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

Star: Pacers to sign Snap Hunter

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

  • #16
    Re: Star: Pacers to sign Snap Hunter

    Originally posted by Anthem
    I still think it makes sense to trade for MoPete.
    You would have to think that Fred and Anthony Parker would take his spot on the Raptors, so he should be available. Although MoPete could play the 3 and they are not as loaded at that spot as they are at the 2.
    Slug 'em Sabres!!!!!
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=cj1SUF4wzu0

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Star: Pacers to sign Snap Hunter

      I predict a Jack/Williams package to be sent away soon after Al gets here
      Read my Pacers blog:
      8points9seconds.com

      Follow my twitter:

      @8pts9secs

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Star: Pacers to sign Snap Hunter

        OMFG, another point guard!?!? There has to be another deal on the horizon. Has there ever been an NBA team that had half their roster consisting entirely of point guards (without having one that's a true consistent starter)? I know everyone is rooting for Snap because he is the underdog with such a great attitude but this is getting ridiculous.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Star: Pacers to sign Snap Hunter

          Originally posted by FrenchConnection
          You would have to think that Fred and Anthony Parker would take his spot on the Raptors, so he should be available. Although MoPete could play the 3 and they are not as loaded at that spot as they are at the 2.
          He's a better 2 than 3. Surely Steven Jackson would be great in that role?
          This space for rent.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Star: Pacers to sign Snap Hunter

            Originally posted by jjbjjbjjb
            http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...TS04/607310379


            "I like our perimeter players now," he said. "We have a lot of them and they're all different than what we had before. They're long and athletic, and they can defend."
            This strikes me as really wierd. Except for swapping out AJ and Jones for MD, we have exactly the same perimeter that we had before. We have the same projected starters in Tinsley and Jackson. Maybe Tinsley is going to grow a few inches and come back lightning fast.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Star: Pacers to sign Snap Hunter

              Originally posted by JayRedd
              I predict a Jack/Williams package to be sent away soon after Al gets here
              I've seen that said a couple times now, and I don't get it. Bird was very high on Williams, and picked him when several other good players were on the board. If we didn't want him, why'd we pick him?

              EDIT: Just saw MSA's post below mine. If we're going to trade one of our two rookies, I'd rather trade Williams than White.
              This space for rent.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Star: Pacers to sign Snap Hunter

                Darrell Armstrong
                Maceo Baston
                Marquis Daniels
                Jeff Foster
                Eddie Gill (FA)
                Danny Granger
                Orien Greene
                David Harrison
                Stephen Jackson
                Sarunas Jasikevicius
                Rawle Marshall
                Jermaine O'Neal
                Scot Pollard (FA)
                Josh Powell
                Jamaal Tinsley
                James White
                Shawne Williams
                Al Harrington
                John Edwards
                + Snap Hunter
                20
                - Eddie Gill (already gone)
                - Scot Pollard (back problems won't allow him to run with the new offense, so he's out)
                - Stephen Jackson (in trade)
                - James White (in trade with Jackson)
                - Josh Powell [in trade with Marshall for draft pick(s)]
                - Rawle Marshall [in trade with Powell for draft pick(s)]

                14
                + Player (in trade of Jackson/White)
                15

                I can't see Stephen staying any more, seeing as how we have seemingly gone with Jamaal for the long run. I chose James White to package with him because of his already showing temper with referees/Adam M., however mild and/or misjudged that is. Plus, there is no real attachment to him yet. I could see Orien Greene in his place for the same reason, but I doubt we'd sign a player just to trade him...But stranger things have happened, right?

                I think Donnie's feelings about Josh/Rawle are true; however, he's the CEO while Larry is the GM. Larry may not share the same feelings about those two. And, besides, someone has to go in some trade(s). Donnie is mentioning how much he likes those two players, thus keeping their trade value afloat. That's my speculation. I could also envision a Jackson/White/Josh or Rawle trade for draft picks, thereby holding onto one of the new Mavericks young guys.

                Then again, I'm MSA2CF. Just tossing some ideas out there...

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Star: Pacers to sign Snap Hunter

                  Originally posted by Tyrion
                  This strikes me as really wierd. Except for swapping out AJ and Jones for MD, we have exactly the same perimeter that we had before. We have the same projected starters in Tinsley and Jackson. Maybe Tinsley is going to grow a few inches and come back lightning fast.
                  I think he's including SF.
                  This space for rent.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Star: Pacers to sign Snap Hunter

                    Originally posted by JayRedd
                    I predict a Jack/Williams package to be sent away soon after Al gets here
                    Early on I had the feeling White may be used as a "buffer" to add in with Jackson or Tinsley, now I think Williams could be that player.

                    I think White is here to stay. Very little mention of all regarding Williams lately, especially from Walsh or Bird, perhaps not but that is just my feeling as well right now.

                    Why Not Us ?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Star: Pacers to sign Snap Hunter

                      Originally posted by Will Galen
                      You forgot Maceo Baston too. We can't keep track of the team without a scorecard! (Grin)

                      Thanking about it some more it's obvious that Bird and Walsh have some trades already in mind that they think they can do or they wouldn't be signing all these guys.

                      That would no doubt mean that we are going to do a two for one trade. Three for one being unlikely when you consider the contracts of the guys we still have and want to trade are 5 to 7 million.

