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

We need a trade

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

  • #31
    Re: We need a trade

    Originally posted by Shade View Post
    I have come to the conclusion that Obie and co. are getting the best they can out of the team as currently constructed. We're just an average team. That's all we're going to be until some roster changes are made.
    I don't believe this to be true. I think we have lost our fair share of games we should have won - games in which we were up by 20 or winning going into the final 2 minutes. I think better coaching decisions need to be made during games as opposed to between them.

    A minor trade, however, one that will shorten our bench a 2 for 1 or a 3 for 2 might be beneficial, because right now there aren't enough minutes going around.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: We need a trade

      How about just an acquisition? Daniel Artest (yes, brother), PG, Rockford Fury, 255 lbs as reported on TNT w/ chuck, ernie and kenny.

      http://www.rockfordfury.com/dsp_roster.cfm
      Last edited by kester99; 12-28-2007, 02:07 AM.


      [~]) ... Cheers! Go Pacers!

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: We need a trade

        Originally posted by celticpacers
        Theres a RUMOR on local sports station in Indianapolis that The Pacers and The Suns are talking trade. JO and Jeff Foster To the Sun for Marion and Barbosa.
        Anyone heard any thing of this? Sounds way too good to be true to me. Although a deal with the Suns seems very interesting, with either Amare or Shawn Marion + Atlanta's 1st coming our way.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: We need a trade

          Originally posted by Kofi View Post
          Although a deal with the Suns seems very interesting, with either Amare or Shawn Marion + Atlanta's 1st coming our way.
          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


          • #35
            Re: We need a trade

            Originally posted by Mourning View Post
            Obviously Amare would be a long shot, as he's still a stud. However if the Suns ever accept the reality that they're never going to win a championship with their lackluster interior defense, Jermaine O'Neal would be their perfect solution. The only thing Amare has on J.O. is offense, and who knows how well J.O. could score in the Suns system with Nash feeding him the ball.

            How is the second trade far fetched? It was proposed on another forum by a Suns fan and around 50% of their fans liked it. Marion's value is slightly lower than J.O.'s, and you do realize the Hawks pick is currently at #19, right? Somehow I don't think you do. If the Hawks were still a lottery team with a top-5 pick, then sure it would be a huge stretch, but they're not.
            Last edited by Kofi; 12-28-2007, 07:46 AM.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: We need a trade

              I really think that we will not shake this roster up too much. We need a PG that is apparent. But the team has startted to unify (1 loss does not change that).

              We are also seeing the effects of not having a proactive leader in this bunch. Any leadership that JO provides is after the fact, reactive to be more precise. I am convinced that if this team is average at best then I can deal with that.

              Elite players are hard to come by. Miller has been the only true elite player this organization has had in its NBA tenure. Sure there have been All-Stars. But none have had the resolve and poise that Reggie had on the court.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: We need a trade

                If and when J.O. is moved, Jeff is not the guy I'd want to
                see accompany him. Jeff fits the '5' spot in OB's system
                pretty damn nicely.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: We need a trade

                  No ones going anywhere. Someone needs to start a thread on the dissappointment of ________, a la Kareem Rush so that player can turn around and become a stud.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: We need a trade

                    Juan Dixon is available, according to hoopshype.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: We need a trade

                      Just to be clear, I didn't post this as a knee-jerk reaction to the Atlanta loss. I've been dwelling on this for a bit now, and with nearly 30 games under our belts, I feel confident that a trade is needed to have a shot at getting above average.

                      I don't dislike our team. I just think we need some tweaks.

                      That rumored Phoenix deal sounds interesting, though I've never really been as high on Marion as some others on the forum.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: We need a trade

                        How about JO, Granger, 2009 1st round pick for Amare, Barbosa, and Piatowski? (Piatowski is only included to make the deal work financially, we'd probably buy him out)

                        Phoenix becomes much better defensively with the addition of JO. Granger or HIll becomes their sixth man and still sees probably 30 minutes a game.
                        PHX:
                        PG: Nash
                        SG: Bell
                        SF: Granger or Hill
                        PF: Marion
                        C: JO

                        The Pacers commit themselves to the uptempo and the addition of a guy like Amare would do a lot to bring the fans back IMO. We get worse defensively, but like I said this would be a full commitment to the uptempo style of play. Dun would get to move back to the SF position and we would be able to get Shawne and Ike more PT off the bench.

