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

Pacer/Laker trade nears?

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

  • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

    The problem with Kwame is he may put up good numbers just because it's a contract year, we sign him to a long contract, and he goes back to being lazy.
    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

    Comment


    • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

      Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
      The problem with Kwame is he may put up good numbers just because it's a contract year, we sign him to a long contract, and he goes back to being lazy.

      He's not lazy, he's "country strong!"
      Slug 'em Sabres!!!!!
      http://youtube.com/watch?v=cj1SUF4wzu0

      Comment


      • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

        I acutally agree with what Kobe supposedly said, if you include Odom and Bynum in any deal for JO, it's a lateral move for them. Now thats a Laker perspective, from a Pacer perspective any deal that does not include both is unfair, so I still have huge doubt a straight up trade goes down with only these two teams.

        Do the Pacers like Luke Walton, # 19, and Farmar enough to even make a difference if they are coupled with Bynum and K Brown with no Odom, I doubt it. But the Lakers really have no use for youth.

        Are the Lakers willing to take any long term overpaid players to make it worth the Pacers while, like Murphy who would seem to fit the Triangle. I don't know.



        My guess is the only way it happens with Odom is if the Lakers think JO is way better than LO is now and is better than Bynum will be in the next two years, combined.

        The only way the Pacers do it, without Odom, is if they think Granger is an Allstar and can be a franchise player and Bynum could be possibly be those things too.

        That is why I don't see it working especially since Walsh is still around, but just my opinion.

        Comment


        • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

          The reason why a deal is so hard to make is both teams have made bad deals over the years and both are trying to fix all of them (bad acquisitions, worse contracts, no depth) in one blow.

          Not happening. Both sides need to make some concessions or talk to another team.
          Last edited by 2Cleva; 06-12-2007, 12:18 PM.

          Comment


          • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

            Originally posted by 2Cleva View Post
            The reason why a deal is so hard to make is both teams have made bad deals over the years and both are trying to fix all of them (bad acquisitions, worse contracts, no depth) in one blow.

            Not happening. Both sides need to make some concessions.
            the biggest problem is that the pacers don't have to take a bad deal. so if they do take one its worse than the laker perspective because the lakers have been put into a poor bargaining position by kobe. the pacers are really under no absolute need to trade JO. should it happen? probably. but it doesn't have to, especially with a new coach. and at the very least we don't have to trade JO to the lakers if other deals are more appealing.

            so if the pacers get a bad deal that can only be attributed to poor management. if the lakers get a bad deal its because of unattractive players/contracts and their star's meltdown.
            This is the darkest timeline.

            Comment


            • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

              Uh, Kobe, trades are supposed to be "lateral" moves.

              That's what happens when both teams are trying to "win" the trade.

              Would the Lakers be better after trading for JO? Probably not. But the window with Kobe is starting to close so the Lakers need to try something.

              Would the Pacers be better after trading for Bynum/Odom? Probably not. But next "window" in the East is a few years away so the Pacers should start building with youth toward that opportunity (or else the Hawks will beat them to it.)

              That sounds lateral to me. So its probably a "fair" trade.

              Its funny how the last two trades, in which the Pacers were allegedly without leverage, have the other teams looking to unload the guys that the Pacers didn't really want either (Artest, SJax). They might have had a short-term honeymoon, but the fact that those players are on the market again - for chemistry reasons - speaks volumes.
              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
              And life itself, rushing over me
              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

              Comment


              • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                Originally posted by Jay View Post
                have the other teams looking to unload the guys that the Pacers didn't really want either (Artest, SJax).
                And if true, it sure didn't take their teams as long as it did the Pacers to start looking to make that move. ...Altho nobody has actually moved yet.

                -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


                • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                  Originally posted by Jay View Post
                  Its funny how the last two trades, in which the Pacers were allegedly without leverage, have the other teams looking to unload the guys that the Pacers didn't really want either (Artest, SJax). They might have had a short-term honeymoon, but the fact that those players are on the market again - for chemistry reasons - speaks volumes.
                  Where did you read Jax was on the market again? I just read yesterday JRich was on the market. Of course that was just a headline and I didn't read the artical.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                    Originally posted by indyman37 View Post
                    I really believe that if we did trade Tinsley, and we didn't get a starting PG back, Jim O'Brien would use Quis as our PG. Larry and Donnie had said that last year they wanted RC to use Daniels at the point, but Carlisle was in that phase where he didn't really even play Quis. So I think the log jam would be some what relieved even though we would still have a mess.
                    Don't get me wrong.....I would include Tinsley in the deal if the Lakers would be willing to take him on. I just get the sense that they won't.

                    There were 2 things I was trying to highlight in my post. First, IF the Pacers insist on taking on Kwame's Expiring Contract ( and therefore another contract is included ), I think that the Lakers are going to insist on taking on Marquis instead of Tinsley. Second, although TPTB would probably want to move Tinsley ( for obvious reasons ), I wonder if TPTB would "cave-in" to the Lakers ( just to get the deal done ) and "kill 2 birds with 1 stone" by including Marquis so that we could find a way to give more minutes to a Dunleavy/Granger/Shawne SG/SF rotation while keeping a "somewhat acceptable" PG option in Tinsley.

                    I would have ZERO problem with Marquis running and starting at the PG spot.....whenever I use Marquis as my Starting PG on NBA2K7, he seems to do fairly well. If it works on a video game...it should work in real life right?
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                      Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
                      Kwame's a win-win. Everyone's down on him because he hasn't (and never will) live up to the hype of being the top pick but he's a very good position defender and can score a little in the post.

                      If by some miracle he performs well, you have the edge in re-signing him (right now he's just about an MLE-level player IMO) and if he sucks, you get cap relief.

                      Or you can S&T him next summer.

                      Or trade his expiring contract around the deadline for something good.

                      Make that a win-win-win-win
                      If Foster is included in the deal....I honestly wouldn't mind signing him to a reasonable deal. But if he costs too much...I would let him go.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                        Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                        Where did you read Jax was on the market again? I just read yesterday JRich was on the market. Of course that was just a headline and I didn't read the artical.
                        Are you telling me Jay led me astray??



                        -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


                        • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                          Originally posted by CableKC View Post

                          I would have ZERO problem with Marquis running and starting at the PG spot.....whenever I use Marquis as my Starting PG on NBA2K7, he seems to do fairly well. If it works on a video game...it should work in real life right?
                          I think players that run are better than players that don't. I think they get around a lot faster!

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                            Originally posted by Bball View Post
                            Are you telling me Jay led me astray??



                            -Bball
                            If so, me too. (grin)

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                              Originally posted by Mal View Post
                              It was posted on the "big" JO/LA thread a few days ago.
                              Ah, ok. That explains why I had missed it then, I'm in the middle of moving to a new house, so I haven't has as much time to check the forum as I nornally like to do.

                              Regards,

                              Mourning
                              2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                              2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                              2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                                RE: Jax being available... I don't know if there are strong rumors about it, but it was the sense of at least one oakland/san fran columnist that the warriors would and should be parting ways with SJax while he had a revival during the playoffs. they'd be looking to move him because of his playoff meltdowns and fearing that it was only a matter of time until he retrogressed into an artest-like sacramento situation.

                                i don't know if there is anything beyond that, though.
                                This is the darkest timeline.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X