                      An example of a three for one we could do is Jackson, Tinsley, and Williams for Francis. (Yeah I know some wouldn't want to do that, this is an example) Isiah was interested in Williams before we drafted him. I don't remember how long we have to keep Williams before we can trade him though.

                      I looked it up, you can trade a draft pick 30 days after he has signed a contract. That would mean we could trade White ot Williams Aug 5 since they both signed July 6.

                      We have these players we haven't traded-

                      JO...........Both Bird and Walsh have said we aren't trading Him.
                      Granger....No way. He's to good and cheap.
                      Harrison...No way. Centers take time and he's coming along.
                      Jackson...Most likely.
                      Foster.....Only if we get a big man back.
                      Tinsley....Probably not unless it was for Francis in my example.
                      Saras......Was available and almost traded, not likely now but still possible.

                      Plus there is talk about wanting more players. Quote; "They're also hoping to add a center or power forward and perhaps a perimeter shooter."

                      Al, and Pollard, unless we get Edwards and keep him, and a shooter.

                      Now lets look at the line up again using my example.

                      JO / Hulk / Pollard or Edwards
                      Al / Baston / Foster / Powell
                      Granger / White /
                      Daniels / Marshall / Snap
                      Francis / Saras / Armstrong / Greene

                      That's 16 players without adding a shooter. Francies was just an example I was using, I don't think they will trade for him. But even if they made a three for one trade like that I don't see how they are going to get the roster down with out cutting guys.
                      See this is my thinking, too. (see bold.) Everyone's trying to figure out our roster, but I think it's extremely premature. I am positive, management has one huge trade coming just before the season.

                      And what are we stocking up on?: PGs. I think PGs are the most sought after, valuable commodity out there and pretty much the coin of the realm. Look how many teams aren't established at PG. Look at the Sixers (Iverson and Ollie?), Warriors (Baron-injured as much as Tinsley-Davis, and Monta Ellis), Lakers (Smush Parker(?) and a bunch of unknowns), Kings (Bibby and a couple of weak sisters), Sonics (Rinour and Watson. That's it.) Utah (Deron and Derrick Fisher)...it goes on and on.

                      Some teams still have gaping holes. I know from ClutchFans forum that their fans are DYING for a PF. And look at what we have to offer. Same thing with Utah. I think we're setting ourselves very nicely to offer Stephen Jackson + promising guys. At least, I hope that's what happens.
                      Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Star: Pacers to sign Snap Hunter

                        Originally posted by Anthem
                        I still think it makes sense to trade for MoPete.


                        If that happened I might actually watch the Pacers.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Star: Pacers to sign Snap Hunter

                          Originally posted by Frank Slade
                          Early on I had the feeling White may be used as a "buffer" to add in with Jackson or Tinsley, now I think Williams could be that player.

                          I think White is here to stay. Very little mention of all regarding Williams lately, especiall from Walsh or Bird, perhaps not but that is just my feeling as well right now.
                          intresting thought. maybe we really can net a 2nd star with williams and a first included?
                          maybe thats why we r holding on the al deal and we want only to give up a 09 first rounder.
                          jackson/tinsley/williams + 1st for ray allen?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Star: Pacers to sign Snap Hunter

                            Originally posted by rela
                            jackson/tinsley/williams + 1st for ray allen?
                            I think that is probably too good to be true.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Star: Pacers to sign Snap Hunter

                              Originally posted by Skaut_Ech
                              See this is my thinking, too. (see bold.) Everyone's trying to figure out our roster, but I think it's extremely premature. I am positive, management has one huge trade coming just before the season.

                              And what are we stocking up on?: PGs. I think PGs are the most sought after, valuable commodity out there and pretty much the coin of the realm. Look how many teams aren't established at PG. Look at the Sixers (Iverson and Ollie?), Warriors (Baron-injured as much as Tinsley-Davis, and Monta Ellis), Lakers (Smush Parker(?) and a bunch of unknowns), Kings (Bibby and a couple of weak sisters), Sonics (Rinour and Watson. That's it.) Utah (Deron and Derrick Fisher)...it goes on and on.

                              Some teams still have gaping holes. I know from ClutchFans forum that their fans are DYING for a PF. And look at what we have to offer. Same thing with Utah. I think we're setting ourselves very nicely to offer Stephen Jackson + promising guys. At least, I hope that's what happens.
                              I would agree with you except for the fact that the point guards that we are stocking up on aren't really starting caliber guys. The only one we have that has proven to be a good starting level pg is Tinsley, and no one likely wants to take a chance on him. It's true that pg is (along with center) the hardest position for teams to fill, but back-up level pgs are a dime a dozen. It is quality starters that are hard to come by. We don't have any of those to trade now that AJ is gone.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Star: Pacers to sign Snap Hunter

                                Originally posted by Skaut_Ech
                                See this is my thinking, too. (see bold.) Everyone's trying to figure out our roster, but I think it's extremely premature. I am positive, management has one huge trade coming just before the season.

                                Some teams still have gaping holes. I know from ClutchFans forum that their fans are DYING for a PF. And look at what we have to offer. Same thing with Utah. I think we're setting ourselves very nicely to offer Stephen Jackson + promising guys. At least, I hope that's what happens.
                                Or maybe management is signing a bunch of really inexpensive players to get fans excited about their 'potential' and sell tickets?

                                ...Which I wouldn't have a problem with IF they'd address the problems at the core of this team as well.

                                -Bball
                                Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                                ------

                                "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                                -John Wooden

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X