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

Chad Ford Chat 12-14-06 12pm

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

  • Chad Ford Chat 12-14-06 12pm

    Here is the ongoing chat so far. Of course AI dominated chat.
    Debunks a few trade rumors. I may have missed a few at the end.


    Chad Ford: (12:02 PM ET ) Aloha everyone. Hmmm ... nothing to talk about this morning I guess as AI watch goes into Day 5 .... what happened to the Sixers moving him in 48 hours ...? Let's roll.


    Rob (Los Angeles, CA): Phil Jackson has now spoken twice about AI. Is he trying to convince the Lakers to trade for him? They wouldn't really get into this mess, would they?

    Chad Ford: (12:03 PM ET ) I'm not sure there are enough shots in a 48 minutes game for Kobe and AI. I think it would be a disaster. Ditto for most of the other teams in the hunt for AI. Yes he's a great player ... but he's really going to screw up a team's chemistry and likely get the coach or GM that wants him fired.

    -------------------------------------------------------------
    Max: How about trading T-MAc for AI?

    Chad Ford: (12:04 PM ET ) Yeah, Jeff Van Gundy would LOVE that ... besides T-Mac's injury woes may make him less desirable than AI right now.

    -------------------------------------------------------------
    rob (ny,ny): any chance Miami lands ai with a package of james posey jason williams dorrel wright and a 2008 1st and second round pick ?

    Chad Ford: (12:06 PM ET ) I know the Sixers are desperate to get rid of AI ... but that desperate? I do like Dorrel Wright ... but that extra year on Jason Williams contract (it expires in the summer of 2008) probably kills the deal. Besides, a backcourt of AI and Dwyane Wade may be overkill.
    -------------------------------------------------------------

    Adam (Minneapolis, MN): Is there any hope that the T-Wolves can land AI? Are there any pieces they can add to Foye to make the deal enticing to Philly?

    Chad Ford: (12:09 PM ET ) No ... and that's why I've been so critical of the T-Wolves the past few years. They have a ton of bad contracts and only one real asset -- Foye. They've made it almost impossible to pull off a big deal like this to get KG help. Unless they find some sucker who really wants the overstuffed contracts of a Marko Jaric, Mark Blount, Troy Hudson, Mike James or Trenton Hassell ... then I think they're stuck


    -------------------------------------------------------------
    Sean (Orlando, FL): I have only recently heard Portlands name in a deal including Iverson, however it was a three team deal that would send Iverson to the Nuggets. Why wouldn't the Trailblazers try to get AI? Pairing the Answer with Uncle Zach could be a nasty combination.

    Chad Ford: (12:10 PM ET ) No ... they are not trying to acquire AI. They have an expiring contract, Jamaal Magloire, that a number of teams are trying to send to Philly as part of the deal. This is a three team scenario. They would get someone else in return. A number of teams are trying to use the Blazers and/or the Bobcats to get this deal done.


    -------------------------------------------------------------
    Jeff (Cleveland): I'm just throwing this out there...AI and LeBron?

    Chad Ford: (12:12 PM ET ) Actually ... this one I could see a little bit. Philly would have to take back a contract like Larry Hughes and Ilgauskas ... which I personally wouldn't do. But I do think that AI would be a better fit in Cleveland than on most teams that have been mentioned.

    -------------------------------------------------------------
    Johnny (Billerica,MA): Please tell me now that the Celtics dominated the sixers last night, the sixers saw something they liked and will trade Iverson to us now for Gomes and West instead of either Jefferson or Green

    Chad Ford: (12:14 PM ET ) I don't think Danny will give up Al Jefferson or Gerald Green. If the Sixers can live with Gomes/West or maybe Telfair instead of West along with Theo Ratliff's contract (note to NBA writers who keep getting this wrong ... Ratliff does NOT have an expiring contract. It ends in 2008). It's not much for Philly ... but it's a heck of a lot more than what Toronto got for Vince Carter. If the Celtics weren't in the same division with Philly ... I'd probably put them as the front runners.


    -------------------------------------------------------------
    tim(california): Iverson/Webber/Hunter for Baron/Pietrus/Murphy and Foyle . Deal or no deal Chad ?

