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

Article in Star about Pacers still hoping to get Damp

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

  • Article in Star about Pacers still hoping to get Damp

    I am surprised this wasnt posted already but found it interesting. I sure get the feeling something is up.

    http://www.indystar.com/articles/8/164046-5508-036.html

  • #2
    Re: Article in Star about Pacers still hoping to get Damp

    here is article, link doesnt seem to work.



    The more Erick Dampier's options dwindle, the better chance the Indiana Pacers have of landing him. Eventually.

    Pacers CEO Donnie Walsh is "monitoring" the situation regarding Dampier, who played his rookie season in Indiana before being traded to Golden State for Chris Mullin, who is now the Warriors' general manager.

    The Pacers are unlikely to reacquire Dampier in a trade with the Warriors, but they haven't given up hope of obtaining him.

    Or anyone else for that matter.

    "We're looking at a lot of options and weighing what might be best for us," Walsh said Tuesday. "We'll continue to do that going into training camp. Some of these things you just have to wait out."

    Dampier, who averaged 12.3 points and 12 rebounds last season, is the NBA's most attractive unclaimed free agent. At 6-11, 265 pounds and 30 years old, he has the size and experience to at least offer the hint of competition for Shaquille O'Neal, who rejoins the Eastern Conference in Miami next season.

    New York Knicks president Isiah Thomas attempted to land Dampier by offering Nazr Mohammed and Othella Harrington. That possibility appeared to end Tuesday when Mullin traded Nick Van Exel to Portland for Dale Davis and Dan Dickau.

    Thomas reportedly offered a six-year, $70 million contract but can only acquire Dampier in a trade because the Knicks are over the salary cap.

    Atlanta has nearly $12 million in salary cap space. Hawks general manager Billy Knight and coach Mike Woodson met with Dampier and his agent, Dan Fegan, in Salt Lake City on Monday. Knight, who was working in the Pacers' front office when they drafted Dampier with the 10th pick in 1996, reportedly has offered a deal starting at $8 million per year and totaling about $40 million.

    Atlanta could sign Dampier with the intent of trading him. NBA rules prohibit free agents from being dealt for three months after their signing date or until Dec. 15, whichever comes later. The Pacers and Memphis rank as trade targets.

    Mullin appears willing to let Dampier walk away as a free agent, placing more pressure on Fegan to find an attractive sign-and-trade arrangement. Mullin, however, doesn't want to take long-term contracts.

    Dampier opted out of a contract that would have paid $16.8 million the next two seasons.

    The Pacers have about half of their $4.9 million midlevel exception and the $1.6 million exception to use on free agents.

    Call Star reporter Mark Montieth at (317) 444-6406.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Article in Star about Pacers still hoping to get Damp

      I definitely think that Damp can be had now. Especially with GS trading for Dale Davis. What reason would GS want to the Knicks scrubs for when they have Double D. I think that trade just went ou tthe window. Also yet again the Warriors had another point guard. Golden State is not done yet. If the pacers can steal Dunleavy do the freaking deal. Even though Damp benefited form Troy Murphy's absence last year.


      2006 WORLD CHAMPION INDIANAPOLIS COLTS

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Article in Star about Pacers still hoping to get Damp

        The Knick deal is dead - Isiah just took Moochie off the table in the Crawford deal which was the one sticking point in that one - looks like he's shifted priorities.

        Dampier should be putting together a letter firing his agent - I have a feeling he may end up being an MLE player.
        The poster formerly known as Rimfire

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Article in Star about Pacers still hoping to get Damp

          We aren't getting damp for half the MLE.
          Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Article in Star about Pacers still hoping to get Damp

            O'neal
            Artest
            Miller
            Tinsley
            Foster
            Bender
            Jackson
            F. Jones

            If we can get Dampier without giving up any of those players, I'm for it. I'm happy with this team the way it is now, but I suppose if we can drop Croshere's and/or Pollard's contract for a solid starting center, it's a good deal.

            I'm thinking Donnie had his eye on Damp from the start, but has been waiting for all the teams to set their rosters and Golden State to get desperate. Either that, or he's faking the interest altogether.
            Official Member of the Anti-Alliteration Association

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Article in Star about Pacers still hoping to get Damp

              Memphis perspective:

              Grizzlies looking for center

              Deal for Dampier is now unlikely
              ANALYSIS


              By Ronald Tillery
              Contact
              July 21, 2004

              Same search. Different summer.

              And, thus far, the Grizzlies are experiencing deja vu in their never-ending quest to acquire a defensive-minded, rebounding center.


              Remember last summer when Griz president Jerry West persistently pursued multiple sign-and-trade deals for a beefy big man only to fall short?

              Welcome to another frustrating walk through the offseason.

              West, who remains tight-lipped about his dealings, is in Los Angeles where the Grizzlies' summer league team is playing. But his mind has to be wandering all over the NBA map.

              It's no secret that the Griz covet Erick Dampier, the only big-target center left in free agency. Decisions by Dampier's agent (Dan Fegan) and his former team (Golden State) made futile West's pursuit of the former Mississippi State big man.

              Could recent developments compel West to again chase a Dampier sign-and-trade deal?

              This much is clear: Dampier's options seem to dwindle by the day.

              Dampier was figured to be one of the biggest targets this summer. He didn't draw interest from teams with money to spend under the salary cap. Dampier now must weigh a reported three-year offer from Atlanta, which has more than $11 million in cap space but refuses to overpay for players.

              New York's bid to acquire Dampier in a sign-and-trade apparently died when Golden State sent Nick Van Exel to Portland for Dale Davis and Dan Dickau.

