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

Orlando Sentinel} Big Ben's Piston time may be up

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

  • Orlando Sentinel} Big Ben's Piston time may be up

    Big Ben's Piston time may be up
    Published June 4, 2006



    MIAMI -- There is a reason -- a good reason -- Ben Wallace recently hired high-powered agent Arn Tellem to represent him this summer in free agency.

    Wallace wants to find his true worth.

    And surprisingly, the Detroit Pistons might not be the team to provide that opportunity.

    In a league struggling to find enough decent centers and with teams dying to build a championship contender, someone will be willing to break the bank for Wallace.

    Wallace might be a four-time Defensive Player of the Year, hailed as the anchor to the amazing run the Pistons have made in the past three seasons, but there is nothing certain about his re-signing in Detroit.

    For a guy who never was drafted, signed for the minimum with the Washington Wizards, was traded to the Orlando Magic for Ike Austin and later found fame and fortune in Detroit, the world doesn't always turn smoothly.

    "Nothing in this league is automatic,'' Wallace said last week in Miami when asked about his pending free agency. "I was never supposed to leave Washington. I was supposed to retire in Orlando.

    "Strange things happen. It's not automatic [that he will re-sign in Detroit]. You just never know what might happen.''


    The Pistons and the city of Detroit love Wallace and his blue-collar work ethic -- he has become a folk hero there -- but is it wise for the Pistons to give him one of those maximum contracts (six years, $132 million)?

    Is it wise to commit so much to a player who is not involved in the offense, who relies so much on pure athleticism and whose athleticism will start diminishing soon (he turns 32 in September)?

    It's a quandary the Pistons will face July 1 when he officially becomes a free agent.

    Yet he is the only star among a generally weak free-agent crop, making him an attractive alternative this summer for anyone with major room under the salary cap.

    Only the Chicago Bulls, Atlanta Hawks, Toronto Raptors and Charlotte Bobcats would be able to clear enough space to afford him, but others could acquire him with a sign-and-trade deal, which might interest the Pistons.
    "You have to listen to hear what opportunities are out there,'' Wallace said. "You have to weigh your options.

    "And it's not always just about money. It's about having the opportunity to do what you're comfortable doing.''


    Imagine what the centerless Bulls and Coach Scott Skiles could do if they signed Wallace, putting him in the midst of all their young, talented perimeter players. They might be playing next season in the NBA Finals.

    Atlanta will find him attractive, too, bringing Wallace back toward his roots in Alabama, where his family can see him shine every game, where he could anchor a budding team.

    And what better way for Toronto to regain its NBA luster than by putting Wallace between young forwards Chris Bosh and Charlie Villanueva.

    Either way, Wallace has found himself in a very enviable situation, but the Pistons are in a sticky one.

    Wallace just completed the six-year, $30 million contract he signed when he left the Magic, but this summer, he will sign another contract that could be three times as large.

    Like many that win championships or contend seriously, the salary structure of the Pistons is changing rapidly. By keeping Wallace, they almost certainly will be paying the luxury tax for many years.

    Not only that, the contract of point guard Chauncey Billups will be up for renewal after the upcoming season or the one after that.


    Re-signing Wallace, at his price, isn't as certain as it would be if this was just a basketball decision.

    It was a brilliant decision for the Pistons to have him the past six seasons -- prime years of his wonderful career.

    It might not be the same with the next six years.
    Orlando Sentinel

    Why Not Us ?


  • #2
    Re: Orlando Sentinel} Big Ben's Piston time may be up

    It'll likely be a sign-and-trade if Ben leaves, and Dumars has hinted that he's guarenteed to Ben that he'll make as much as he can get, which leads me to believe that if it isn't with us, Dumars will write a big deal out to Ben himself and ship him off to a team more willing to pay it.

    And I really don't think Chicago will pay Ben to team with chandler for the most expensive 10ppg frontcourt in history. I think their interest in him died when they gave chandler to do the same job they'd be asking ben to do. They'd be paying 150 million to two guys to do the exact same job.

    I'd love for Ben to be a Piston for life, but I'm also realistic.

    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Orlando Sentinel} Big Ben's Piston time may be up

      If those teams are in the bidding for Big Ben, then they won't be in the bidding for Peja.

