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

Another rumor

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #1

    Another rumor

    http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...02_soni10.html



    Thursday, June 10, 2004 - Page updated at 12:00 A.M.

    Sonics
    Sonics might be looking to deal top pick

    By Percy Allen
    Seattle Times staff reporter

    CHICAGO — The evaluation process, which began three weeks ago and will conclude seconds before Seattle selects in the June 24 NBA draft, has yet to unearth a player the Sonics feel comfortable selecting at No. 12 overall.

    In part, that is why they have flown the coaching staff and various front-office and scouting personnel to Chicago, where they will sit in the stands at Moody Bible Institute and take notes on the 60 prospects.

    It's an exhaustive search that begins with drills in the morning and several games in the afternoon and early evening.

    But because most of the best players participate in only physical testing and interviews while skipping scrimmages, the Sonics are unlikely to find their guy this week and are more apt to discover players they might choose with their two second-round picks.

    There is, however, another incentive to being at the camp, general manager Rick Sund noted days before leaving for Chicago.

    "With everybody being there, all of the league's GMs and coaches, there's going to be some talk about all sorts of possibilities," he said. "A lot of talk started after the draft lottery two weeks ago, and it's only going to pick up."

    Seattle, which has sought a prominent power forward the past two years, figures to be among the teams seeking to make a deal that involves either its draft picks, players or both.

    With last year's top pick, Nick Collison, returning — he missed the past season because of two shoulder surgeries — the Sonics have committed to a young power forward.

    "We're not married to our pick," Sund said. "With Nick coming back, we have the flexibility to move our pick. We've added so much youth to our team that you have to look at how viable would it be to add another young player.

    "We've got a lot of options. We can trade the pick. Move the pick, whether that means going back or trying to move up higher. Draft for a specific area where we need help. Take the best player. Or take a big (player). A lot of that depends on the expansion draft."

    Each team can protect eight players off its 2003-04 roster, including restricted free agents, and must submit its list before tomorrow's deadline.

    Charlotte, the NBA's newest franchise, must select a minimum of 14 players from NBA rosters in the expansion draft, which will be held June 22, or June 23 if the NBA Finals is extended to a seventh game.

    Seattle is expected to protect Ray Allen, Rashard Lewis, Collison, Luke Ridnour, Vladimir Radmanovic, Ronald Murray and Antonio Daniels.

    The Sonics will likely expose Richie Frahm and Calvin Booth and must decide between Reggie Evans, Vitaly Potapenko and Jerome James for the eighth protected spot.

    Bernie Bickerstaff, the Bobcats' general manager and coach, has said he's looking for young, athletic players with modest contracts in the expansion draft, so it would seem unlikely that Charlotte would select any Sonics.

    The bigger question facing Seattle is whether Sund and coach Nate McMillan, both in the last years of their contracts, plan to tweak the current model or perform a major reconstruction of personnel.

    In the days after the 37-45 season, McMillan said he favored returning most of the team. Sund said: "I don't want to do a deal just to do a deal," but insisted he'll explore a major trade.

    Early speculation fueled by Internet reports had the Sonics linked with Portland in a trade involving Ray Allen and Shareef Abdur-Rahim.

    Citing team policy, Sund declined to comment on the rumor. Team sources, however, said the report was bogus. Portland is shopping Abdur-Rahim, but it appears the Sonics are unwilling to part with Allen and are working toward an extension that both sides believe will be completed before training camp.

    "I want to be and I expect to be in Seattle," Allen said weeks ago. "That's my intention."

    Excluding Allen, Seattle's top trade assets include Lewis, Radmanovic and Murray. A combination of those players might be enough to convince Portland to deal Abdur-Rahim or Indiana to trade Al Harrington.

    The Los Angeles Clippers, who have the second overall pick and need a point guard, are reportedly shopping Chris Wilcox, and Memphis' Pau Gasol may be available for the right price.

    The top free-agent power forward is Kenyon Martin, but he's too costly for the Sonics, who are over the projected $45 million salary cap and have only the mid-level and million-dollar exceptions.

    Even the likes of Stromile Swift may be too expensive for Seattle if it hopes to re-sign unrestricted free agent Brent Barry.

    Although there is large amount of underclassmen who have made themselves available for the draft, most won't be able to help a team right away.

    "It's a very good draft," Sund said. "A draft, however, in which the immediate contribution from these players won't be seen next year. More down the line. It's getting closer and closer to baseball. We're drafting younger kids who need to develop and mature."

    If the Sonics keep the No. 12 pick, many NBA sources believe they will use it on a small forward who would replace free agent Ansu Sesay and back up Lewis.

