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

Trade RUMOURS and NEWS thread March 2012

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

  • Re: Trade RUMOURS and NEWS thread March 2012

    Originally posted by PaulGeorge View Post
    http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/features/rumors

    From Mike Wells of the Indianapolis Star: "Keep an eye on Solomon Jones, who New Orleans didn't sign for rest of season, as a possible big man Pacers may look at to help at center."

    The Pacers are also said to be after Chris Kaman as a possible addition at center, but as Wells also tweeted "they will not give up a first-round pick for his expiring contract" -- which could be a dealbreaker.

    If the Hornets don't bend on asking price, it's possible Kaman may head elsewhere -- or remain in New Orleans -- which may make Jones the more feasible option.
    Solo really c'mon man he does nothing to help us -Pendagraph

    Comment


    • Re: Trade RUMOURS and NEWS thread March 2012

      Originally posted by BQQ View Post
      Ben Golliver ‏ @blazersedge
      League source: Reported Blazers / Pacers talks for Jamal Crawford are "legitimate." Portland asking for 2012 first & A.J. Price.
      Retweeted by Justin Beck
      I wouldn't do that... not worth it in my opinion...
      J-Craw back 4 years ago... yes for sure ... but nah, not now I wouldn't consider it unless it was a 2nd rd pick instead of a 1st, and even then I am not sure about JCraw anyore.. I used to love his ice-cold veins, but it seems like he chucks alot in his later years now..lol... Now if it were Mayo beying discussed for that same offer, I'd do that in a NY minute..

      I don't think Crawford really helps us.
      "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

      Comment


      • Re: Trade RUMOURS and NEWS thread March 2012

        Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
        Does anyone here believe Atlanta would be willing to deal Smith to an Eastern Conference rival like us? I know someone above said they wouldn't break up our "core" for him, but seeing what a talent he is, I'd have to think long and hard about it.
        I have always held on to the belief that Teams do not trade "difference makers or Impact Players" to Teams that are in the same Conference ( hence one of the reasons why I don't think that the Magic will trade Dwight to NJ but to LaLaLand ).

        IMHO....Josh Smith is on the lower end of the scale when it comes to "difference makers"...but is good enough that I can see reasons as to why they would not want to trade him to a Team like the Pacers unless there was some "over the top" offer.

        Maybe Monta for Josh Smith may fit the bill? I don't know....either way, I don't see the Hawks trading him to the Pacers unless the Pacers made them an offer that they can't refuse.
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • Re: Trade RUMOURS and NEWS thread March 2012

          Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
          I swear that the last 7-10 posts about Crawford should be in green. AJ Price + 1st Round Pick in the 20s = No Brainer for me
          I would be extremely reluctant to give a 1st round pick for a Player that will likely opt out and test the FA market in the offseason.

          I'm cool with a 2nd round pick and AJ....but no way on a 1st round pick in the early-20s.
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • Re: Trade RUMOURS and NEWS thread March 2012

            Originally posted by Kemo View Post
            Now if it were Mayo beying discussed for that same offer, I'd do that in a NY minute..

            I don't think Crawford really helps us.
            Difference to me is that Mayo will be a restricted FA at the end of the year. Crawford will be unrestricted when/if he opts out. Huge difference. Besides the fact that I like Mayo as a player better anyway.

            Comment


            • Re: Trade RUMOURS and NEWS thread March 2012

              Originally posted by PacerPenguins View Post
              so wat makes u think he gets more money this offseason? doesn't make sense to me... i think he would be more than happy on the pacers
              From my understanding as to why he wanted a Player Option is because there is WAY MORE Free Agent $$$ to be spent in the 2012-2013 season then there was this season. The only reason why he got $5 mil was because there were few Teams that wanted to spend that much on him.

              I'm making a total guess here....but I'm thinking that when Bird went to JCraw and offered a 2 year deal with no Player Option for $5 mil each season. If it was for more $$$, I could see him going with the Pacers....but I wouldn't be surprised if JCraw didn't want to be locked into a 2 year deal for $5 mil as opposed to going with the $5 mil deal with a Player Option in the 2nd year.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • Re: Trade RUMOURS and NEWS thread March 2012

                Those potential trades are all interesting... how will they impact their respective teams?

