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

Tyson Chandler: "I really think I'm going to be on a new team come training camp"

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Tyson Chandler: "I really think I'm going to be on a new team come training camp"

    This was posted in the NBA rumors thread, but I thought it was big enough news to deserve it's own thread. If the admins disagree... well, they know what to do.

    Tyson Chandler think he'll be on a new team soon - CBSSports.com

    Originally posted by Royce Young
    The lockout isn't even officially over and the Mavericks could be losing one of their key championship pieces already. At least Tyson Chandler thinks so.

    "I really think I'm going to be on a new team come training camp," Chandler told ESPN.com in a telephone interview Wednesday night. "I'm really taking a hard look at all of my options, trying to see what best suits me."

    Chandler has already said that he feels the new collective bargaining agreement could mean he has to leave Dallas, which he wasn't happy about. The Mavs obviously want Chandler back, but if it's open season on him, he'll definitely be a top target for a lot of teams. But Chandler doesn't want to wait around.

    "I would like this to be settled by early next week," Chandler said. "I want to be in camp with my new teammates as soon as possible."

    But don't think just because Chandler says it's over, that it's over. This is all a negotiation, all part of the game. Chandler wants the most money he can possibly get and he's basically saying, "Hey Cuban, if you want to keep me, you'll have to pay up." Call it posturing, call it hardball, but Chandler is working to get everything he can.

    Chandler has said repeatedly he wants to stay with the Mavericks and the team has maintained that their top offseason job was to bring him back. But according to the report, the Mavs fear that they won't be able to match the offers Chandler will get on the open market. Right now, assuming Dallas lets Caron Butler and J.J. Barea walk, the Mavs would only have $5-6 million in cap space for 2012 to make a run at Deron Williams, Dwight Howard or Chris Paul.

    Top suitors for Chandler as of now are listed as the Nets, Warriors, Rockets and Raptors. But again, this is just how free agency works. The Mavs say they don't have the money to pay and Chandler says that he probably won't be back. Have we not learned anything from all the posturing and PR spin from the lockout? What you hear isn't what is truth.

    Chandler very well may move on, but there's still time to get this figured out. I mean, the lockout isn't even actually over yet.


    Tyson Chandler of Dallas Mavericks says he expects to 'be on a new team come training camp' - ESPN Dallas

    Originally posted by Chris Broussard and Marc Stein
    In a surprise development on the first day that NBA teams and agents could start talking about new contracts, Tyson Chandler came away convinced that his time with the Dallas Mavericks is coming to an end.

    "I really think I'm going to be on a new team come training camp," Chandler told ESPN.com in a telephone interview Wednesday night. "I'm really taking a hard look at all of my options, trying to see what best suits me."

    Chandler's doubts about the Mavericks' willingness to re-sign him to a lucrative long-term deal will be welcome news for organizations throughout the league. Chandler and Denver center Nene rank as the two most coveted unrestricted free agents in the 2011 class, but the overwhelming sentiment in many front offices has been that Chandler's return to Dallas was essentially a done deal after the 7-footer's role in helping the Mavericks win their first championship.

    Chandler, though, insisted Wednesday that such assumptions are a misnomer and admitted for the first time that he's disappointed by the club's decision not to offer him a contract extension after he was widely credited -- most notably by Mavericks star Dirk Nowitzki -- for changing the team's defensive culture after three first-round exits in the previous four years.

    Chandler maintains that staying in Dallas has been his first choice, but he expressed disappointment that the communication between the sides was minimal from the end of the NBA Finals in mid-June and the June 30 deadline for extensions. NBA front office sources list New Jersey, Golden State, Houston and Toronto as the teams chasing Chandler hardest.

    The Mavericks have likewise long maintained that bringing Chandler back is their No. 1 offseason priority. But sources with knowledge of club's thinking have told ESPN.com this month that management fears trying to match the offers Chandler gets on the open market -- even if Dallas' other free agents, such as Caron Butler and J.J. Barea are all let go -- will leave them with about $5-6 million in salary-cap space in the summer of 2012.

    That's when the Mavericks had hoped to be under the cap for the first time in the Mark Cuban era to join the free agent bidding for Dwight Howard, Chris Paul and Dallas-area native Deron Williams.

    As one of the league's oldest teams, Dallas needs the injection of youth that a perimeter scorer like Williams could provide. The Mavs' quandary, however, is that the presence of Nowitzki alone on the roster in July 2012 might not be enough to tempt the league's top free agents.

