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

PG you'd most like to see the Pacers trade for...

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

  • #16
    Re: PG you'd most like to see the Pacers trade for...

    Well, I don't want to trade good pieces for a PG with a ceiling of "solid starter" because I truly believe Price has that ceiling as well. So, unless we're trading an expiring and Price for a different PG with a ceiling of "solid starter" It'd be stupid to do so. Because I don't want to give up Rush (in all likeliehood) for someone not going to end up much better than AJ. That's just me though.

    So with that said, honestly, I think now would be the time to push for Chris Paul. They are overrating Collison right now, IMO. Paul has shown to be relatively injury prone, and they really really really want to get rid of Okafor's contract.

    So we take Paul and Okafor, give them back two expirings in Murphy and Ford (back up positions for the positions they lost) #10 and Rush. On the surface, it appears highly skewed in favor of the Pacers. But I think NO has extremely high expectations for Collison, and doesn't believe they'd be able to keep both him and Paul and probably would want the cheaper one, wants to desperatly unload Okafor's contract...and actually wants to reduce they're payroll..which this trade does a lot of. Then they have a young piece in Rush and #10 plus their first round pick.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: PG you'd most like to see the Pacers trade for...

      Is that the equivalent of saying Granger and Murphy for Peja and Posey, #11, and Julian Wright?

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: PG you'd most like to see the Pacers trade for...

        Originally posted by Sookie View Post
        Well, I don't want to trade good pieces for a PG with a ceiling of "solid starter" because I truly believe Price has that ceiling as well. So, unless we're trading an expiring and Price for a different PG with a ceiling of "solid starter" It'd be stupid to do so. Because I don't want to give up Rush (in all likeliehood) for someone not going to end up much better than AJ. That's just me though.

        So with that said, honestly, I think now would be the time to push for Chris Paul. They are overrating Collison right now, IMO. Paul has shown to be relatively injury prone, and they really really really want to get rid of Okafor's contract.

        So we take Paul and Okafor, give them back two expirings in Murphy and Ford (back up positions for the positions they lost) #10 and Rush. On the surface, it appears highly skewed in favor of the Pacers. But I think NO has extremely high expectations for Collison, and doesn't believe they'd be able to keep both him and Paul and probably would want the cheaper one, wants to desperatly unload Okafor's contract...and actually wants to reduce they're payroll..which this trade does a lot of. Then they have a young piece in Rush and #10 plus their first round pick.
        I like your idea, Sookie, but CP is in rarified air, so methinks we'd have to sweeten the pot with, say, an additional (future) #1. If NO were to agree, I'd help lead the celebration.


        "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

        - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: PG you'd most like to see the Pacers trade for...

          OMG!!

          NO team gives up the face of their franchise in his prime for 2 one year rentals, a #10 pick and Rush all in the name of cap space.

          NO has no problem keeping Collison AND Paul. Collison is on a rookie contract. Pocket change. Both of their contracts don't expire for three years. By that point, every player on their roster will have had their contract expire, except Okafor.

          Would you give up Granger for the package you proposed? They wouldn't give up Paul.

          They may move Okafor. They may move West. NO ONE would be stupid enough to trade Paul because they think the new guy might be as good. If nothing else they can build with Paul and Collison in a Joe Dumars/Isiah relationship.
          Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: PG you'd most like to see the Pacers trade for...

            might need to add randy foye to this list, though i doubt anybody would vote for him.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: PG you'd most like to see the Pacers trade for...

              :booprivatepoll:

              Conley. He's not great at anything, but he's good at everything. And he's still improving.
              Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: PG you'd most like to see the Pacers trade for...

                Originally posted by Jose Slaughter View Post
                Ricky Rubio

                Comes over from Europe just as the expiring kick in.

                #10 for Rubio & one of the T-wolves later 1st rounders

                That would be a great trade for the Pacers, but not a realistic one for the T-Wolves. David Kahn would laugh and hang up on Bird with that offer. If Kahn chooses to trade Rubio, he'll get more than that for Rubio not to mention having to throw in another 1st for the opportunity to get a #10 pick from the Pacers.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: PG you'd most like to see the Pacers trade for...

                  Since it's now unlikely that the Nets are gonna move Harris, my second choice is Collison.

                  Collison plays like a superstar when he's playing over 40 minutes which shouldn't be an issue if it's just AJ backing him up.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: PG you'd most like to see the Pacers trade for...

                    Originally posted by Skaut_Ech View Post
                    OMG!!