                Comment


                • Re: Trade RUMOURS and NEWS thread March 2012

                  Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                  I. . . Maybe Monta for Josh Smith may fit the bill? I don't know....either way, I don't see the Hawks trading him to the Pacers unless the Pacers made them an offer that they can't refuse.
                  just a guess, but there will be quite a bit of this type of trade. my garbage out and your garbage in type of trade. teams want value for the guys they want to get rid of, but the guys they want to get rid of are flawed and not worth the price. the only way to get value for guys like ellis and smith are trade them for other guys that teams want to get rid of. i expect a lot of guys on the trade list to end up being traded for each other.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Trade RUMOURS and NEWS thread March 2012

                    booooooo Jamaal Crawford boooooo! why give up a first in a deep draft for a guy who didn't want to play with us in the beginning and going to opt out anyway. If he were good then why is Portland on a meltdown?

                    Comment


                    • Re: Trade RUMOURS and NEWS thread March 2012

                      I wouldn't mind doing Granger for Smith. Smith's game has grown so much. He would bring shot blocking that we need and then since West wouldn't want to come off the bench u see if u can trade him for a SF

                      Comment


                      • Re: Trade RUMOURS and NEWS thread March 2012

                        I really, really like some of these guys that are available. I think Smith and Rondo in particular would be great fits for this team. I just don't think either of them can be had without giving up a significant piece or two.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Trade RUMOURS and NEWS thread March 2012

                          Originally posted by RLeWorm View Post
                          booooooo Jamaal Crawford boooooo! why give up a first in a deep draft for a guy who didn't want to play with us in the beginning and going to opt out anyway. If he were good then why is Portland on a meltdown?
                          Deep draft? You will be surprised.....

                          Comment


                          • Re: Trade RUMOURS and NEWS thread March 2012

                            Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                            Seems like a not so good trade for the Blazers..

                            I don't quite understand why the Blazers would do that..I could be wrong, but looking at their roster (and with Felton struggling) isn't Crawford their best guard? (I haven't really watched him, or the Blazers play)

                            I like AJ as well as anyone, and it looks like he'd be the primary backup, but isn't your best guard worth more than AJ and a 1st?

                            Hill and Crawford seem like they'd be a good backcourt. But my concern (and I haven't seen Crawford play, so I don't know) is once again the lack of PG issue. And, that those two will take playing time from PG.
                            AJ is good enough not to have to throw in a first round pick. Portland probably knows they are not making the playoffs this year, and Crawford is probably gone. Felton is not the long term answer so get a decent back up PG ( wouldnt be suprised if given the chance, AJ did well there ala B Rush in Golden State)

                            By the way Sook, your UCONN boys put up a good fight today, really made the Orange sweat
                            Sittin on top of the world!

                            Comment


                            • Re: Trade RUMOURS and NEWS thread March 2012

                              Honestly, some of you are sleeping on J Crawford. Yeah his numbers are bad, yeah he has flaws in his game, questionable shot selection

                              BUT

                              When we need a bucket late in the playoffs, that is where you would see his true value in my opinion

                              Dude has ice water in his veins. His game reminds me so much of Vinny Johnson (K Stat where ya at ?) Vinny was the "microwave" and J Smooth can heat up just as fast

                              I would happily roll with Solo and Crawford

                              Kaman would help with scoring, but he is even worse on the boards than Roy
                              Sittin on top of the world!

                              Comment


                              • Re: Trade RUMOURS and NEWS thread March 2012

                                Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                                Honestly, some of you are sleeping on J Crawford. Yeah his numbers are bad, yeah he has flaws in his game, questionable shot selection

                                BUT

                                When we need a bucket late in the playoffs, that is where you would see his true value in my opinion

                                Dude has ice water in his veins. His game reminds me so much of Vinny Johnson (K Stat where ya at ?) Vinny was the "microwave" and J Smooth can heat up just as fast

                                I would happily roll with Solo and Crawford

                                Kaman would help with scoring, but he is even worse on the boards than Roy
                                I'm with you on Crawford. I like that guy. I think he would be a great fit on this team and I don't think he would cost very much to acquire. The problem there is what p4e (and probably others) have touched on: We had a chance to sign this guy outright and lost the bidding. Now we decide we want him and we actually have to trade legit pieces to get him? Ehh...it would not look good for the front office.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X