    One source close to Williams, for example, says it's unlikely that the New Jersey Nets' point guard would consider signing with the Mavericks unless he was joining both Nowitzki and Chandler. The Mavs' counter is that, with Nowitzki and Chandler on the books, they won't have enough money to sign Williams outright and would be forced to rely on striking a complicated sign-and-trade arrangement.

    Chandler, for his part, says he hopes to know where his home will be soon, even though the league announced Tuesday that teams and players can't strike written or verbal agreements before the officially scheduled start of free agency on Dec. 9.
    "I would like this to be settled by early next week," Chandler said. "I want to be in camp with my new teammates as soon as possible."

    Earlier Wednesday, Cuban told ESPNDallas.com's Jeff Caplan: "We are going through and digesting all the new rules and waiting on others. Once everything is in place we will have a far better idea on what we can and can't do. In the meanwhile, we certainly are going to be talking to everyone's agent."

    Chandler, 29, was acquired by the Mavericks in July 2010 in a deal with the Charlotte Bobcats co-headlined by Erick Dampier, but was widely billed as a consolation prize after Dampier's cap-friendly contract failed to get Dallas in the bidding for the league's marquee free agents -- Miami stars LeBron James, Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh among them -- through various sign-and-trade offers.

    In the final year of his contract, Chandler wound up meshing with Nowitzki better than anyone anticipated, supplying length, athleticism, rim protection and a brand of vocal leadership that no big man who previously lined up alongside the eventual NBA Finals MVP had ever provided in Dallas.

    Chandler wound up playing in 74 regular season games -- after missing nearly 70 games over the previous two seasons through injury -- and finished third in the league's Defensive Player of the Year voting. In the Western Conference finals, Chandler helped Dallas to a 4-1 series win over the same Oklahoma City Thunder team that traded for him in February 2009 and then rescinded the trade one day later because of concerns about a toe injury.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Tyson Chandler: "I really think I'm going to be on a new team come training camp"

    Come to the Hoosier State, Tyson!


    (A guy can dream, right?)

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Tyson Chandler: "I really think I'm going to be on a new team come training camp"

      As I said elsewhere, he already seemed to be losing his hops last year, and it's only going to get worse. Combined with his mostly one-sided game, I'm certainly not rooting for the Pacers to open the bank vault for him. Certainly not $15mm a year.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Tyson Chandler: "I really think I'm going to be on a new team come training camp"

        I keep seeing guys and thinking "Hey, the Pacers could use that guy."

        Then I see the price tag.
        This space for rent.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Tyson Chandler: "I really think I'm going to be on a new team come training camp"

          I think that in Texas, "I really think I'm going to be on a new team come training camp" is code word for "Cuban, I want to get paid".
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Tyson Chandler: "I really think I'm going to be on a new team come training camp"

            He'd get a sweet deal in China.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Tyson Chandler: "I really think I'm going to be on a new team come training camp"

              Originally posted by CableKC View Post
              I think that in Texas, "I really think I'm going to be on a new team come training camp" is code word for "Cuban, I want to get paid".

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Tyson Chandler: "I really think I'm going to be on a new team come training camp"

                If Mark Cuban can't afford Chandler then we surely can't afford him.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Tyson Chandler: "I really think I'm going to be on a new team come training camp"

                  This would be a big loss for Dallas. He was huge for them in the postseason.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Tyson Chandler: "I really think I'm going to be on a new team come training camp"

                    Originally posted by Larry Staverman View Post
                    If Mark Cuban can't afford Chandler then we surely can't afford him.
                    I would put his price tag at 12 mill. The maavs have. To decide if dwilll is a possibility or not.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Tyson Chandler: "I really think I'm going to be on a new team come training camp"

                      I like Chandler for the next 2-3 years, but I'd probably hate him for the remaining 2-3 years on the lengthy contract he'll get. Let's not forget this guy has had a lot of injuries throughout this career, and the Pacers cannot afford to miss on any big contracts.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Tyson Chandler: "I really think I'm going to be on a new team come training camp"

                        Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                        I like Chandler for the next 2-3 years, but I'd probably hate him for the remaining 2-3 years on the lengthy contract he'll get. Let's not forget this guy has had a lot of injuries throughout this career, and the Pacers cannot afford to miss on any big contracts.
                        Its a good thing we could only sign him for 4 years then. I doubt we go after him though.

                        Comment

                        Previous template Next
                        Working...
                        X