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

Chad Ford thinks we'll trade Foster and/or Murphy by the deadline

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

  • #16
    Re: Chad Ford thinks we'll trade Foster and/or Murphy by the deadline

    Originally posted by Peck View Post
    I mean it would be a dream come true for me if both these players were traded, but again I am starting to have real doubts about the people above O'Brien now.

    My gut feeling is that they will do nothing until it gets closer to the trade deadline because right now they honestly think that they have turned a corner on health and are in a playoff hunt.

    Murphy is one of the cornerstones for O'Brien's system so my guess is that as long as they think they have an outside chance of making it that they will not make any moves.
    Then I think they should be drug tested immediately

    For the love of God, for 3 seasons now it's been wait till we get healthy. To think this team has a shoty of going anwyhere but the lottery , as currently constructed, is highly deliousional
    Sittin on top of the world!

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Chad Ford thinks we'll trade Foster and/or Murphy by the deadline

      Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
      Not following

      I take it your not a fan of Devin Harris?
      I'm not. He seems to much like a shoot first point guard.
      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Chad Ford thinks we'll trade Foster and/or Murphy by the deadline

        Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
        I'm not. He seems to much like a shoot first point guard.
        wow,

        not really sure about that. I mean he was playing at a really high level before he got injured, and he is only 24 I believe

        If the Nets get the number one pick, then it should facilitate a trade
        Sittin on top of the world!

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Chad Ford thinks we'll trade Foster and/or Murphy by the deadline

          Pray tell who would you pass to on the Nets?
          Report: 82% Of Wiseguys Think They're Real Funny

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Chad Ford thinks we'll trade Foster and/or Murphy by the deadline

            I think I would give my left nut to have harris on this team. Him and granger would make a very good tandem.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Chad Ford thinks we'll trade Foster and/or Murphy by the deadline

              Folks the Nets only want a All Star Caliber player to even part w/ Harris... they say it'll hurt their chances of signing an elite Free Agent otherwise... so unless you're willing to trade Granger, Harris is highly unlikely here...
              "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Chad Ford thinks we'll trade Foster and/or Murphy by the deadline

                Originally posted by MrSparko View Post
                Pray tell who would you pass to on the Nets?
                Send Troy Murphy back home!!!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Chad Ford thinks we'll trade Foster and/or Murphy by the deadline

                  Originally posted by dohman View Post
                  I think I would give my left nut to have harris on this team. Him and granger would make a very good tandem.
                  If Foster or Murphy can turn into Devin Harris I would be intoxicated enough to do alot of things, however never that. I was wondering, however, if one was required to remove a nut how does one decide which is the better nut. It would seem many are more apt to remove the left than the right and I am curious if there is science to back this up.
                  Someone has very little on his plate today, obviously

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Chad Ford thinks we'll trade Foster and/or Murphy by the deadline

                    Originally posted by Peck View Post
                    I mean it would be a dream come true for me if both these players were traded, but again I am starting to have real doubts about the people above O'Brien now.

                    My gut feeling is that they will do nothing until it gets closer to the trade deadline because right now they honestly think that they have turned a corner on health and are in a playoff hunt.

                    Murphy is one of the cornerstones for O'Brien's system so my guess is that as long as they think they have an outside chance of making it that they will not make any moves.
                    Since when do teams that have pieces that other teams want move them way before the deadline... you have more bargaining leverage using the other teams against each other the closer you get to the deadline...

                    I know you have mistrust for our management, and everyday that passes you doubt they'll do anything... but be patient... b/c guess what, every GM worth their salt is patient and gets the best deal for their team. That's why you see most deals done closer to the deadline than weeks before.

                    It's hard being a fan and not able to control the strings of something you have allot of passion about, but sometimes we here need to step back and take a deep breath, to clear out some of the cynicism... (Not aimed directly at you)
                    "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Chad Ford thinks we'll trade Foster and/or Murphy by the deadline

                      Originally posted by Speed View Post
                      Big thing is Foster has to play and be all the way healthy and show it for awhile, I'd guess.
                      Do you think the Pacers are purposely holding him out to ensure he'll be 100% healthy when traded?
                      First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Chad Ford thinks we'll trade Foster and/or Murphy by the deadline

                        There has been a lot of D. Harris talk lately, and I wanted to add some things. This is only to inform you of the sentiment for Devin Harris of people in the metropolitan area. I have good friends who have attended every game at the Izod center since J Kidd was in town, At first when Devin came to the Nets they were what I'd describe as highly optimistic, and there was no question the Nets won that trade.