      Works for me.
      This space for rent.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Orlando Sentinel} Big Ben's Piston time may be up

        Originally posted by Kstat
        It'll likely be a sign-an-trad eif Ben leaves, and Dumars has inted that he's guarenteed ben that he'll make as mucha s he can get, which leads me to believe that if it isnt with us, Dumars will write a big deal out to Ben himself and ship him off to a team more willing to pay it.
        Wow, that's by far the least readable post Kstat's ever written.

        This space for rent.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Orlando Sentinel} Big Ben's Piston time may be up

          Originally posted by Anthem
          Wow, that's by far the least readable post Kstat's ever written.

          It's my last day on the bottle, I swear.....

          It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

          Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
          Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
          NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Orlando Sentinel} Big Ben's Piston time may be up

            maximum contracts (six years, $132 million)

            Almost 32.....

            Nahhhhhh

            3 years @ 10-15 mill each and thats all Ben baby and thats a big iff

            four-time Defensive Player of the Year

            Surely that says more about the league the Wallace and no disrepect is intended

            I doubt Dumas will commit, he has worked hard to get this team working well and working under or near the cap

            Back to the age old question... is the money worth it to Ben and how much is Ben worth to any given team
            Ya Think Ya Used Enough Dynamite there Butch...

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Orlando Sentinel} Big Ben's Piston time may be up

              Originally posted by GO!!!!!

              Back to the age old question... is the money worth it to Ben and how much is Ben worth to any given team
              Ben's achieved more than any player of his beginnings has in NBA history.

              If Ben feels that he deserves a serious raise, god bless him. He's more than earned it.

              Don't forget ben could have opted out of his cheap conrtact 2 years ago and chose to honor it. He could have held us hostage for a king's ransom. Now its time for him to get paid.

              I don't want to lose Ben, but if he leaves because another team offers him more money, he's earned my blessing.

              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Orlando Sentinel} Big Ben's Piston time may be up

                Originally posted by Kstat
                It's my last day on the bottle, I swear.....
                Looks like you chose the wrong day to quit drinking...

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Orlando Sentinel} Big Ben's Piston time may be up

                  My first thought was, "would you be against bringing him to Indiana?"

                  Then I read that he'll get a estimated $132 mil and my second thought was something along the lines of "no way!"
                  It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Orlando Sentinel} Big Ben's Piston time may be up

                    Originally posted by pizza guy
                    My first thought was, "would you be against bringing him to Indiana?"

                    Then I read that he'll get a estimated $132 mil and my second thought was something along the lines of "no way!"

                    If Ben doesnt go to Detroit, he'll be going to a place both Ben and Joe will agree on, because it'll be for a lot more than the MLE. Chicago probably wont give ben what he wants, and its doubtful he wants to go to a lottery team.

                    Toronto might be an option, but with Bosh's impending max deal? They may be scared of locking too many guys up to huge contracts.

                    It's highly doubtful that ben will get 6 years and 132, but 4 years and $90 might be possible.

                    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Orlando Sentinel} Big Ben's Piston time may be up

                      that's even worse, on a per year basis. of course, it doesn't work like that, so...

                      either way, more $$ than I'd want to spend on him.
                      It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Orlando Sentinel} Big Ben's Piston time may be up

                        Originally posted by pizza guy
                        that's even worse, on a per year basis. of course, it doesn't work like that, so...

                        either way, more $$ than I'd want to spend on him.
                        Most people would agree with you.

                        But all it takes is one GM to think he's the missing piece to a championship, be it sacramento, the clippers, whatever.

                        Frankly I'd love to have Ben back at $8-9 million per season, but that might be a pipe dream.

                        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Orlando Sentinel} Big Ben's Piston time may be up

                          haha sacramento....imagine the headlines

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Orlando Sentinel} Big Ben's Piston time may be up

                            Originally posted by BigDawg44
                            haha sacramento....imagine the headlines
                            I'd pay money to see Ben and ROn on the same team....

                            It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                            Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                            Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                            NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Orlando Sentinel} Big Ben's Piston time may be up

                              I think Detroit will find a way to keep him for way less than the max. He'll prolly get a 4 year deal for around 75 mill.
                              STARBURY

                              08 and Beyond

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X