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

Rockets acquire Ron Artest

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

  • Rockets acquire Ron Artest

    http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...n/5914062.html

    Ron Artest set for deal to Rockets

    Bobby Jackson, first-round pick to go to Sacramento

    By JONATHAN FEIGEN
    Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle
    July 29, 2008, 7:09PM

    In what had been a quiet offseason, the Rockets are about to make a lot of noise.

    In a stunning move designed to push the Rockets from solid playoff team toward legitimate NBA contenders, the Rockets reached agreement Tuesday with the Sacramento Kings to acquire gifted but controversial forward Ron Artest, according to an NBA executive with knowledge of the deal.

    The Rockets will give up guard Bobby Jackson, a No. 1 draft pick next season and another player that the individual with knowledge of the trade could not name. Rockets general manager Daryl Morey could not be immediately reached for comment.

    Because of contract considerations, the trade will not be announced until Aug. 14, though that would indicate the deal could include Rockets first round draft pick DonteM Greene. Greene is not permitted to be traded until then, one month from when he signed with the Rockets.

    There could also be other players involved to make the money match but none that the Rockets would plan to keep. The Rockets will also send the Kings cash in excess of $1 million.

    Artest, 28, is considered one of the NBAs most unpredictable characters and was the central figure in a 2004-05 brawl with fans in Auburn Hills, Mich. He is also considered among the leagues toughest lock-down defenders and sometimes, an unstoppable offensive force.

    The 39 points he scored against the Rockets in 2006-07 season are his career high.

    A 6-7, 248 pound forward, he had publicly lamented his decision last month not to opt out of the last season of his contract to become a free agent, renewing the Kings efforts to move him.

    Artest played 40 games for Rockets coach Rick Adelman after he was traded by the Indiana Pacers to the Kings in the 2005-06 season, averaging 16.9 points, 5.2 rebounds and a career-high 4.2 assists. He was also a first-team NBA All-Defensive team selection. He offered to donate his salary if the Kings were willing to retain Adelman after that season.

    In nine NBA seasons out of St. Johns, where he was a third-team All-American, Artest has averaged 16 points and 5.1 rebounds. He was the 2003-04 NBA Defensive Player of the Year. He averaged 20.5 points per game last season.

    Artest, however, has been unable to stay clear from trouble. He was arrested in March 2007 and charged with domestic abuse and eventually sentenced to 20 days in jail and community service. That sentence was reduced to 10 days in a work release program. He had also been charged with animal neglect, though charges were not filed and Artest has since worked with People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals on several campaigns.

    In addition to his 73-game suspension after going into the stands in the Nov. 19, 2004 brawl (the longest suspension in NBA history other than for drug policy violations or gambling), he has been suspended for destroying a television camera in New York, for an altercation with then Heat coach Pat Riley in Miami and for numerous flagrant fouls.

    Drafted by the Chicago Bulls in 1999, he was traded in 2002 to the Pacers, having some of his best seasons, including his one All Star season in 2003-04. Prior to the fight in 2004, he was suspended for two games for asking for a month off to promote an R&B album by a group on his production label.

    After his return to the Pacers the season after the fight, he asked for a trade and was placed on the inactive roster.

    Though Artest has been best used as a small forward, Rockets forward Shane Battier is also considered among the leagues best players at defending small forwards and shooting guards. But because Artest can defend players from small guards to power forwards, the Rockets could finish games with Artest and Battier on the court together, either with Tracy McGrady sliding over to point guard or with Artest matching up with power forwards.

  • #2
    Re: Artest dealt to Rockets?

    Pretty good move. The Rockets weren't going anywhere.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Artest dealt to Rockets?

      Wow, they are giving up a lot to have deal with Ron's problems in the future.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Artest dealt to Rockets?

        Wow, that could be really interesting. I am sure the Rockets see him as a one year rental for them to win it all. If he maintains his composure, and Yao and T-Mac stay healthy, it could be interesting.

        Would you rather have Ron, Yao, and T-Mac or Ray Allen, Paul Pierce, and Garnett? Similar talent level. Obviously the Celtics group has better intangibles, but if Artest can hold on for a year...

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Artest dealt to Rockets?

          Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
          Wow, they are giving up a lot to have deal with Ron's problems in the future.
          I doubt they will extend him after this year.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Artest dealt to Rockets?

            Houston, You Have A Problem.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Artest dealt to Rockets?

              The reason the deal won't be announced for awhile is because they are including Donte Green, the first round pick of the Rockets.

              http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archiv...re_ron_artest/

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Artest dealt to Rockets?

                Originally posted by Shade View Post
                Houston, You Have A Problem.
                Why didn't I think of that!? lol

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Artest dealt to Rockets?

                  Rockets get a solid deal if Artest can keep his head on basketball for one year and one year only. The Rockets only had to surrender an aging and largely ineffective Bobby Jackson, the next Tim Thomas, and a pick likely in the teens if not into the 20's.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Artest dealt to Rockets?

                    Originally posted by dcpacersfan View Post
                    The reason the deal won't be announced for awhile is because they are including Donte Green, the first round pick of the Rockets.

                    http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archiv...re_ron_artest/
                    Wait a minute...the Kings got Bobby Jackson back, AND a 2009 first-rounder, AND Donte Green?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Artest dealt to Rockets?

                      Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
                      Why didn't I think of that!? lol
                      I want royalties every time someone uses this phrase from this point on in reference to Ron Artest and the Rockets.

                      I intend to be a rich by season's end.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Artest dealt to Rockets?

                        Originally posted by Shade View Post
                        I want royalties every time someone uses this phrase from this point on in reference to Ron Artest and the Rockets.

                        I intend to be a rich by season's end.
                        Better trademark it...quick!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Rockets acquire Ron Artest

                          This now creates a logjam of sorts between Mac, Artest, and Battier. The easy and quick solution is to make Battier the backup at 3 (behind Artest), creating a starting 5 of Yao/Scola/Artest/McGrady/Alston.

                          Or they could package Battier and Alston and look to get a dynamic PG...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Artest dealt to Rockets?

                            Originally posted by Shade View Post
                            Wait a minute...the Kings got Bobby Jackson back, AND a 2009 first-rounder, AND Donte Green?

                            Bobby Jackson is just salary relief.

                            Donte Green is unimpressive to me, at least in the 3-4 Syracuse games I watched last year. By draft standards, he is a very poor man's Brandon Rush. And I don't think the draft pick will be very good because the Rockets will probably be one of the top 3-4 teams in the West next year if they can gel and if Artest stays in control for one year (he usually does ok at year one for most teams).

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Artest dealt to Rockets?

                              Originally posted by dcpacersfan View Post
                              The reason the deal won't be announced for awhile is because they are including Donte Green, the first round pick of the Rockets.

                              http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archiv...re_ron_artest/


                              Again?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X