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

Nets and Pacers, going nowhere, talking to each other (Yahoo Sports)

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

  • Nets and Pacers, going nowhere, talking to each other (Yahoo Sports)

    this is about the o'neal/carter deal but i thought it deserved its own thread as he talks more about the constant mediocrity. if mods want to merge, thats fine.

    Nets and Pacers, going nowhere, talking to each other
    By Kelly Dwyer
    Tuesday, Jan 22, 2008 1:16 pm EST

    This is what happens when people don't listen, and decide that sustaining a run of mediocrity is the best possible way to keep their jobs.

    Indiana Pacers boss Larry Bird, after watching his Pacers fall apart in 2004-05 and flame out in 2005-06, should have rebuilt the team in the summer of 2006.

    He had Peja Stojakovic's hefty contract coming off his books, he had some assets (Jamaal Tinsley, pre-shootouts, Jermaine O'Neal, then-overrated) that could fetch expiring contracts and young talent, and he had the goodwill of the Pacer fandom, who wouldn't possibly blame him for the melee in Auburn Hills back in 2004, or the string of injuries that resulted.

    This time last season, New Jersey Nets Rod Thorn should have looked at his aging Nets, stuck at .500 with little room to grow, and blown the thing up.

    Should have dumped Jason Kidd on a desperate team looking to make one last push. Should have sent Vince Carter for a team looking for perimeter scoring and/or an expiring contract. Should have, if no suitors emerged for VC, passed on signing Carter last summer, or explored sign-and-trade options.

    Now look at where the Nets are: 18-22, in the midst of a tough Western Conference road swing, and out of the playoffs today in spite of a 67 million dollar payroll. Vince is about to turn 31, Kidd's about to turn 35, and nobody expects much of them.

    Now look at where the Pacers are: 19-23 with a 66 million dollar payroll that grows even larger next season, with little room to improve short of blowing everything up, which won't be easy to do now that the bloom is off the Jamaal.

    So what do the Nets and Pacers decide to do? Talk about sustaining that near-.500 turn for even longer, making it look like they're working on improving, and potentially sending Jermaine O'Neal to the Nets for Carter, Jamaal Magliore, and Marcus Williams.

    I don't know who leaked the deal, or which team (or agent, even) would stand to gain from this move hitting the press, because it confirms our worst fears about both teams: they really don't get it.

    The Pacers would add Carter, who plays the same (wing) position as their only trio of talented youngsters (Danny Granger, Shawne Williams, Mike Dunleavy Jr.)?

    The Nets still think Jermaine O'Neal, career 46 percent shooter, is the team's low-post scoring option of the future? The guy has averaged 55 games a season over the last three, he's played 33 games this year (15 points, seven rebounds, 2.5 blocks) while talking about sitting the rest of the season out ... and he's the answer?

    I know it's hard to sell dwindling crowds on the idea of a rebuilding process, but these GMs need to give their fans a little credit.

    There's a reason nobody is coming out to see the Pacers, or Nets. And it has little to do with Jamaal Tinsley's glock or Jason Kidd's happy hands: these fans know mediocrity. They know these have little chance of making a championship run, and have no easy chance at rebuilding with youngsters. And they don't want to witness the unraveling of two teams winning 45 percent of their games.

    But Bird and Thorn don't want to hear it. Not when there's a Jamaal Magliore to sign. Mags in '08, straight to the top!

    http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/nba...?urn=nba,62992
    This is the darkest timeline.

  • #2
    Re: Nets and Pacers, going nowhere, talking to each other (Yahoo Sports)

    Yahoo is slow when it comes to news. they report todays news, whne they probably got the info last week, just to make it look current
    R.I.P. Bernic Mac & Isaac Hayes

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Nets and Pacers, going nowhere, talking to each other (Yahoo Sports)

      I still like the trade if we can involve a third team to take on Carter and give us an expiring big man. Other way I like it is we can piggyback another trade with Carter and one of our young guys to get a nice player to fit our weaknesses.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Nets and Pacers, going nowhere, talking to each other (Yahoo Sports)

        I've never liked VC, he's a marvel athletically which is on the fast decline. He applied himself about a season and half as far as I can tell. He's indifferent defensively and without a conscious offensively. I'd rather watch JO go of the books in 3 years to be honest.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Nets and Pacers, going nowhere, talking to each other (Yahoo Sports)

          Apparently Jamaal Tinsley has been caught brandishing a Glock?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Nets and Pacers, going nowhere, talking to each other (Yahoo Sports)

            this is weak...we have talent why the hell we want injury prone vince?
            "GIMMIE DAT!"-DANGER

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Nets and Pacers, going nowhere, talking to each other (Yahoo Sports)

              Originally posted by OnlyPacersLeft View Post
              this is weak...we have talent
              Yeah, enough to just stay mediocre.... cool.... . The author is right. This is not the sort of trade we should be pursuing.
              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


              • #8
                Re: Nets and Pacers, going nowhere, talking to each other (Yahoo Sports)

                Originally posted by OnlyPacersLeft View Post
                this is weak...we have talent why the hell we want injury prone vince?
                Not that it's going to happen now.....but I could have seen a JONeal for VC deal as an attempt at salvaging the relatively low trade value that they have in JONeal and exchanging it for VC...who has way more trade value.

