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

The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

    Originally posted by Jay View Post
    No f'ing way on that one. We give up our two best players for that? There is no way you've got what it takes to get JO AND Granger - you don't have the assets to get JO alone, let alone to add Granger.



    You'd need to add one of your PGs (I don't care which one) and at least one draft pick.

    Under any of those scenarios, Odom wouldn't be staying in Indy long (as we don't need forwards but you have no guards worth discussing except Kobe) and Kwame would presumably be bought out immediately, so adding a PG and a pick might get it close enough that it would depend on what we could flip Odom to a third team for (preferably help at SG.)

    Would the Clippers want Odom back in exchange for Maggette (+ salary cap necessities)?

    Could a third team get us a really good SG in exchange for Odom + Brown. If I'm the Lakers, that's what I'm trying to accomplish while the rest of the world assumes that a Lakers-Pacers deal is dead.
    What do you think of this:

    JO, Harrison for Bynum, Maggette, and Farmar (no picks).

    Comment


    • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
      Both Granger and JO played all-star weekend. I don't remember seeing Bynum or Odom.
      Well, Bynum AND Farmar played in the "Rookie/Soph" game also... Along with Granger...

      Comment


      • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

        I think we can put all these JO trade ideas to rest...for now.

        It's obvious that since he openly stated to the (local) media that he wants to remain a Pacer and the fact that JOB, Bird and DW have all said they want him here that JO's not going anywhere...at least not in the near future.

        Frankly, I doubt he'll get traded at all which would be fine by me. While the Lakers do have a few pieces that would fit in nicely here, it would mean gutting their team, and neither Kupchak nor Kobe wants that. Heck, even JO doesn't want that as he has stated he doesn't want to be on a team that is going through a rebuilding phase (Pacers in particular, but I'd imagine any team going through that would be off limits). And while the trade to the Nets would seem decent enough, they'd still be a few pieces away from truly being contenders themselves. And we haven't even begun to talk about how to make the salaries match no matter what combination of players you put together in a trade for JO. It's still going to mean some team will have to give up either a ton of players or a ton of cash just to balance things out.

        So, in the final analysis I seriously doubt a trade featuring JO will get done any time so, if at all this year. As has been stated several times before, unless a third team gets involved, I doubt JO would be easily moved. And at this stage of the off-season where teams are starting to really nail down the dynamics of their rosters, it's doubtful any team is willing to make any more trades at this point anyway. If anything, they're looking for those last minute cast-offs - players who have been released and can pick them up for the bare minimum - to plug holes. Thus, anyone who's still hoping to see JO, Tinsley or Murphy moved any time soon may as well forget it. If it hasn't happened by now, in all likelihood it's not going to happen.

        Can we start focusing in on the roster we now have and get excited about some new and improved Pacers basketball? I am!! First tip-off for the Pacers pre-season is on October 10th.

        "GO PACERS!"

        'Nuff Said.

        Comment


        • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

          Originally posted by gng930 View Post
          What do you think of this:

          JO, Harrison for Bynum, Maggette, and Farmar (no picks).
          I could be interestd in that one. I have no qualms really, about Bynum. I just don't think his potential (which also means, potentially plateauing where he is now) is enough for a six-time, 28 y/o all star that is a legit post player. But the other stuff you've got to offer (Odom, Brown's contract) does nothing for a team that, even without JO, is still stocked with forwards and in need of guard help.
          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: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

            I wonder if TPTB have noticed what a trade has done to the Celtics tix sales.
            Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

            Comment


            • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

              Now that was funny, a chat on ESPN w/ David Thorpe and he said DWade was better than Kobe and all of the same trolls came out that have been on here...

              Sorry I missed copy and pasting it before it went to the insider deal, but at one pt a troll goes, its obvious David doesn't know B ball if he thinks DWade is better than Kobe... Thorpe goes well you can't argue with logic like that... lol

              They were talking about PER I guess a way to calculate stats and DWades was higher and than Kobe said you also have to factor in how good a teammate a guy is when the trolls were ripping using stats and not your eyes, it was pretty awesome.
              Last edited by Speed; 08-15-2007, 01:09 PM.

              Comment


              • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

                Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
                I wonder if TPTB have noticed what a trade has done to the Celtics tix sales.