                        Now they have completely turned on him. The main thing when griping about Harris is he is SOFT, to put it nicely. Next is on to his mental ability to lead a team deep into the playoffs. Also they say how he "wants to be a huge star". Which I only mention because I wonder would he conflict with Granger.

                        Now the talk is that it has become evident through out the organization and immediate fan base that D Harris is not the type of leader to carry a championship team. Which is why he is suddenly expendable.

                        Again this is what people here are saying every time the Nets are brought up. Sometimes looking deeper into a situation there is no one better than the local/die hard fans to diagnose their team, but then again what do they know, they're Nets fans

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Chad Ford thinks we'll trade Foster and/or Murphy by the deadline

                          Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
                          Do you think the Pacers are purposely holding him out to ensure he'll be 100% healthy when traded?
                          Yes.

                          Also think that you likely wont see a deal done til the deadline due to the fact one of the primary deals being discussed is a Cleveland deal involving Z and a potential buyout and subsequent release. The longer that waits, the less money it will cost the Pacers so I dont think they will make a deal as long as that seems like a viable possibility.
                          The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Chad Ford thinks we'll trade Foster and/or Murphy by the deadline

                            Originally posted by BobbyMac View Post
                            Well I haven't changed my position that we should kepp Murphy, but with Tyler's continued inner ear problems I don't think we can trade Murphy. If we trade Foster we need to get a young big.
                            I am all for competing for a Playoff spot and recognize that we need some Big Man depth.......but if we ever decided to NOT make a trade ( especially Murphy's huge contract ) because of a 3rd/4th/5th rotational Big Man's ear infection ( that I'd assume will go away in a couple of weeks at most )....I'd want someone's head to roll.
                            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Chad Ford thinks we'll trade Foster and/or Murphy by the deadline

                              Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                              All I am saying is if Bird and Company fail to trade either Foster or Murphy then

                              either Bird is asking too much and he has completely failed this franchise

                              or he truly believes that he can get more for them next year

                              as long as the reason is NOT that he thinks they can make a playoff run again
                              This is a bit overstated. If Bird is turning down very reasonable offers (Z + Hickson, for example) then you might have a case. However, if he decides to wait and see what he can get for Murphy and Foster next season when they are both talented players and expiring contracts, I don't think he's failing the franchise.

                              However, I do think we need to move one player by the deadline just to avoid some serious luxury tax issues for next season.

                              I think there might be some truth to the Foster being held out due to trade talks idea. If Denver (or someone else) really wants him and is committed to finding a way to get him, why would they want him playing right now? Any team that trades for him is going to know he's had back issues for years. They're also going to examine him and try to determine how healthy he'll be for the rest of this year. He'll probably be healthier if he's not playing.
                              "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                              - Salman Rushdie

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Chad Ford thinks we'll trade Foster and/or Murphy by the deadline

                                Originally posted by Peck View Post
                                My gut feeling is that they will do nothing until it gets closer to the trade deadline because right now they honestly think that they have turned a corner on health and are in a playoff hunt.

                                Murphy is one of the cornerstones for O'Brien's system so my guess is that as long as they think they have an outside chance of making it that they will not make any moves.
                                I really hope that the FO is not thinking like this. If the FO has a deal that could net the Pacers Financial relief and some sweetner ( ie, $$$, prospects, picks ), I'd really hope that they take it and move on....if they don't thinking that Murphy is too valuable to keep....then Bird has moved on from running the Pacers FO in a "practical, pragmatic and realistic" manner that has gotten us this far to IMHO DW territory....where he overvalues and asks for too much in return for the Pacers assets while setting unrealistic goals for the Team.

                                I am all for not tanking and making the best push that we can for the Playoffs......but not at the cost of further limiting our SalaryCap/financial situation next season. Murphy is a good JO'B type of player....but he is not the end all be all when it comes to the success of this team.
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X