    "The pick itself is not going to be a make or break for us," Sund said. "We think the team can make the playoffs next year. The playoffs are our goal. We think we can get there with everybody we had last year, because they are a year older."
    Here, everyone have a : on me
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Another rumor

    The only person that I'd consider out of the three "assets" is Murray... he could be a decent SG for us... We really don't need another SF/PF tweener...
    Here, everyone have a : on me

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Another rumor

      The only person that I'd consider out of the three "assets" is Murray... he could be a decent SG for us... We really don't need another SF/PF tweener...
      He's only played one good year...and I think Al is better than he is.
      Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Another rumor

        The only person that I'd consider out of the three "assets" is Murray... he could be a decent SG for us... We really don't need another SF/PF tweener...
        He's only played one good year...and I think Al is better than he is.
        Oh yeah... I totally agree!
        I guess my point is that Seattle will have to give something more if they want Al...

        Also, the trade wouldn't even be close to working salary-wise...
        Here, everyone have a : on me

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Another rumor

          One thing that I don't understand is why they want Shareef Abdur Rahim... I don't think he has ever been on a team that has been over .400 (unless you count the trailblazers in which case he didn't even play)... He is so soft
          Here, everyone have a : on me

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Another rumor

            If we could get both Flip and Lewis, might be worth Al and a Pollard/Cro combo. But It really doesn't make us that much better, and I don't think Seattle would do it.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Another rumor

              al harrington for the #12 pick + brent barry (s & t) works for me...

              bones gives us guard depth for now and we can draft someone like luke jackson as the sg of the future with the #12

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Another rumor

                al harrington for the #12 pick + brent barry (s & t) works for me...

                bones gives us guard depth for now and we can draft someone like luke jackson as the sg of the future with the #12
                Great trade... I kinda doubt they'll do it though... I really want Brent Barry... He fits our teams needs perfectly right now...
                Here, everyone have a : on me

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Another rumor

                  If we could get both Flip and Lewis, might be worth Al and a Pollard/Cro combo. But It really doesn't make us that much better, and I don't think Seattle would do it.
                  From what I hear, that is feasible...

                  Perhaps we'd have to throw in Fred or someone too though...
                  Here, everyone have a : on me

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Another rumor

                    [quote="ILovethePacers"]http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/sonics/2001952602_soni10.html

                    [b]Excluding Allen, Seattle's top trade assets include Lewis, Radmanovic and Murray. A combination of those players might be enough to convince Portland to deal Abdur-Rahim or Indiana to trade Al Harrington. [/b


                    Thanks Seattle...I don't see anything happening with the Sonics, but this does help the Pacers. Keep Al's name out there and maybe his stock will continue to rise with other teams afraid on missing out.
                    You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Another rumor

                      al harrington for the #12 pick + brent barry (s & t) works for me...

                      bones gives us guard depth for now and we can draft someone like luke jackson as the sg of the future with the #12
                      Great trade... I kinda doubt they'll do it though... I really want Brent Barry... He fits our teams needs perfectly right now...
                      IMO, this is pretty good but I'm not sure it solves our immediate SG problem. I see BB as the perfect combo guard, so do you think Luke Jackson could start at SG as a rookie (remember, I don't watch the semi-pro game, so I don't know much about him)?
                      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

                      • #12
                        Re: Another rumor

                        Al for Murray and their first draft pick. That's 12 or 13 I think.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Another rumor

                          al harrington for the #12 pick + brent barry (s & t) works for me...

                          bones gives us guard depth for now and we can draft someone like luke jackson as the sg of the future with the #12
                          Great trade... I kinda doubt they'll do it though... I really want Brent Barry... He fits our teams needs perfectly right now...
                          IMO, this is pretty good but I'm not sure it solves our immediate SG problem. I see BB as the perfect combo guard, so do you think Luke Jackson could start at SG as a rookie (remember, I don't watch the semi-pro game, so I don't know much about him)?
                          actually, i would start bones at sg, with fred as the combo guard (or vice versa). the rookie sg gets spot minutes until he proves himself. this is a nice setup i think because with barry on board the rookie can be brought along slowly.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Another rumor

                            Al for Murray and their first draft pick. That's 12 or 13 I think.
                            it's 12. salaries don't match though, seattle would have to include someone like jerome james or potapenko.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Another rumor

                              Al for Murray and their first draft pick. That's 12 or 13 I think.
                              it's 12. salaries don't match though, seattle would have to include someone like jerome james or potapenko.
                              JJ to give us some size.

                              I don't think we should throw Fred Jones into any deal UNLESS we get a starting SG in return. IMO it would be pointless for us to trade away Fred for a future 2 because...ummm...isn't that what Fred is?

                              I would really like to hold onto Fred for atleast 1 more year...he may explode next year..or maybe he won't. The point is none of us know which one it will be. This team doesn't need a trade to help us 4 years from know, we need a trade to help us Next Year.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                              Working...
                              X