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 the Lakers trade talks dead.

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

  • #76
    Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

    DD, I would be very happy with that move and I am ready for a new era in
    Pacer history. Trading with the Nets would be a disaster.
    If Bynum and Crittenden came on board that would be great. I am not convinced that the team could not make the playoffs in the east. The east
    is weak. The potential is so much greater also. This kind of trade would give the Pacer faithful some hope and bring interest back to Conseco.
    {o,o}
    |)__)
    -"-"-

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

      The Laker deal is DOA, because the Lakers simply don't have enough quality pieces to make it work. Trade JO to NJ or whomever else and enjoy watching the Lakers implode.
      Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

        Originally posted by diamonddave00 View Post
        The #1 in 2008 might be a little much but if they want to keep Odom , I'd want Crittenden and the 2008 pick . I'm not interested in Farmar, I want Crittenden . Javaras is bigger , and plays decent defense.

        Walton may be seen as filler but there are teams who really like him , he has trade value.

        If they want to keep Bynum , then I want Odom , Crittenden, and Brown's contract. Lamar Odom is very tradable.

        Unlike the Pacers . I'd take compromise package.
        LA-Pacers is the best option for both teams and should be able to be worked out. If the Pacers falter they can always go after another big next year.
        {o,o}
        |)__)
        -"-"-

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

          I don't understand Bird's line of thought. What the hell is the point of just barely making the playoffs each year? The idea that anything can happen in the playoffs is complete BS! OK yes GSW beat Dallas this year, but they then got trounced by Utah. When was the last time an 8th seed ever won it all or even made it to the Finals, oh yea NY did it and they got trounced by the Spurs. We play best of 7 series in the playoffs, the better team always wins.

          This is the difference between LA and Indy. Our fans will never be satisfied with just scraping by the playoffs. We want to win it all, your either 1st or last to quote the immortal Ricky Bobby.

          I think the compromise package that Indy Dave mentioned might work. We love Walton though, so it'd be tough to see him go. He's really a solid role player kind of guy that any team could use.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

            Originally posted by oneofthesedays View Post
            I agree on paper this trade is lopsided towards LA.
            First, I think you and Laker fan Smashed Potato are one and the same. You have the same style of posting which is trying to convince Pacer fans that giving up JO for little of nothing is a good deal.

            I'm thinking what you are trying to do is convince us so we will put pressure on the Pacer front office. That's really lame if true! One, you are dealing with Larry Bird a confirmed Laker hater. Two, he's only going to deal with the Laker's if he gets what he wants, a trade lopsided towards the Pacers.

            Three, this isn't a blinking contest to see who blinks first. We don't have to trade with the Laker's, whereas you are fast running out of ways to please Kobe.

            What's going to happen if you don't give us what we want is you are going to have to trade Kobe and it will be a very lopsided trade the other way. You need to face it, Kobe has put you in a very bad position, and you are going to get ripped one way or another.

            The thing is, you were offering Bynum and Odom for KG, and yes he's better than JO, but you were going to be minus third fiddle Odom in that trade and KG isn't enough better than JO to make up that difference. So whatever your Laker plans were going to be with KG you can put in place with JO.

            At this point the best thing you can do is trade for JO and Murphy. Why? Because if it satisfy s Kobe, you can still build with that team. If it doesn't satisfy Kobe you can trade him and build around JO and the pieces you will get for Kobe. Either way is better than what you have now!

            PS. The Showtime appears to be another or your screen names.
            Last edited by Will Galen; 06-30-2007, 01:57 PM.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

              Originally posted by The_Showtime View Post
              Of course the Lakers offer of Bynum/Brown/Filler is NOT fair (You can't expect to get fair value when you trade a all-star), but I gotta think for my team future. Suffering for a few years of losing and maybe end up happy in the end.
              Teams that trade for All Star players nearly always are the winners in any trades, so your saying teams can't expect to get fair value is bogus.

              And I'm glad you said that about suffering for a few years, because that's probaby where the Lake Show is headed.

              One other thought. Your persistence is reminding me of a fellow named Earl who used to post on this board. You wouldn't perhaps be him would you?

              I'm thinking, Smashed Potato = oneofthesedays = The Showtine = Earl.
              Last edited by Will Galen; 06-30-2007, 02:08 PM.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

                Do we know for a fact that adding JO would please Kobe? And what does Kobe think the Lakers should give up to get JO?

                The Bynum deal without Odom is a fine offer and we should take it. Even IF we eventually paint them into a corner and get Odom, he'd only congest the rotation when we should be developing the young players anyway... not trying to squeeze into the playoffs as the 8th seed. Why risk the Bynum deal for that?



                -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


                • #83
                  Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

                  The Pacers don't have to make a trade. The Lakers do.

                  The Pacers put the deal on the table. If the Lakers want it, the trigger is pulled. If they don't, no sweat. We will just have to keep our All-Star PF.

