peja deal fell through. Well if you believe Vescey, the Warriors were ready to increase their offer. Greg Rakestraw mentioned this Tuesday night also.

    I would much, much, much rather have Diogu and Dunleavy right now than Peja. That is what the Warriors were going to offer, and that is what the Pacers had demanded.

    I think I'm going to get sick


    http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/pfriendly_new.php


    STINGING INDICTMENT
    By PETER VECSEY

    CONGRATULATIONS to Chris Andersen for becoming the first Developmental League player banned from the NBA for substance abuse. He's also the first since Stanley Roberts (Class of '99) to be deported for getting caught with drugs in his system, and we're not talking about marijuana, we're talking a killer drug — heroin, cocaine, amphetamines, something like that.

    By rule, the Hornets' hippie is expelled for at least two seasons. However, the league office can show leniency if it's determined Andersen used the drugs because Kendra Davis may have been in danger.

    A Warriors' baller claims Baron Davis rarely does anything asked of him by Mike Montgomery. His improvised playbook often excludes everyone except Jason Richardson and himself. That, in some measure, explains Golden State's uninspiring 19-23 record. Another determining factor, notes another source, is the college coach's incapacity to relate to pro players, or even remember their names in some cases. Montgomery appears on course to become the league's next head coaching casualty. Not to be outdone by his not-quite-namesake, Isaiah Rider was arrested by Marin (Calif.) County police Thursday and charged with kidnapping and battery.

    Seems our old friend J(ust) R(eleased) was arguing with an unidentified female acquaintance and drove off with her, without getting her expressed written consent. Proud owner of an outstanding Alameda (Calif..) County warrant for resisting arrest, Rider was indeed released on $2 million bail. Rider, who last played in the league for the Nuggets in '01, appeared in court Friday without entering a plea or a lawyer. He also had community-oriented time with the Timberwolves, Trail Blazers, Hawks and Lakers.

    By my count, Rider remains the only player to conclude his career averaging double figures in the all-important three P's: points, pot and possession of stolen goods.

    This just in: Isiah Thomas thanked Hillary for standing behind him.

    I find it amusing there wasn't so much as a peep out of Shaq following the Heat's home surrender to the Suns, a mismatch that saw him get a mere 11 field- goal attempts as well as a merger four free-throw tries.

    While recognizing Phoenix had two dwarfs alongside the 7-story O'Neal most of the evening, and its strategy was to challenge Dwayne Wade and Udonis Haslem to beat the Suns from outside, you know damn well had Stan Van Gundy been coaching instead of you-know-who, Shaq's Squaw Box would still be pulsating off the hook.



    A half-hour after the Ron Artest-Peja Stojakovic trade fell apart Tuesday, the Pacers and Warriors reconnected and vowed to get something done the next day if Sacramento terminated the deal altogether.

    Despite being unable to get anybody from St. John's or Indiana to recommend Artest ("T.O. times three," is how an ex-Pacer brands him) sources say Golden State boss Chris Mullin was prepared to take the gamble. His only requirement was to meet with Artest one-on-one before meeting the Pacers' demand for Ike Diogu, Mike Dunleavy or Troy Murphy in a four-player package.


    Artest should fit in very well in Sacramento (as long as Mike Bibby includes him in the offense; Peja was often left out and he wasn't alone). Coupled with the governor, that's two people in the capital no one understands.

    Before we go, let's give props to last Tuesday's under-the-radar round-up (domestic violence) of former Knick and current Sixer Lee Nailon.

    According to my calculations, Nailon has been in the league six seasons and it's the first charge he's taken.

    Nailon was arrested by police in Lower Merion, Pa., where Kobe went to high school. Symmetry — it's a wonderful thing.

    And what of those bounced Babcocks? A scant one day after the Raptors relieved GM Rob of his responsibilities, Player Personnel man Pete was also shown the showers.

    Fascinatingly, the reason management gave when Rob Babcock was booted ("We never should have hired someone with such limited experience") was the same fresh-faced logic used when he was first given the gig.

    Apparently, after 18 months of working with Rob, CEO Richard Peddie concluded Rob didn't have the leadership skills to lead a basketball operations department or credibility around the league to advance the team beyond where it is currently.

    Once ownership established Rob would be fired, it felt it'd be disingenuous to keep him around until the end of the season when he could seek employment with another team's staff.

    "Decisions regarding Jalen Rose, Mike James, perhaps others and first round draft picks, need to be made now (while the Knicks remain interested).

    "The feeling was that Rob's not the best guy to be making them," a Toronto source stated, underlining Peddie's confidence in interim GM Wayne Embry, whose experience is vast.

    Another motive behind the timing is to make it known around the league the Raptors' vacancy will be there when other GMs are considering their own futures — Nuggets executive Kiki Vandeweghe, for example — when they weigh their options come May, June and July.

