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

Is it time to move JO?

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

  • Is it time to move JO?

    Let's face it. If things continue the way they have been, JO will opt out at the end of next season. So, we either need to put together a team that can contend next season, or look at moving JO and starting over.

    Besides, trying to build around JO just isn't working. We still try to force-feed him too much.

  • #2
    Re: Is it time to move JO?

    no way JO opts out and lets all that money go...it will work out.
    "GIMMIE DAT!"-DANGER

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Is it time to move JO?

      You're a pretty optimistic guy..

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Is it time to move JO?

        It's time to entertain ideas. This team is going to give up on group of players that are 28-30 and moving toward handing the reigns over to the guys 5 years younger. JO will keep this team around .500 all by himself if he's healthy, but that's not what this franchise or its fanbase expects.

        So, yes. There is no fire sale here but they are open to talking.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Is it time to move JO?

          I've already said it in another thread, but I think J.O. has to go whether we want it or not. He's the only chance we have at significantly improving our roster in the off-season. Also, the way he's been talking, I wouldn't be surprised if he did opt out of his contract after next season. We can keep him, not make any significant moves, and risk losing him. Or, we can trade him coming off a good [stat] season while he still has good value, and get some young prospects for the future. Option #2 is a lot less risky. We're not going anywhere with him, so I think it's time to try it without him. OR bring in a coach that can actually make his game flow with the rest of the teams offense. Rick has failed miserably at that.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Is it time to move JO?

            What the heck? All'a sudden everyone wants to trade JO. Heck no! Have ye all gone mad? Have a little patience. Losing 3 in a row does not mean it's the end of the world.
            You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Is it time to move JO?

              I don't want to trade JO, but I also don't want to lose him for nothing.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Is it time to move JO?

                I love Jermaine, and don't want to move him.

                But I'd do JO-Tinsley for KG-Foye.

                Other than that, there's not a lot out there that would look good to me.
                This space for rent.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Is it time to move JO?

                  In a word, no.

                  Say we did trade him. It wouldn't be for another 30ish star, that'd defeat the purpose of the trade. So let's say it's for picks, maybe an expiring contract, and a nice young player. That means a solid 2 or 3 years of below .500 basketball for the Pacers. The fans are losing interest already, how empty do you think the Fieldhouse would be if that happened? It doesn't seem like a good business decision to me.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Is it time to move JO?

                    Originally posted by SoupIsGood View Post
                    What the heck? All'a sudden everyone wants to trade JO. Heck no! Have ye all gone mad? Have a little patience. Losing 3 in a row does not mean it's the end of the world.
                    No Soup, don't you remember how the Pacers traded their one all-star after the team hit the skids in 97. ECF to first round to no playoffs, it was CLEAR that the team couldn't move forward unless they moved the one major star they had in order to rebuild, mostly through the draft.

                    Trading Reggie for those 3 picks that were later used to get Artest, Brad Miller and Tinsley are why the team eventually made their way back to the ECF in 03-04.





                    Wait, you mean that's not how it happened?


                    Yeah, JO is definitely going to leave 20m on the table in order to get 16m from Atlanta or Charlotte. And just what is it that people think is going to be brought in? One of the other 5 or 6 (if that) 28-30 year old big superstars?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Is it time to move JO?

                      Originally posted by tdubb03 View Post
                      In a word, no.

                      Say we did trade him. It wouldn't be for another 30ish star, that'd defeat the purpose of the trade. So let's say it's for picks, maybe an expiring contract, and a nice young player. That means a solid 2 or 3 years of below .500 basketball for the Pacers. The fans are losing interest already, how empty do you think the Fieldhouse would be if that happened? It doesn't seem like a good business decision to me.
                      I just wanted to say that if we trade JO I would want it to be for one of the top two picks in this coming draft. We would have to wait until we know who holds those two top picks, but if we couldn't get a top two pick then I wouldn't really want to trade JO.

                      But going with what TDUBB said... Pacer fans are losing interest for many reasons. First, is this team is boring to watch. They are all tired of watching us dump it into JO and wait for him to turn it over or miss a 15 foot jump shot. Second, we know that we are not going to go deep into the playoffs. First round exit will probably be our end result. Finally, with no draft picks and Ricks refusal to leave Shawn and Ike in the game more than 2 minutes, we have no reason to get excited about the future.