                    NO team gives up the face of their franchise in his prime for 2 one year rentals, a #10 pick and Rush all in the name of cap space.

                    NO has no problem keeping Collison AND Paul. Collison is on a rookie contract. Pocket change. Both of their contracts don't expire for three years. By that point, every player on their roster will have had their contract expire, except Okafor.

                    Would you give up Granger for the package you proposed? They wouldn't give up Paul.

                    They may move Okafor. They may move West. NO ONE would be stupid enough to trade Paul because they think the new guy might be as good. If nothing else they can build with Paul and Collison in a Joe Dumars/Isiah relationship.
                    Depends on what they want to do really. The NBA is far more about business then about the players.

                    They can keep Collison and Paul now, but not once Collison gets off his rookie contract. People are assuming Collison is available, well I'm saying I think there's a possibility that they'd rather give up Paul, get a ton of cap space and rebuild. Particularly since it's been pretty clear that NO wants to reduce the pay roll. The real equation is, is Collison + 10th pick, + Rush + plus losing Okafor's massive contract worth the loss of Paul. I don't know. I'd guess that a team could give them more for just Paul, but I don't know if that team would be willing to take on Okafor's contract as well..which would be the whole point. But honestly, it really depends on how high they value Collison..just from the fans I've seen, seems they'd rather give up Paul.

                    And I'm just saying, I don't want to give up good young pieces for a PG that will barely be an upgrade on Price. Unless the young piece you give away is Price..then that makes more sense..but giving away our future SG/sixth man for a slight upgrade over Price is kind of dumb.
                    Last edited by Sookie; 05-19-2010, 12:57 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: PG you'd most like to see the Pacers trade for...

                      Originally posted by Skaut_Ech View Post



                      Then we have Sessions. Couple Rubio's impeding arrival with Kurt Rambis' odd treatment of him (What does Kurt have against Ramon and Love?) and I think he's an extremely viable option.

                      I think he's simply a lost man in Minn and typifies a player simply in need of a change of scenery. I think he's become a forgotten man in the media due to where he's playing, but I really like his game and i think he could be a strong option for us as a starting PG. My only knock on him would be his three point range, and given our current state (ahem), that wouldn't fly...but then do we really see JOB being here beyond next year?

                      You beat me to the punch.

                      I have liked and followed Sessions for 3 years, and "IF" I was Bird I'd make a play for him in some type trade scenario that also included the #10 for their #16 & 23 picks. I would have to believe that David Kahn would have listen to an offer like that.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: PG you'd most like to see the Pacers trade for...

                        Darren Collison makes the most sense by far. New Orleans has Chris Paul, and it makes no sense to have a player as talented as Collison as their backup PG. After his outstanding rookie season, his trade value will never be higher, and the Hornets need to take advantage. Collison proved that he can produce when given starter's minutes, and the Hornets would be holding back his delevopment by not trading him.

                        George Hill isn't going anywhere. Tony Parker will be traded before George.

                        Mike Conley is the Grizzlie's guy at PG, and won't be traded unless they get an obvious upgrade at that position.

                        Devin Harris lost my respect by losing so many games as the teams best player. I don't really want a shoot first PG either. A better version of TJ Ford.

                        Raymond Felton simply hasn't panned out as a quality starting PG for the Bobcats. Compared to the other PGs in his draft, Chris Paul and Derron Williams, Felton has underachieved. He has his moments, but I don't really know if he is that much better than Ford.

                        Ty Lawson could develop into a quality PG, but I don't think that Denver is going to give up on him after his rookie season. Billups is getting older, and Denver may view Lawson as their PG of the future.

                        Monta Ellis is the best player of this group, and I doubt that GS will trade him.
                        Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: PG you'd most like to see the Pacers trade for...

                          Did any of you guys watch Maynor play at all in the playoffs against L.A. ? I think he could be a very good starting PG, and he has size to boot at 6'3"

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: PG you'd most like to see the Pacers trade for...

                            I said Felton, less because he's the best of the group and more because he probably has the lowest asking price.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: PG you'd most like to see the Pacers trade for...

                              Collison
                              Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: PG you'd most like to see the Pacers trade for...

                                I am for Sessions, because he is underrated, young, has upside and could come cheap! I think he had a good season in 2008/2009, which shows that there is room for improvement.

                                If there is an option to get Jefferson too, this would be a pretty move.

                                What do you think, is it realistic that such a deal could be done and if yes, who should we give up for those 2?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X