    Chad Ford: (12:16 PM ET ) Wow. Nellie reunited with Webber. Ugh. Not sure why Philly would want to replace one headache (AI) with another Baron. Pietrus and Iguodala are too alike. Foyle and Murphy are overpaid. Yeah, nothing to really like here. By the way, I'm told that reports that Baron Davis and Andris Biedrins "almost" going to Philly are totally bogus. The Warriors have interest in AI, but aren't giving away Biedrins.

    -------------------------------------------------------------
    Andrew (Indy): The most tight-lipped GM out there, Donnie Walsh, is denying all sorts of trade rumors for the Pacers, but they keep coming up. Any indications this could go through and what would be the result if they did get A.I.?

    Chad Ford: (12:19 PM ET ) Take a listen to my podcast with him on Monday. He said he's interested in AI ... but wouldn't confirm whether he was making an actual offer for him. There was a story floating around that the Pacers were the front runners and just waiting for Marquis Daniels to become eligible to be traded. That, too, is bogus.

    Daniels was not a free agent acquisition. He was traded this summer. He's eligible to be traded now ... with that said ... I think Indiana is a long shot. They would love to have AI's talent ... but given their move toward trying to clean up the locker room after the Ron Artest debacle ... this would be a giant step backward.


    -------------------------------------------------------------
    Pacini (Altamonte Springs, FL): Chad, This is the trade Philly needs to pull off. Expiring contract of Grant Hill, Jameer Nelson(Philly native), Fran Vazquez and future draft pick for A.I. Remember the last name, one day I'll be a GM.

    Chad Ford: (12:21 PM ET ) I can't see the Magic doing this ... mainly because if I was Billy King, and got an offer like this, I'd take it in a heartbeat. Terrible deal for the Magic. Terrible.


    --------------------------------------------------------------
    Andrew (Saint Louis): Chad - Im glad to see at least one of the ESPN analysts seems to be sane about the AI situation. AI would KILL the chemistry on about 27 teams right now. And why would a young team like the Bobcats even try to get him in a trade? They cant win now and his 20 shots a game are 20 shots the kids wont be taking. About the only place he makes sense is in Minny. who probably doesnt have the assets to acquire him. I hope Billy King enjoys the hell he has created for himself.

    Chad Ford: (12:22 PM ET ) I think the reports about Charlotte trying to acquire Iverson were bogus. They are in the mix as a potential third team because of their cap space ... but they won't end up with him.

    Iverson created the hell, not King. But good GM's know when to cut the strings and King waited too long.


    -------------------------------------------------------------
    jim(california): Chad, any truth to the AI to Clips for Livingston/Maggette rumors ? Thats a steal for the Sixers so I doubt its true .On that note, is Maggette a goner somewhere else?

    Chad Ford: (12:23 PM ET ) Everything that I hear is that the Clippers will NOT give up Shaun Livingston. Maggette and Cuttino Mobley yes ... Livingston no.


    -------------------------------------------------------------
    Hal (Philly): Explain why that Orlando deal is bad. That sounds great for both teams to me.

    Chad Ford: (12:24 PM ET ) That's because you're from Philly.


    -------------------------------------------------------------
    Sean (Ann Arbor): Detroit. AI for Rip, Davis and Delfino. Detroit makes this in a heartbeat, no? Rip is good, not great, AI is the best. Don't give me that team crap either, the team didn't win the last two years with Wallace. We need more.

    Chad Ford: (12:25 PM ET ) I don't think Joe D is a big fan of AI these days ... though he almost traded for him 5 years ago. He'll be my guest on the Daily Dish podcast today and I'll ask him about this.


    -------------------------------------------------------------
    Sam (San Jose): How do you think Billy King is handling the AI situation? Throwing out false rumors to get teams to up their bids, BD and Biedrins for AI? No way the Warriors offered that.

    Chad Ford: (12:27 PM ET ) He's made a couple of big mistakes. The biggest was setting a deadline (he never did that publicly, the media did, but a number of GMs told me that he told them he was moving AI right away, so make their best offer). If GMs call your bluff, which they seem to have done, it looks like the market is much weaker. The Sixers aren't dealing from a position of strength any more ...Billy King's a good guy ... but I definitely think that it's time for a change in Philly ... they'll have cap room in 2 years and should get someone in place with a different vision of what to do with it.


    Dan (philly): Hey Chad thanks for taking my question. I was at the sixers/ celtics game last night, and it felt like pre-season. Is there any hope for us? Oden?

