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

Shaq has made it clear he wants to be traded.

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

  • Shaq has made it clear he wants to be traded.

    Death of a dynasty

    O'Neal upset by direction, won't be the 'scapegoat'

    By Howard Beck
    Staff Writer

    Link Here

    EL SEGUNDO -- Shaquille O'Neal, the cornerstone of three championship teams and the most dominant big man in the NBA, wants to be traded, and the Lakers intend to honor his request.

    A team source, speaking on condition of anonymity, said O'Neal made the trade demand late Thursday through his agent, Perry Rogers. The same source said the Lakers intend to pursue a deal immediately.


    In a telephone interview Friday morning, a somber O'Neal said he "never" called it a demand, but he made his desires absolutely clear.

    "The direction they're going, if they're going to continue going in the wrong direction, I don't want to be a part of this," O'Neal said. "So I want you guys to write that if any GM out there wants a hard-working big man who wants to win championships, call Mitch Kupchak, because he will entertain offers."

    Kupchak, the Lakers' general manager, said Thursday that he could not rule out trading O'Neal. While Kupchak was referring then to a hypothetical demand -- which had not yet been delivered -- O'Neal was insulted and infuriated by the comments.

    "I don't think this is about me at this point, because Mitch said he would entertain offers," O'Neal said. "Everybody knows I love L.A. ... That's just Mitch using me as a scapegoat. But don't believe it."

    Kupchak declined to comment Friday. Rogers is out of the country and was unavailable for comment.

    O'Neal's business manager, Mike Parris, said no demands have been made, but summed up his client's agenda this way: "He wants to go to a place where they're interested in building a team to win, and they're not interested in individuals. If the Lakers' intent isn't to build a team, then it might be time to part ways."

    A day earlier, Kupchak refused to rule out trading O'Neal but said, "That would not be a good day in this club's history. ... Players do have that option (to demand a trade), and we'll see what happens."

    Within the organization, O'Neal's stance is viewed as anger over stalled contract negotiations. The team and O'Neal have been unable to agree to terms on an extension. O'Neal was seeking the maximum allowable -- about $77 million over two years.

    The team, concerned with O'Neal's age (32) and declining production, wanted him to take a significant pay cut.

    According to a team source, the contract extension offer is no longer on the table. However, the team had intended to keep O'Neal through the final two years of his contract until now.

    During the course of Friday's 10-minute interview, O'Neal cited everything but money. He never mentioned Kobe Bryant either, but he hinted frequently at discord within the team and the effect of Bryant's desire to reshape it.

    The Lakers parted ways with coach Phil Jackson on Friday, the first step in a purge designed to keep Bryant happy and in Los Angeles. Bryant has exercised an option to become a free agent July 1.

    Owner Jerry Buss has not spoken publicly, but those familiar with his thinking say he plans to do everything necessary to re-sign Bryant. That shift in power seemed foremost on O'Neal's mind.

    "I told you guys when I first got here, I'm all about winning championships," O'Neal said. "The organization now is different. It seems they're trying to pit one guy against another. ... I don't want to be part of that. Right now, they're not talking the team concept."

    "When I was brought in by Jerry West, it was always a team concept," O'Neal said. "This isn't about respect or extensions. ... My last six or seven years I'm going to be in the league, I want to be on a great team."

    It is regarded as a given by sources close to both stars that neither one wanted to play with the other. Indeed, while Bryant's disapproval of Jackson was the primary factor in the coach's dismissal, his greatest source of frustration is O'Neal, team sources said.

    Even as they won three consecutive championships from 2000 to 2002, O'Neal and Bryant sparred constantly, both in private and through the media.

    It was Jackson's steady hand that kept the team from imploding through years of infighting. It was Jackson's willingness to rein in Bryant's sometimes-wild play that endeared him to O'Neal and alienated him from Bryant.

    Over the past few years, O'Neal has repeatedly pledged his loyalty to Jackson, saying he would not play for another coach. And he was disturbed when it became clear that Jackson would not be invited back.

    "It affects me a lot," O'Neal said. "Phil's a guy that's taken me to the next level. To let our leader go means something's not right."

    He added, "I think the fans deserve better. This should be about the team."

    Trading O'Neal will be difficult.

    Under the extension he signed in 2000, O'Neal is due $29.5 million next season and $32.4 million in 2005-06. To move him to another team over the salary cap, the Lakers would have to take back players whose combined salaries are close to O'Neal's for next season.

    Further complicating matters is that O'Neal can opt out of his contract next summer, which means a team trading for him could lose O'Neal after just one season. His new employer would also have to consider O'Neal's contract extension demands. As of July 1, he'll be eligible for a three-year deal worth more than $100 million.

    Derek Fisher, a teammate of both Bryant and O'Neal since they all arrived in the summer of 1996, said a trade of the league's best center and three-time Finals MVP was hard to envision.

    "Getting it done without Shaq seems to be extremely difficult. I think Orlando found that out the hard way," Fisher said, referring to O'Neal's defection in 1996. "And hopefully the Lakers won't have to find that out, in terms of not having a team with Shaq on it."
    Broadcasting Classic Rock Hits 24/7 SauceMaster Radio!!!!


  • #2
    Re: Shaq has made it clear he wants to be traded.

    Wow.... LA really is cleaning house.

    Here's something to ponder: If, through some unearthly means, we were able to get Shaq, would you want him, knowing that he'd probably get us 2 or 3 rings? Or would you rather stick with this team and earn it the old-fashioned way?
    Official Member of the Anti-Alliteration Association

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Shaq has made it clear he wants to be traded.

      O'Neal is open to the idea of going to one of only a few teams, among them Orlando, Atlanta and Dallas.