              The Knicks had structured a sign-and-trade deal with the Warriors that would have Golden State sign Dampier to a six-year contract, starting at $9 million per season, and then trade him to New York for forwards Nazr Mohammed and Othella Harrington.

              Dampier, 29, opted out of the last two years of his contract to become a free agent, leaving more than $17 million on the table.

              Memphis and Indiana are the other teams that talked to Golden State about Dampier. But Indiana isn't willing to part with Jonathon Bender and Memphis wouldn't send Stromile Swift in a proposed multiple-player deal.

              With the Warriors' asking price too high and Dampier's sudden lack of leverage, West may choose to resurrect negotiations or continue to move on.


              The Grizzlies' past interest in Boston Celtics center Chris Mihm (restricted free agent) could lead to a sign-and-trade transaction.

              To complete a sign-and-trade, a team could sign its own free agent up to the maximum salary allowed under the league's collective bargaining agreement. The team could then trade that player to another team in exchange for assets that come within 15 percent of the player dealt.

              The catch is that all parties must agree. It takes the free-agent player, his former team and new team to accept trade terms on all fronts.

              West's inability to consummate a deal last summer led to what he admittedly called his "eighth or ninth" deal. He ended up with a training-camp deal with Phoenix for center Jake Tsakalidis and forward Bo Outlaw.

              That trade happened after Michael Olowokandi slipped from West's grasp and into a Minnesota Timberwolves uniform. During his first Grizzly offseason, West pursued Seattle 7-footer Jerome James, who eventually re-signed with the Sonics. West then settled on Polish project Cezary Trybanski.

              The Griz have played the past three seasons primarily with Lorenzen Wright in the middle.

              Wright and his backup, Swift, are undersized at that position despite their aggressiveness.

              Poor rebounding and interior defense remains the team's Achilles' heel, and the root of West's desire for an upgrade at that position.

              Memphis ranked 25th in defensive rebounding last season, and was 28th in that category during the 2002-03 campaign.

              - Ronald Tillery:
              The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Article in Star about Pacers still hoping to get Damp

                Croshere may start looking pretty good to Mully pretty soon....
                Official Member of the Anti-Alliteration Association

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Article in Star about Pacers still hoping to get Damp

                  It mentions the Hawks and 3 years. But a contract starting at $8M for about $40M must be for 4 years.

                  I think signing Dampier for 3 or 4 years would be just about right.

                  If the Hawks sign him, the article mentioned it is possible that they would do so only to trade him after 12/15.

                  That just might give the Pacers enough time to make up their minds about Bender.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Article in Star about Pacers still hoping to get Damp

                    I mentioned in another thread, I would not sign Dampier for any longer than 3 years. 2 years is about all I really want to, but 3 is OK.

                    4 years is too long.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Article in Star about Pacers still hoping to get Damp

                      The question of the day on Pacers.com was about this yesterday, just in case someone didn't see it:

                      http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/question_040720.html

                      " QUESTION
                      OF THE DAY
                      Conrad Brunner
                      Q. What do you see the Pacers doing for the center position for next year? Jeff Foster is a very effective rebounder and hustler, but he lacks the inside scoring and shot-blocking presence. I think David Harrison will be very good, but he's clearly a few years away. Playoff basketball, as a rule, goes through dominant big men. No doubt the Pistons will be very tough, and Shaq will have a definite impact on the Heat.

                      Do you see us making a move for a center? Erick Dampier seems like the obvious choice, but I hear the Knicks or the Hawks are about to wrap him up. Will Donnie Walsh or Larry Legend be able to pull off some magic, or are they happy with our present situation? (From Barry in Des Moines, IA)

                      A. Though the Pacers did use their first-round pick on Harrison, it seems unlikely they’ll expect him to step into a prominent role right away. Given that, there is a need for another quality big man in the frontcourt rotation. Throw in the trade of Al Harrington, who figured in the rotation as a backup power forward and was a quality low-post option, and the need becomes more pronounced. Foster is a very good rebounder, but lacks shot-blocking ability. Defensively, he can be very effective against certain types of centers but lacks the bulk to spend a full season leaning on the more physical big men. Neither Foster nor Scot Pollard is an offensive option, though Harrison could eventually help with filling that void.

                      Dampier has been pursued by a number of teams because he’s the best center on the market this year, but his price is very high – both in terms of salary (he reportedly is seeking a deal that begins at more than $9 million next season), but trade cost (at least two quality players). Because they’re over the cap, the Pacers can’t get in the free agent bidding for Dampier, which leaves the sign-and-trade route as the only avenue. Coming off a career season (12.3 points, 12.0 rebounds), Dampier finds himself in much the same position as Brad Miller a year ago. The Pacers decided then they couldn’t afford to keep Miller, and it seems to follow they would take a similar stance now with Dampier."

                      Here, everyone have a : on me

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Article in Star about Pacers still hoping to get Damp

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck
                        I mentioned in another thread, I would not sign Dampier for any longer than 3 years. 2 years is about all I really want to, but 3 is OK.

                        4 years is too long.
                        4 years would be fine, if the 4th year was our option.

                        "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Article in Star about Pacers still hoping to get Damp

                          I'd even take 5 years if the 5th was our option...

                          Here, everyone have a : on me

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Article in Star about Pacers still hoping to get Damp

                            If Indy would've just signed Stephen Jackson outright we could be including Al Harrington in a sign& trade with Golden State. No doubt about it that would get Dampier.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Article in Star about Pacers still hoping to get Damp



                              Thre HAS to be people on this forum that has to be sick of hearing that by now.....

                              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

                              Working...
                              X