    Chad Ford: (12:30 PM ET ) I don't think the Sixers are going to get a lot back for Iverson. I think you've got to try to find some cap space and maybe one second tier young prospect out of this and call it good. The Sixers will be in the mix for Greg Oden and if they can get him ... their fortunes change over night. He's that good.

    Knox (Tucson): Chad, do you see any scenario that has Portland trading Zach Randolph either by himself or with Magloire? His value has to be at an all time high right now. An Aldridge has look servicable.

    Chad Ford: (12:43 PM ET ) Great point Knox. I've been thinking the same thing. Randolph is so talented, but he's also so immature. They should be able to get something very good for the combo of the two and I agree that Aldridge looks like he'll eventually be a very good four for them. Learn from the Sixers ... Blazers management. Get out while people are still buying high.

    Luke (NYC):
    The Nets need a big guy to rebound, outlet and run. After the dust settles after AI is traded, will Rod Thorn surprise everyone again with a blockbuster?

    Chad Ford: (12:44 PM ET ) I talked to Rod earlier in the week and it was clear he's frustrated. There's been a lot of talk about Jamaal Magloire coming there. I just don't know if that's a good idea. The way that the Nets get up and down the floor isn't ideal for Magloire. Personally, I think now is the time to explore trading Vince Carter and trying to get a solid center in return that can get up and down.

    Rick(Memphis): No Iverson question here. My question to you is...do you think with Gasol coming back this week that the Grizz will fall out of the Greg Oden sweepstakes? If they get Oden...do you see a scenerio like the Spurs? Or who else would be a good fit for the Grizz in the draft.

    Chad Ford: (12:48 PM ET ) I think if Jerry West had his way ... he'd move Gasol ... get another draft pick or two ... clear cap room and then get multiple shots at Greg Oden this spring. However, it seems clear that with the team ownership in limbo ... West can't have his way right now. It's unfortunate. I think he's finally in a position where he could get something done either way (they also would've been a solid contender for AI) but I think his hands are tied.


    -------------------------------------------------------------
    Aaron (Dallas, TX): Why do you think Cuban is against an AI Trade? I know we'd have to give up Devin Harris, Crosh and Stack, but AI and Dirk on the same side, I can't imagine Dallas losing another game. It would be Scary. So why would Cuban not pull the trigger, this would be a no brainer to me!

    Chad Ford: (12:51 PM ET ) Chemistry and finances. I actually like AI on the team too ... especially if they could find a way to make it Crosh, Stack and Jason Terry instead of Harris. But Avery's really thrived there and so far, no one but Larry Brown has had any luck controlling AI ... and even Brown really struggled. Does Cuban really want to put Avery in that position. The financial ramifications would also be huge because the Mavs are luxury tax payers. With that said, if AI were to behave ... they'd be even better than they already are.

    http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/chatESPN?event_id=13977

    Why Not Us ?


  • #2
    Re: Chad Ford Chat 12-14-06 12pm

    Thanks for posting Frank. I am starting to think that we area long shot to get AI. Sad but true I think.
    Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Chad Ford Chat 12-14-06 12pm

      I'm starting to think everyone's a long shot to get A.I.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Chad Ford Chat 12-14-06 12pm

        Originally posted by Quis View Post
        I'm starting to think everyone's a long shot to get A.I.
        For once, I actually agree with you.

        Seems as if Billy King exhausted his options way too early and now is left with a bunch of 2nd-tier offers.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Chad Ford Chat 12-14-06 12pm

          Originally posted by ajbry View Post
          For once, I actually agree with you.

          Seems as if Billy King exhausted his options way too early and now is left with a bunch of 2nd-tier offers.
          I agree. I hate to say this but he should really take Boston's offer. Whatever is left. Get some young guys and Theo Ratliff's contract. Wait a couple of years til Webber and Ratliff expire and then rebuild with cap space and young guys.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Chad Ford Chat 12-14-06 12pm

            I take it Chad doesn't care too much for AI.


            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Chad Ford Chat 12-14-06 12pm

              Originally posted by Frank Slade View Post
              Chad Ford: I think Indiana is a long shot. They would love to have AI's talent ... but given their move toward trying to clean up the locker room after the Ron Artest debacle ... this would be a giant step backward.
              I think this is the main reason why AI will not end up in Indy. People got to understand that more than DG's future as a Pacer is at stake at the moment... The whole image of the Pacers as a franchise is at stake this year... I just don't see TPTB taking this chance with AI.

              Comment

              Working...
              X