    In an unrelated matter, Detroit Red Wings coach Mike Babcock, despite the best record in the NHL's western conference, has legally changed his last name.

    peter.vecsey@nypost.com

  • #2
    Re: If Peja deal fell through, G. State was ready to increase their offer

    I'm calling BS on Vecsey. In any case, I think that Donnie would have sat him for the year out of principle if the Sacramento deal did not go through.
    Slug 'em Sabres!!!!!
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=cj1SUF4wzu0

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: If Peja deal fell through, G. State was ready to increase their offer

      Too vague to get worked up over. They had lots of time to make a decent offer. Maybe with Diogu in there they would have wanted Granger too, or multiple future #1 picks.

      I'm happy it's over.
      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


      • #4
        Re: If Peja deal fell through, G. State was ready to increase their offer

        i like the 1 for 1 deal. if pedja doesnt pan out he leaves.
        1 - 2, Tinsley's coming for you.
        3 - 4, You're not a team no more.
        5 - 6, He's gonna plead the 5th.
        7 - 8, He's gonna stay out late.



        Comment


        • #5
          Re: If Peja deal fell through, G. State was ready to increase their offer

          Originally posted by FrenchConnection
          I'm calling BS on Vecsey. In any case, I think that Donnie would have sat him for the year out of principle if the Sacramento deal did not go through.
          Vecsey is pretty accurate when it comes to the Pacers...

          Also, it is foolish to believe Artest would have been sat down just for principle, business is business. IMHO, the Pacers would have dealt Artest for 3 bags of crap by time the deadline got here.
          ...Still "flying casual"
          @roaminggnome74

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: If Peja deal fell through, G. State was ready to increase their offer

            We would also have had the horrible contract of either Dunleavy Jr. or Murphy not too mention atleast one of our other contracts would have to be send to the Warriors aswell and I figure it would not have been Eddie Gill.

            Diogu is great, but I think we made the right move in the end.

            Regards,

            Mourning
            2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

            2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

            2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: If Peja deal fell through, G. State was ready to increase their offer

              Originally posted by Unclebuck
              This makes me sick, sick to my stomach.
              No reason for that. We didn't need either Murphy or Dunleavy's contract, even if Diogu had been made available.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: If Peja deal fell through, G. State was ready to increase their offer

                It's easy to say to your fans you would have re-entered the fray after the deal is already old news.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: If Peja deal fell through, G. State was ready to increase their offer

                  Originally posted by FrenchConnection
                  I'm calling BS on Vecsey. In any case, I think that Donnie would have sat him for the year out of principle if the Sacramento deal did not go through.
                  You can call BS if you want but Vescey called the Peja trade talks before anyone else caught wind of it.

                  I hate the condescending SOB but I tend to believe him on this.
                  The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: If Peja deal fell through, G. State was ready to increase their offer

                    Depends on which fours players would've been involved. In order to get Diogu, certainly the Warriors would've both wanted another of our starters or promising young players PLUS required us to take back a bad contract.

                    I don't doubt the truth in what Vescey's saying - I just doubt whether it would've been the better deal. Can Peja play at least one game before we call this mystery trade a better one? Better still, can we wait until after this summer's transactions to see what the Peja trade did for this team (e.g., resigned, S&T, nothing) before closing the book?
                    "I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
                    -Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: If Peja deal fell through, G. State was ready to increase their offer

                      Ike (untouchable)Diogu is averaging 6.6 ppg currently , when he was rumored as being the Pacers target he was averaging 7.6 ppg, sorry the guy is a undersized pf at 6'7 1/2 , to me the Elton Brand comparisons are not accurate. At best Diogu is more along the lines of Wayman Tisdale a good but nothing special player.

                      Mike Dunleavy's deal to me is the reason the trade never happened. As far as Diogu ever even being offered , who knows.

                      If thats a big IF , Peja Stojakovic returns to form and resigns here , the Pacers made a better trade . I think we'll see Peja return closer to his form , interesting to note Larry Bird , himself wants to work with Peja on parts of his game. Does not sound as if Larry thinks this is a half season rental.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: If Peja deal fell through, G. State was ready to increase their offer

                        So Diogu wasn't untouchable ..... why am I not surprised?

                        That said, I'm relieved it's over and no other player was attached to Artest - for their sake!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: If Peja deal fell through, G. State was ready to increase their offer

                          Eh, Donnie and Vescey do the dance. Donnie could have very well been using Vescey to try and keep interest alive if the Kings deal fell through.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: If Peja deal fell through, G. State was ready to increase their offer

                            Originally posted by DisplacedKnick
                            You can call BS if you want but Vescey called the Peja trade talks before anyone else caught wind of it.

                            I hate the condescending SOB but I tend to believe him on this.
                            I've never had a problem with how Vescey comes off. His opinions are just that. Atleast he knows a little something about basketball.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: If Peja deal fell through, G. State was ready to increase their offer

                              Hands down, I'd rather have Pietrus/Diogu than Peja.
                              This space for rent.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X