                      Now if we were to end up with a top two pick and that ended up being Durant or Oden, that would create a buzz in Indy and the fans would come to watch. Even if we didn't win many games we would have some excitement to our team. I would even say that if we took Durant or Oden now and lost JO that we would still be a .500 team, but a younger and more exciting .500 team.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Is it time to move JO?

                        I think the question of whether JONeal is going to opt out before the start of the 2008-2009 season is based off of whether he ( at the age of 30...when he has the option to opt out ) can...as a Free Agent can get a contract that is worth more then 44 million ( whichs how much he would earn if he sticks with the contract ).

                        Do any of you think that he can get more then 44 million at the age of 30 years old?
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Is it time to move JO?

                          Personally, I think it's time to look a yet another lineup change (provided no new moves are made before the Break).

                          What we've seen thus far has been several attempts to pair certain players w/JO in order to re-establish an inside-outside game while at the same time raising the tempo of the offense. It didn't work w/JO-Al. It's working better w/JO-Murphy, but it's not quite there. Part of the problem there is Murphy and MDjr haven't been as confident with their game since being traded here. The irony is they both have come alive now sharing the spotlight in back-to-back home games; Murphy had his game going against Seattle and MDjr had his last night against the Nuggets. Unfortunately, JO is nursing a knee injury. So, we're unable to determine if the breakout play of the two newbies were 1-night wonders w/them stepping up finally, if they've finally got it all figured out or if it was just luck. Or if they just work better in a more free-flowing offense that doesn't rely on feeding the low-post as often w/JO on the bench or receiving limited playing time. Regardless of the reasons why their games have suddenly improved (if only for their one game, respectively), the experiments have to stop! And that's how I view staying with a starting lineup of JO/Granger/Murphy/MDjr/Tinsley. I think RC has to make another change.

                          I think Quis needs to start at SG, and Army should start at PG. The switch to Quis should be pretty obvious; Tinsley's not a SG, and to use him that way frankly was no better than inserting Sarunas in that position when he was here. However, I do understand why Tinsley has either been called upon to shoot the ball more as a Guard or he has taken it upon himself to do so. Without Quis, the Pacers lack a legit playmaker. No, Quis isn't our answer for a Kobe, D-Wade, AI or any of those other players, but teams disrespect his play enough that he has surprised some people with his ability to get to the basket w/near ease, myself included!

                          The switch to Army would probably give this team a chance to win the first quarter, thereby putting pressure our their opponents rather than constantly playing from behind. In fairness, the Pacers are competing, but their play of late has been more like a team that's still finding its way rather than a team that should have a legit chance at making a move in the post-season. Tinsley would still get the lion's share of starter's minutes, but I think we need to come out with energy instead of looking to "find it" when the energy guys are rotated in.

                          Another area I would look at is rotating JO to Center when Diogu off the bench and playing him at PF. I would also like to see more of Shawne Williams at SF. This grouping in the low-post would give us the height we've been missing down low. These last three games, I've noticed how dribble penetration has hurt the Pacers. Bigger bodies might help to stop some of this. Another alternative might be to use David Harrison more than his 2-5 mpg. He's finally healthy enough to play. Play the man!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Is it time to move JO?

                            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                            No Soup, don't you remember how the Pacers traded their one all-star after the team hit the skids in 97. ECF to first round to no playoffs, it was CLEAR that the team couldn't move forward unless they moved the one major star they had in order to rebuild, mostly through the draft.

                            Trading Reggie for those 3 picks that were later used to get Artest, Brad Miller and Tinsley are why the team eventually made their way back to the ECF in 03-04.





                            Wait, you mean that's not how it happened?


                            Yeah, JO is definitely going to leave 20m on the table in order to get 16m from Atlanta or Charlotte. And just what is it that people think is going to be brought in? One of the other 5 or 6 (if that) 28-30 year old big superstars?
                            In all fairness, Jalen Rose had almost equal value to Reggie, due to his productivity and age in comparison with Reggie. I think it was the same sort of situation as trading Artest instead of O'Neal, except that in this case, Rose didn't have any 'issues' to drop his trade value.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Is it time to move JO?

                              I'm for anything that makes the team better, trading JO is not it IMO.

                              JO is not going anywhere, where else is he going to make what we're paying him with that pesky little thing called a salary cap. Trading a all star for several players never works. 6 time all stars are not a dime a dozen, big man that score in the post are even rarer. We can rebuild with minor changes, a complete overhaul is just idiotic.

                              The only way I see JO going anywhere is for Garnett, but if we have to give up a lot with JO we'll just in up T-Wolves East.
                              "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X