      So I doubt if we have a ghost chance in Hell
      Broadcasting Classic Rock Hits 24/7 SauceMaster Radio!!!!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Shaq has made it clear he wants to be traded.

        Wow.... LA really is cleaning house.

        Here's something to ponder: If, through some unearthly means, we were able to get Shaq, would you want him, knowing that he'd probably get us 2 or 3 rings? Or would you rather stick with this team and earn it the old-fashioned way?
        Oh you mean by trading JO, Al, Bender, Jones?

        Naw... It wouldn't bother me one bit if Shaq never stepped foot in Conseco again, let alone play for the Pacers.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Shaq has made it clear he wants to be traded.

          Wow.... LA really is cleaning house.

          Here's something to ponder: If, through some unearthly means, we were able to get Shaq, would you want him, knowing that he'd probably get us 2 or 3 rings? Or would you rather stick with this team and earn it the old-fashioned way?
          Oh you mean by trading JO, Al, Bender, Jones?

          Naw... It wouldn't bother me one bit if Shaq never stepped foot in Conseco again, let alone play for the Pacers.
          I mean hypothetically, just the idea of him being a Pacer. Nevermind what it would cost us [the team], would you want to ride him to a title or earn it without him?

          I know my answer, I'm just curious to see what others think.
          Official Member of the Anti-Alliteration Association

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Shaq has made it clear he wants to be traded.

            LA radio is spreading JO for Shaq rumors.

            It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

            Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
            Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
            NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Shaq has made it clear he wants to be traded.

              LA radio is spreading JO for Shaq rumors.
              JO for Shaq.... Ron, Al, Jon, and Tins for Tmac....

              Maybe we're giving up on winning and trying to make a run for the team with the most jersey sales?
              Official Member of the Anti-Alliteration Association

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Shaq has made it clear he wants to be traded.

                if shaq takes a 15-20 million dollar pay cut ..maybe

                I love all these rumors , it's great to see people go apeshit over rumors and the past 2 days have been priceless and entertaining .,
                Broadcasting Classic Rock Hits 24/7 SauceMaster Radio!!!!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Shaq has made it clear he wants to be traded.

                  Shaq says it's all about the "team," not "individuals," but he wants a contract extension of 2 years at $38.5 million per year?

                  I NEVER want that greedy, hypocritical fatass in a Pacers uniform. EVER.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Shaq has made it clear he wants to be traded.

                    LA radio is spreading JO for Shaq rumors.
                    JO for Shaq.... Ron, Al, Jon, and Tins for Tmac....

                    Maybe we're giving up on winning and trying to make a run for the team with the most jersey sales?
                    C - Shaq/Foster/Pollard/Brezec
                    PF - Croshere
                    SF - T-Mac/JJones
                    SG - Miller/FJones
                    PG - Johnson/Brewer

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Shaq has made it clear he wants to be traded.

                      LA radio is spreading JO for Shaq rumors.
                      JO for Shaq.... Ron, Al, Jon, and Tins for Tmac....

                      Maybe we're giving up on winning and trying to make a run for the team with the most jersey sales?
                      C - Shaq/Foster/Pollard/Brezec
                      PF - Croshere
                      SF - T-Mac/JJones
                      SG - Miller/FJones
                      PG - Johnson/Brewer

                      To get Shaq, we'd need to give up something like.... JO, Cro, Pollard, Foster.... and if we throw in Freddie, we can get Karl Malone too!

                      C: Shaq - Primoz
                      PF: Malone
                      SF: JJones - Jay@Section222
                      SG: Tmac - Miller
                      PG: Johnson - Brewer

                      The Pacers could pick up a decent FA [Jay] to make sure they wouldn't have to forfeit any games due to someone getting hurt and not having the minimum of 8 players available.

                      Official Member of the Anti-Alliteration Association

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Shaq has made it clear he wants to be traded.

                        I think its important to mention that for reason alone of shaq's enormous SALARY, JO would HAVE to be included, among others. I think without JO youd have to trade the other 11 guys on your roster TOGETHER to make it work under the cap.

                        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Shaq has made it clear he wants to be traded.

                          L.A. Lakers trades: C Shaquille O'Neal (21.5 ppg, 11.5 rpg, 2.9 apg in 36.8 minutes)
                          L.A. Lakers receives: C Scot Pollard (1.7 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 0.2 apg in 11.1 minutes)
                          SF Ron Artest (18.3 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 3.7 apg in 37.2 minutes)
                          PF Al Harrington (13.3 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 1.7 apg in 30.9 minutes)
                          PF Austin Croshere (5.0 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 0.7 apg in 13.7 minutes)
                          PF Primoz Brezec (1.6 ppg, 0.8 rpg, 0.2 apg in 4.0 minutes)
                          Change in team outlook: +18.4 ppg, +6.9 rpg, and +3.6 apg.

                          Indiana trades: C Scot Pollard (1.7 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 0.2 apg in 11.1 minutes)
                          SF Ron Artest (18.3 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 3.7 apg in 37.2 minutes)
                          PF Al Harrington (13.3 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 1.7 apg in 30.9 minutes)
                          PF Austin Croshere (5.0 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 0.7 apg in 13.7 minutes)
                          PF Primoz Brezec (1.6 ppg, 0.8 rpg, 0.2 apg in 4.0 minutes)
                          Indiana receives: C Shaquille O'Neal (21.5 ppg, 11.5 rpg, 2.9 apg in 67 games)
                          Change in team outlook: -18.4 ppg, -6.9 rpg, and -3.6 apg.

                          TRADE ACCEPTED
                          So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                          If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                          Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Shaq has made it clear he wants to be traded.

                            Shaq's good friends with Reggie, I'd love to see him come over here to get Reggie a ring.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Shaq has made it clear he wants to be traded.

                              Him and reggie are friends? I had no idea. How long has that been going on?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X