                        IND:
                        PG: Tins/Quis/Barbosa
                        SG: Barbosa/Quis/Rush
                        SF: Dun/Shawne/Rush
                        PF: Amare/Ike/Murphy
                        C: Foster/Murphy/Harrison


                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: We need a trade

                          Originally posted by Bball View Post
                          In other news... the sky is blue.
                          Ya had that coming Shade.

                          Mal - I don't think they've quit yet, but I mentioned to Gnome last night that JO's reaction to the Tins-fest Atlanta loss has me concerned. I'm not knocking JO, nor should I really imply that it was a JO reaction to Tinsley's shooting exactly since I don't know, but he obviously was in a foul mode regarding that loss.

                          I am going to harp this point till it's proven false, this team was 29-24. They won games post-trade. I think the trade hurt them, but I'm willing to concede that instead it was a LATERAL move. What still worries me then is that last year they hit that really tough patch of schedule, started losing, and THEN they "gave up".

                          To me this team hasn't done enough or shown enough consistancy to make me feel like they could ride out a rough patch of games, though in their defense they did take that 6 game streak well. On the other hand that was extremely early in the season and with plenty of injury roster shake-ups and learning the system excuses to fall back on.

                          Can this group handle 6 straight losses if it's Tinsley shooting 8-21 and saying "my shot wasn't falling but I asked the coach if I was shooting too much..." or JO flubbing on offense himself or Danny doing a youthful MIA or Mike doing a "who me" MIA or Troy getting toasted on defense....

                          What happens when it's not injuries or understanding the system? What happens when/if they have to face up to just not having enough for the next stage? That can be demoralizing.


                          But back to Bball's point, I agree with Shade too, but "What can you do? Stand Pat!" They are pretty stuck right now, or so it would seem.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: We need a trade

                            Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                            any trade we do will probably make us worse in the short term, like last season's golden state trade.

                            simply, we don't have the short contracts that rebuilding teams are looking for. we do have young players that other teams may like, but they're not good enough to offset the bad contracts they'll have to be paired with.

                            actually, some people will argue that the golden state trade made us worse in the long term too, since it reduced our nearly non-existent financial flexibility to zero.

                            we're getting close to the point where we need a trade, not to improve the team, but to improve the bottomline. otherwise better expect more brad miller situations, where tptb just hold up their hands helplessly and say "how could we have expected david or danny or ike or shawne to have gotten such a big offer?"

                            truth is, in the luxury tax era, salary management is nearly as important a gm skill as talent evaluation. joe dumars is a master at this. like other gms, he's signed his share of duds, but somehow he has always found a way to move them (see nazr trade to charlotte)
                            Good post. Depressingly realistic, but good.

                            It's not like 6 months before the Brad thing we were all sitting around saying "this team is in trouble and I expect a huge flop when it comes time to deal with Brad". Maybe you saw a building issue, but few people were expecting it to go the way it eventually did. These problems with the cap tend to sneak up on fans. I just wish they wouldn't appear to be sneaking up on TPTB lately.

                            Of course then again maybe I'm overlooking some brilliant exit strategy they have lined up. God I hope so. Miracle trade FTW

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: We need a trade

                              Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                              Huh? Oh right, the Pacers did lose their last game.
                              We have needed a rebuild after every single game, win or loss, since Artest and Reggie Miller left the team with their immense talent.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: We need a trade

                                I am all for it, we need a damn player who can consistantly play good, who can average at least 20 ppg, with other words... a good player.

                                I give up, i dont care who we trade... i want THAT player. I am thinking of a Shooting Guard or Point Guard....

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X