                  We either get Bynum & Odom or JO. We are in decent shape either way. The Lakers either get Kobe and JO or they lose them both. They are screwed if they pass.

                  You tell me who as the power here.
                  The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
                  http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
                  RSS Feed
                  Subscribe via iTunes

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

                    Keeping JO should not be an option for this franchise because it is now a deadend. He will in almost all certainty opt out after this season and we're leaving the cupboard bare to have much to sell the fans on for the future.

                    Bynum would at least give the fanbase some hope for a brighter future as we watch him (hopefully) develop along with Granger and Williams.

                    We need the Lakers deal as bad as the Lakers need JO... probably worse truth be told.

                    I'm someone who has always talked about 'winning now' but we're at a point where that is not a realistic option.

                    I'd much rather see the young players learning and fighting their way to the 8th spot and coming up short than to see a patchwork collection with some veterans being coaxed to the 8th spot only to be dispatched in the 1st round and no hope of real improvement or a brighter future.

                    -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


                    • #85
                      Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

                      Originally posted by wjs View Post
                      You overvalue Granger. Yes, I would move him if (a) it made sense to get Odom (a better player right now) and (b) to dump Murphy's contract. I'd keep Shawne vs. Granger, if forced to choose.

                      You definitely overvalue JO. I'd be tempted to move him for picks and cap space alone just to remove his killer contract.

                      Someone's power rating this week had Pacers ranked #30. Out of 30 teams. The Pacers, as they stand now, are going nowhere, effectively "destroyed" already.
                      I agree. I hear all this talk about Granger on the defensive end of the court, and everytime I look at Danny he looks lost when trying to contain someone. It's a mold we're trying to force feed him into. He's not a stopper yet. Danny's a nice up and coming player, but I don't know if I would say he's untouchable.
                      Last edited by NapTonius Monk; 06-30-2007, 02:50 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

                        Originally posted by owl View Post
                        Trading with the Nets would be a disaster.
                        WHY?

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

                          Originally posted by Bball View Post
                          Keeping JO should not be an option for this franchise because it is now a deadend. He will in almost all certainty opt out after this season and we're leaving the cupboard bare to have much to sell the fans on for the future.

                          Bynum would at least give the fanbase some hope for a brighter future as we watch him (hopefully) develop along with Granger and Williams.

                          We need the Lakers deal as bad as the Lakers need JO... probably worse truth be told.

                          I'm someone who has always talked about 'winning now' but we're at a point where that is not a realistic option.

                          I'd much rather see the young players learning and fighting their way to the 8th spot and coming up short than to see a patchwork collection with some veterans being coaxed to the 8th spot only to be dispatched in the 1st round and no hope of real improvement or a brighter future.

                          -Bball
                          Then he leaves $20 million on the table (which he won't do) and we go shopping.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

                            JO is going to opt out next season and if you don't trade him now you'll get next to nothing for him next year. Your just as desperate as we are, unless Indy fans are OK with mediocrity. Keeping JO on your squad only delays the inevitable, and when he opts out you will be in a far worse position then if you had traded with us.

                            Your best offer right now is the one we are giving you. You'll get a lot of young talent that can develop together with their new coach. In a couple of years if these players pan out then you'll be ready to make some noise in the East. In the end, I think your management will see this and relent on their Odom demands.

                            Bynum+Kwame+Crittenton/Farmar+Luke S&T is not a bad deal at all for JO. It's probably the best you'll get to be honest.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

                              Originally posted by johnnybegood View Post
                              WHY?
                              It doesn't make us a better team in the short or long term.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

                                Originally posted by oneofthesedays View Post
                                JO is going to opt out next season and if you don't trade him now you'll get next to nothing for him next year. Your just as desperate as we are, unless Indy fans are OK with mediocrity. Keeping JO on your squad only delays the inevitable, and when he opts out you will be in a far worse position then if you had traded with us.

                                Your best offer right now is the one we are giving you. You'll get a lot of young talent that can develop together with their new coach. In a couple of years if these players pan out then you'll be ready to make some noise in the East. In the end, I think your management will see this and relent on their Odom demands.

                                Bynum+Kwame+Crittenton/Farmar+Luke S&T is not a bad deal at all for JO. It's probably the best you'll get to be honest.
                                First of all, he isn't opting out. When is the last time a player left $20 million on the table?

                                Secondly, we'd be better off letting him leave if all the Lakers are going to give us is garbage.

                                Third, JO won't have any interest in going to the Lakers if Kobe has already gone postal (due to the Lakers doing nothing in the offseason again) and is no longer a Laker.

                                Finally, the fact that Lakers fans are flocking to a Pacers forum practically begging us to take crap for JO proves just how desperate your fans are.

                                If this is going to work, a third team is going to have to get involved.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X