                It's like when Walsh traded Artest to the Kings for Peja. Artest had little to no trade value for us and Peja ( no matter what any of our opinion of him was ) had more. Once they had a player with more trade value....that gave us some more wiggle room for future trade negotiations.

                On top of that....trading for VC would have been a futile PR attempt at trying to draw in more Pacer fans to see the Vince Carter show.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Nets and Pacers, going nowhere, talking to each other (Yahoo Sports)

                  Does anyone know how many years VC has left, I know he just resigned. Is it a push as far as number of years? Also, isn't Marcus Williams thought to be a young Tinsley..... um........no thanks, if so.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Nets and Pacers, going nowhere, talking to each other (Yahoo Sports)

                    Cable, I agree with your point but I think the Peja thing is a bad example. Post deadline an expiring contract is worthless. It was a miracle/shady that they got a TE out of the NOK deal. Maybe if no one had cap room and they wanted an S&T, but that wasn't the case with Peja. The Pacers came close to getting nothing out of it. Basically they got Troy for that TE (Jack/Dun, pick/Ike). And it took the EXTREMELY unique Harrington situation to make that happen in the second place.

                    But with Vince they are getting NJ closer to having money off the books while giving themselves some ability to deal in the future. It makes more sense for Indy I think because to me Vince is more of a "missing piece" that a contender might want, even if it isn't till next years deadline.
                    Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 01-23-2008, 03:07 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Nets and Pacers, going nowhere, talking to each other (Yahoo Sports)

                      Originally posted by Speed View Post
                      Does anyone know how many years VC has left, I know he just resigned. Is it a push as far as number of years? Also, isn't Marcus Williams thought to be a young Tinsley..... um........no thanks, if so.
                      Carter has four more years on his deal after this one, which is two more years than JO.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Nets and Pacers, going nowhere, talking to each other (Yahoo Sports)

                        Originally posted by Shade View Post
                        Carter has four more years on his deal after this one, which is two more years than JO.

                        Thanks Shade, so that is the main reason NJ should do it, it sounds like the Pacers approached NJ though from today NJ newspaper (see below) report talking about a Nocioni trade possiblity instead. If you trade for VC, think of a 35 yr old VC most likely not allowing you to sign Granger and S. Williams, along the way w/o going over the luxury tax. Yikes!?!?!?

                        http://www.northjersey.com/sports/ne...lish_deal.html

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Nets and Pacers, going nowhere, talking to each other (Yahoo Sports)

                          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                          Cable, I agree with your point but I think the Peja thing is a bad example. Post deadline an expiring contract is worthless. It was a miracle/shady that they got a TE out of the NOK deal. Maybe if no one had cap room and they wanted an S&T, but that wasn't the case with Peja. The Pacers came close to getting nothing out of it. Basically they got Troy for that TE (Jack/Dun, pick/Ike). And it took the EXTREMELY unique Harrington situation to make that happen in the second place.

                          But with Vince they are getting NJ closer to having money off the books while giving themselves some ability to deal in the future. It makes more sense for Indy I think because to me Vince is more of a "missing piece" that a contender might want, even if it isn't till next years deadline.
                          That's fine.....no matter what happened with the string of trades that led us to our current situation .....the main point was that TPTB made "lemonade out of lemons" when it came to salvaging what little trade value that Artest had for us at the time.
                          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Nets and Pacers, going nowhere, talking to each other (Yahoo Sports)

                            With JO's recent injury revelations, there's no way this trade will happen, but...

                            According to Hoopshype, the last year of Carter's contract is a team option. If that's true, his contract is only one year longer than JO's, not to mention that he's a few million dollars cheaper.

                            In general, I think that we you have a chance to grab a player of Carter's talent on the cheap, you do it. Every so often some star player gets moved relatively cheaply because they're a cancer or a bad human being or what not. I'm a big-time character guy, but there are some gambles worth taking. Look at Rasheed Wallace, Baron Davis, and Allen Iverson. All of these guys were traded for far less than their value because they'd warn out their welcome. None of them has caused problems in their new city, and they're all helping their teams win. Vince Carter (while I don't love him at all) has the potential to be the exact kind of player the Pacers need: a guy who can score no matter what the defense and his teammates are doing.

                            With this trade we'd also get Marcus Williams and Jamaal Magloire. Magloire used to be a good player, but hasn't gotten off the bench lately. If he's 3/4 of what he used to be, he's a good fit for the 5 spot on this team. He's a good interior defender and rebounder and can score a bit. If he sucks now, then he's a $4 million expiring contract.

                            Marcus Williams is worth taking a chance on. He's cheap and has potential. If he truly has character issues, then we don't sign him beyond his rookie deal.
                            "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                            - Salman Rushdie

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X