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

Bonzi likely to sign a one year deal (somewhere) {Sacbee.com}

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

  • Bonzi likely to sign a one year deal (somewhere) {Sacbee.com}

    Bonzi Likely To Sign One Year Deal

    28th August, 2006 - 12:44 am


    Sacramento Bee - Bonzi Wells is reportedly having a difficult time finding a team to offer him a multi-year deal after turning down Sacramento's five-year $38 million offer earlier this summer.

    He will likely be forced to sign a one-year deal
    Bonzi watch -- Wells and his agent, William Phillips, are still waiting for a taker. Having rejected the Kings' offer of a five-year, $38 million deal earlier this summer, a move that looks to have burned them both, it appears the shooting guard will have to settle for a one-year deal somewhere. The money has dried up quickly across the NBA landscape.
    SacBee.Com

    Why Not Us ?


  • #2
    Re: Bonzi likely to sign a one year deal (somewhere) {Sacbee.com}

    Ouch...kinda sounds like what happened to Jax when he turned down the S A offer.
    Impossible Is Nothing

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Bonzi likely to sign a one year deal (somewhere) {Sacbee.com}

      Hell, let's pick him up for 1 year and see how he does. Not like we're going to win anything this year anyway. Why not take the chance?

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Bonzi likely to sign a one year deal (somewhere) {Sacbee.com}

        If we can get Jax out of here for the draft pick we need then Bonzi will be a welcome edition to the team.
        My Dream Team

        PG - A.Iverson
        SG - K.Bryant
        SF - R.Artest
        PF - J.O'Neal
        C - D.Howard

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Bonzi likely to sign a one year deal (somewhere) {Sacbee.com}

          I'd be willing to sign him to a one year deal. What do we have to lose

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Bonzi likely to sign a one year deal (somewhere) {Sacbee.com}

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            I'd be willing to sign him to a one year deal. What do we have to lose
            The only problem with signing Bonzi to a one year deal is that he would be trying to impress (on and off the court) as much as possible so that he can secure a multi-year contract next year. As for improving off the court, certainly anyone would welcome a player with that attitude. The problem is that he would want his minutes, you know, to get his points, etc.... Being a good person off the court will only get you so far, you still have to produce on the court.

            That could cause a serious problem. I really have a hard time seeing him being content with very limited minutes.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Bonzi likely to sign a one year deal (somewhere) {Sacbee.com}

              yeah a 1 year low ball deal i could go for it but anything more then that no thanks, and yeah id be up for trading SJax for a #1 pick....but i doubt any team in the NBA would be stupid enough to do that
              If you havin' depth problems, I feel bad for you son; I got 99 problems but a bench ain't one! - Hicks
              [/center]
              @thatguyjoe84

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Bonzi likely to sign a one year deal (somewhere) {Sacbee.com}

                Question, if a player rejects an offer from his current team, can he go back to them and take/ask back for the deal? or as long as he rejects it its off the table for good?
                Impossible Is Nothing

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Bonzi likely to sign a one year deal (somewhere) {Sacbee.com}

                  I'd think about it, but would probably turn it down.
                  It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Bonzi likely to sign a one year deal (somewhere) {Sacbee.com}

                    Originally posted by Romsey31 View Post
                    Question, if a player rejects an offer from his current team, can he go back to them and take/ask back for the deal? or as long as he rejects it its off the table for good?
                    That's up to the team (there is no rule against it). But chances are, if the player has to come back due to lack of interest, then the team has all the power and wouldn't likely agree to the same deal as prior when the player had the power of other teams potentially taking him.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Bonzi likely to sign a one year deal (somewhere) {Sacbee.com}

                      Originally posted by Romsey31 View Post
                      Question, if a player rejects an offer from his current team, can he go back to them and take/ask back for the deal? or as long as he rejects it its off the table for good?
                      He can always go back and ask for it again, but his bargaining power isn't very great at that point.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Bonzi likely to sign a one year deal (somewhere) {Sacbee.com}

                        I'd take Bonzi for a year to start at SF and have Danny back him up. We can sign and trade him next year or just let him go if wants too much money or he's too much of a problem or whatnot. Danny and Shawne will be one year improved by then anyways and they are our future at the forward spot...not to mention Marquis and Flight's ability to swing to the 3.

