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

Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

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

  • #46
    Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

    Originally posted by blanket View Post
    Don't we HAVE to trade JO (or some other combination of large contracts like Murphy, Dunleavy, or Tinsley) THIS year for contracts that expire in the summer of '09 when Granger's new contract kicks in? Otherwise, we won't be able to afford to keep Danny.

    Daniels + Ike expires in time. That frees up close to 10 million. Granger is not a concern unless we trade one of these two.

    This deal is retarded. I would not trade with cleveland for anything less than JO for big Z, Varejo, and the #19... as proposed before... and I didn't even really like that deal.

    Is that too much? well who cares. If JO can't even fetch that than we are WAY better off seeing what he can do this season. He could come back playing really well and could be worth a good trade at the deadline... or just let him expire if we want cap room. If he has negative trade value, and we have to GIVE UP our pick... that is insane. There is no reason to do that. Just eat it for one more year and let him expire.

    The other deal idea has grown on me though... if we could turn varejo into another pick, maybe send him to utah for the #23. Than we would have #11, #19, #23, and #41. I like it.
    Last edited by Infinite MAN_force; 06-05-2008, 02:12 PM.
    "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

    - ilive4sports

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

      Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post
      Something puzzles me, though. Why are some of you suggesting that the Pacers trade down to get the #19 pick? I thought the idea was to get as high up in the draft you could to have the best chance at getting the best talent out there or at least have the better odds of getting the guy you want. Am I missing something?

      Well, it depends on what you think of picks 6 through 20. I happen to think there's not much, if any, difference in those players. If you can get a good player or something else of decent value and still be in a position to get a guy you think is just as good later, then you do it.

      For example, if, after the workouts, you decide that Lawson and CDR are at the top of your list, you might look to move back a few picks if you think you can get them later, thus getting the guy you want, plus something else. Otherwise, you can just take that guy at 11, though there will be the added pressure of people thinking you're reaching.

      To me, you look to get the most value you can out of the pick, and that could be through (a) using it to pick the best player your can, (b) using with other assets to go higher in the draft, or (c) using it to move back in the draft and address other concerns as well.

      I don't know what the right answer will be, but it's looking to me that the guy we take at 11 isn't going to be all that much more impressive than the guy we might be able to get at, say, 19.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

        Originally posted by Dr. Goldfoot View Post
        It's about making moves for the sake of making moves.
        While that may be true in some cases, it's really a gross oversimplification. At this point, we should be open to trying to move up, move back, move out, or stay put, and not determine which way we go until we figure out which one will put us in the best shape when the summer's over.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

          I just don't see it happening. so I wouldn't worry about it. The important part is the pacers are looking to trade JO

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

            Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
            Daniels + Ike expires in time. That frees up close to 10 million. Granger is not a concern unless we trade one of these two.
            All of our other big contracts will be increasing by roughly $1M each that year, too, plus you have to factor in the contracts for any other players acquired over the next year (since this would leave only 7 players on the roster with contracts through 09/10). Given that, the $10M gained from the Daniels/Ike contracts coming off the books would be just enough to cover the increase of these contracts, and not enough to cover Granger's new contract. If we don't re-sign Foster, that would help, but surely there would be some other player(s) acquired that will fill that salary amount.

            Therefore, we need to drop the contract of either JO, Murphy, Tinsley or Dunleavy before the 09/10 season if we want to retain Granger.
            "I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
            -Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

              JO has more trade value than this. We don't give up the #11 and would acquire the #19.

              Plus, JO can't be traded until after june 30th when he picks up his option, which is after the draft.

              So all of this is speculabumpkiss.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

                Originally posted by beast23 View Post
                I call BS. I thought we traded our pick last season. So, unless it's no longer part of the newest CBA, I didn't think a team is allowed to trade its pick 2 years in a row.

                So, whatever the trade might be, it doesn't involve our #11 pick.
                To go over this again:

                The only rule is that at any one point in time, you can't have consecutive FUTURE draft picks traded away.

                So right now, you are not allowed to trade away your 2008 pick and 2009 pick.

                However, the moment after you use your 2008 pick, you can trade whoever you drafted with that pick. Then a minute later, you can trade your 2009 pick. The 2008 pick is irrelevant to the rule by then because it would no longer be considered a future pick.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

                  Originally posted by iPACER View Post
                  JO has more trade value than this. We don't give up the #11 and would acquire the #19.

                  Plus, JO can't be traded until after june 30th when he picks up his option, which is after the draft.

                  So all of this is speculabumpkiss.
                  NBA reporting in general is a bunch of speculabumpkiss.

                  That's why I can't wait for the draft to end, so I don't have to read about numerous trade "rumors" from Chad Ford that have no realistic chance of happening.

                  Worst part of these rumors is the amount of dumb threads they generate on boards like RealGM. And all because one writer said so.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

                    i wonder it there could be a way to get gibson from them.... i've always liked him, and i know cleveland is pretty high on him too. but any package would have to include the #11 pick.
                    Passion, Pride, Playoffs, Pacers

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

                      Originally posted by iPACER View Post
                      JO has more trade value than this. We don't give up the #11 and would acquire the #19.

                      Plus, JO can't be traded until after june 30th when he picks up his option, which is after the draft.

                      So all of this is speculabumpkiss.
                      Speculabumpkiss?

                      That's snatchtacular.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

                        JO and the 41st

                        for

                        Wally, Snow, 19th

                        ?????


                        For the 2009/10 season, the Pacesr could shed 28m in salary after Snows, Wallys, and release Daniels (would be my hope). I am guessing put us roughly around 25-30m in salaries. This would give them a great chance to hit he Free Agent market with some of the talent looking for contracts.
                        Bambam

                        Follow me on Twitter @http://twitter.com/brockhubble

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

                          Originally posted by iPACER View Post
                          Plus, JO can't be traded until after june 30th when he picks up his option, which is after the draft.

                          So all of this is speculabumpkiss.
                          Not a problem. The trade can be announced on draft night and actually go through 4 days later. Not even a hint of difficulty with that.
                          This space for rent.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

                            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                            JO and Tinsley for Wally, Z, Jones, and the #19? Works for me.
                            I still think this is the start of something decent. No comments?

                            A prospect or a future pick could make that a good deal for the Pacers. Pacers get out of Tinsley's brutal contract, get a couple decent pieces back, don't take on bad contracts, and get a decent player like Rush or CDR.
                            Last edited by Anthem; 06-05-2008, 03:06 PM.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

                              Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                              Not a problem. The trade can be announced on draft night and actually go through 4 days later. Not even a hint of difficulty with that.
                              Plus, the NBA rules say:

                              Section 7. Option Exercise Notices.
                              The NBA shall provide the Players Association with copies of any Option or ETO exercise or non-exercise notice received by the NBA within two (2) business days of the NBA’s receipt of such notice from the Team.
                              Which seems to indicate that JO and his agents can actively waive the ETO, allowing the transaction to be completed on draft night.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

                                Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                                I still think this is the start of something decent. No comments?

                                A prospect or a future pick could make that a good deal for the Pacers. Pacers get out of Tinsley's brutal contract, get a couple decent pieces back, don't take on bad contracts, and get a decent player like Rush or CDR.
                                I like it, but if I keep agreeing with you, people will start to talk.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X