                But they traded FOR a superstar, they didn't trade AWAY one.
                The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
                http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
                RSS Feed
                Subscribe via iTunes

                Comment


                • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

                  True. How are the TWolves doing on selling those season tickets?
                  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: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

                    Originally posted by FlavaDave View Post
                    But they traded FOR a superstar, they didn't trade AWAY one.
                    Is JO a superstar?

                    -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: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

                      Originally posted by Bball View Post
                      Is JO a superstar?

                      -Bball

                      Close enough. He made the cut for the Nike air hanger game thing. His public profile is at least the same as Elton Brand.

                      Point is, trading JO for Odom and Bynum won't energize the fan base anything like KG is for Boston.
                      The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
                      http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
                      RSS Feed
                      Subscribe via iTunes

                      Comment


                      • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

                        Folks at ClubLakers.com forum are discussing a rumored trade between LAL and MIL that would land Yi Jianlian in LA:

                        http://www.clublakers.com/forums/bel...ot-t79926.html

                        we are gonna get Yi jianlian.
                        i just heard it from people. Like most stupid people who come up with rumors say, "IM NOT AN INSIDER BUT......" F THAT!!!!!

                        I would like to say,,,, IM an insider on this one!!!!!! haha.
                        i heard bucks aren't reupping with bell and they finally gave up on YI and they want a good backup pg (to replace bell), backup sg, and starting pf to move cv to starting sf, b/c most importantly they cant get Yi to come to the city of Milwakee.

                        i hear farmar, kwame, evans and a next year's 1st round pick s locked up for simmons and Yi.

                        I guess bucks line up is

                        Mo wiliams / Farmar
                        Redd / evans
                        CV / Mason
                        Kwame
                        Bogut / Gadzuric

                        i heard we've been offering that same combo of players (kwame, evans, farmar) for numerous players but have been rejected.

                        IMO, i think those players we tried to get w/ that combo were artest and camby. But we couldn't land them.
                        Who Knows??? But all i know is is that that combo landed us Yi and Simmons.
                        My friend told me that Kupchack tried desperately to get a starter w/ that combo all summer long without giving up our core starters. When that couldn't happen, he and Phil decided to make our bench more solid then ever.

                        I think it has more to do with a politic push from the international side of Yi, but still, i am excited as heck with this one. Not b/c of Yi, but I've always wanted Simmons. Im telling you rite now, that guy is a poor man tmac.

                        If this rumor is true, then it may make a JO for Odom/Bynum trade more of a possibility:

                        http://forums.lakersground.net/viewt...r=asc&start=25

                        Why stop here with the pipe? Get all the way high...

                        Yi is basically a Lamar Odom-clone with less ballhandling and more of a post game.

                        Get this done then with a 3rd option in Simmons and potential in Yi LA can accept a deal of Bynum/Odom for JO.

                        Fisher, Crittendon
                        Bryant, Karl
                        Simmons, Walton, Radmanovic
                        JO, Yi, Cook
                        Mihm, Turiaf

                        When Yi is ready JO slides to the 5 with Yi at the 4.
                        "I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
                        -Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05

                        Comment


                        • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

                          let this thread die an honorable death
                          This is the darkest timeline.

                          Comment


                          • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

                            Originally posted by blanket View Post
                            Folks at ClubLakers.com forum are discussing a rumored trade between LAL and MIL that would land Yi Jianlian in LA:

                            http://www.clublakers.com/forums/bel...ot-t79926.html




                            If this rumor is true, then it may make a JO for Odom/Bynum trade more of a possibility:
                            Interesting that LA just signed another center:

                            http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_ar..._larry_turner/

                            Looks like LA might be making some moves here...

                            Comment


                            • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

                              I thought this deal was dead and buried.

                              Oh well......let's look at the 1st part.

                              The Bucks essentially trade Bobby Simmons ( who may or may not still have some talent left in him after signing that huge contract ) and the #5 pick for Kwame+Farmar+MoEvans+2008 1st round pick?

                              That seems a little too far fetched for me........the Lakers are essentially trading Huge expiring Contracts and a early to mid 20s pick for Yi?

                              I would think that the Warriors could get in on this and offer something comprable to give them Yi.
                              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                              Comment


                              • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

                                Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
                                let this thread die an honorable death
                                Somewhere around post #1000 this thread gave up any hope of honor.

                                As for dying?

                                NEVER!!!!!!




                                "I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
                                -Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X