                        I see a lack of depth issue at SF. We have lots of guys that swing and play SF but Danny is the only who really is a true SF.

                        And then the versatility that this team would have with lineups (which RC loves) would be absolutely ridiculous.

                        However, Donnie has seemed very adamant that we are not interested. Then again, Bonzi Wells at 4-5 mil for 1 year? He isn't worth Jared Jeffries money for a fourth of the time?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Bonzi likely to sign a one year deal (somewhere) {Sacbee.com}

                          I'd be fine with it, as long as we moved Jack first.
                          This space for rent.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Bonzi likely to sign a one year deal (somewhere) {Sacbee.com}

                            Yes, if you brought him in, you would have to move Jackson.

                            Both of those players on the team would mean disaster. One, I could handle.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Bonzi likely to sign a one year deal (somewhere) {Sacbee.com}

                              The following is a test of the Emergency Knucklehead System....eeeEeeeeeeeeEEEEEeeee....:

                              http://www.pacersdigest.com/forums/s...ht=bonzi+wells

                              I actually was posting this in another thread, but decided to give it a thread by itself because Bonzi's name keeps coming up in different threads as a guy wee should go after (oft-times in tandem with getting Brad back.)

                              The fact that some of you even type his name astounds me. After the wake of what Ron wrought, you guys would want to bring Bonzi here?

                              You guys can NOT be serious??



                              This is the guy who wouldn't leave the scene of a bar fight and was yelling obscenities at the officers.

                              This is the guy who was such a problem child for a great guy and coach like Hubie Brown that he ended being so disruptive to the team thatg they traded him for lesser value just to unload him.

                              He spit on Danny Ferry

                              Started a fight (threw the first punch) with Chris Mills and got suspended for two games.

                              Cussed out his coach in Portland in the middle of a game and got suspended.

                              Let's see...he was suspended for striking and abusing an official....suspended in last year's playoffs...got suspended for giving the finger to a fan...suspended for being the fight at Golden State.

                              On top of it, from our own local paper:

                              "From the Indianapolis Star:

                              Color seems to matter to Portland's Bonzi Wells, the Muncie, Ind.,
                              native who played at Ball State. He's been heard insulting white
                              players on at least a few occasions dating to last season.

                              San Antonio's Danny Ferry said Wells called him a "(expletive) honky"
                              more than once earlier this season, in a game in which Wells spit in
                              Ferry's face.

                              Golden State's Troy Murphy says Wells has called him a "cracker." Last
                              April, Dallas guard Nick Van Exel said Wells was calling the
                              Mavericks' bench "a bunch of soft-a---- white boys."

                              Russ Granik and Stu Jackson of the NBA office both said they were not
                              aware of the allegations, but are concerned.

                              The Portland Tribune recently detailed many of Wells' legal problems
                              and other transgressions from high school and college, along with
                              eight incidents during his five seasons with the Trail Blazers."

                              Let me put it this way, if he was white and throwing arounf racial stuff like that, what would you think?

                              Playing for Jerry West in a great organization like that one and under non-abrasive coaches like Hubie Brown and Mike Fratello, Bonzi had this to say- ""*?&% it. They can trade me, all I care about is the 15th and 30th of the month (pay day)."

                              NooOOoow...here he is in a contract year, playing his best basketball. Hmm...I wonder why?!

                              The guy has been disruptive on every team he's been on. The only reason he hasn't pulled anything in Sacramento is that he's not a moron. Contract year=play well=get paid=start acting like a jerk again.

                              Is that how it goes? Ignore chemistry? Just go by talent? Didn't we fall into that trap with Ron? Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice....

                              Did Ron teach you guys anything?


                              If this had been an actual emergency, any Pacer's fan who even remotely considered Bonzi as a Pacer would be asked to turn in their tickets and Pacers paraphenalia and would be forever shunned as a Pacer's fan. Remember this was only a test. We now take you back to this less than scintilatting discussion.....
                              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

                              Working...
                              X