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

Cavs interested in Hibbert

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

  • #61
    Re: Cavs interested in Hibbert

    Originally posted by Ratking View Post
    In terms of dumping Roy's salary, and having cap-room for next summer (I think Rondo or Aldridge are UFAs), a move like this might actually make a lot of sense for us. If Roy isn't entirely happy being here anyway, maybe he takes his player option and then leaves in 2016. If we are just thinking of optimizing our playoff window for PGs prime, does it make sense to put so much money and faith into a player like Roy who completely caved in last year? Or, do we invest in pairing PG with a proven and consistent side-kick (Marc Gasol, Rondo, Aldridge)? Plus, we would likely be projecting towards a great lottery pick, especially if we could acquire other 1st rounders and try to package them to move up in the draft. I love some of the top talent in this draft class (looking forward to see how the bigs perform in college this year: Karl Towns, Cliff Alexander, Jahil Okafor, Myles Turner). I know it is not a popular decision in terms of fighting for an 8th playoff seed, but I think we would all come to love the deal on draft day, and when entering free-agency with some spending money, especially if D. West choses to rework his contract.

    EDIT: As mentioned earlier though, I see Roy being able to increase his trade value substantially between now and the mid-season deadline. Between now and then, we can gage if he really wants to be here for the long run, and if he may be worth the kind of money he earns. Also, as mentioned, trading him to Cleveland would be a horrible idea in terms of helping them build a powerhouse team.


    Blazers won't allow Aldridge to leave. Matthews on the other hand....... also Reggie Jackson from OKC is a restricted free agent so unless OKC trades him to us I don't think we'll pursue him next Summer. I'd love to have LA here but Portland will trade anyone outside of Lillard to keep him if that's what it takes. If he goes then Lillard might become disgruntled. My hope for next Summer is we land Dragic, both Morris twins, and maybe a bonus player like Jeremy Lamb who we can bring off the bench with Miles

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Cavs interested in Hibbert

      Originally posted by Grimp View Post
      Blazers won't allow Aldridge to leave. Matthews on the other hand....... also Reggie Jackson from OKC is a restricted free agent so unless OKC trades him to us I don't think we'll pursue him next Summer. I'd love to have LA here but Portland will trade anyone outside of Lillard to keep him if that's what it takes. If he goes then Lillard might become disgruntled. My hope for next Summer is we land Dragic, both Morris twins, and maybe a bonus player like Jeremy Lamb who we can bring off the bench with Miles
      That's a huge laundry wish-list of moves that IMHO would be unlikely. It requires wholesale changes to the roster ( which I doubt that Bird would consider ) to even approach anything close to happening......but that's cool....keep on dreaming.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Cavs interested in Hibbert

        Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
        David Falk's also the guy that told one of his clients to not marry his wife (edit: fiance, obviously) two days before the wedding because the pre-nup wasn't up to his standards. **** David Falk.
        and this is relevant... how? and also, an agent/lawyer should be spotting a shoddy contract that opens his client up for liability later on. that's his ****ing job.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Cavs interested in Hibbert

          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
          That's a huge laundry wish-list of moves that IMHO would be unlikely. It requires wholesale changes to the roster ( which I doubt that Bird would consider ) to even approach anything close to happening......but that's cool....keep on dreaming.
          Not really. We upgrade the point guard spot. We start Miles or Lamb at the two guard because Lance will still be gone. Morris twins........ one replaces West, the other replaces Copeland who'll be a free agent. Makes sense. Might as well replace West now rather than beating around the bush. We won't have LaVoy to replace Copeland.... both are now on 1 year deals. Copeland on his final year, LaVoy on a 1 year extension.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Cavs interested in Hibbert

            Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
            Solo's going to get heavy minutes specifically because of this. Not saying it'll work out great, who knows, but we're kinda bereft of scorers. Feed Roy all day really, if it works awesome, it doesn't, hey whatever, ping pong balls.
            Seriously, if the Pacers do the bolded we will be the easiest team to beat in the NBA. And then probably trade the draft pick for a washed up/overrated veteran OR sell it for dat cash infusion.


            David Falk's also the guy that told one of his clients to not marry his wife (edit: fiance, obviously) two days before the wedding because the pre-nup wasn't up to his standards. **** David Falk.
            Sounds like an awesome agent to me. Looking out for his guys. TF is the problem there?

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Cavs interested in Hibbert

              It's just funny to read this board massacre Roy for his offense. Do people realize that Roy shoots a better percentage than what JO did while he was here? People want to make fun of Roy, and his 43.9fg% last season while forgetting JO got 3rd place in MVP voting, while shooting 43.4%.

              In 8 seasons in Indy, JO's average FG% was 45.8.
              In 6 seasons in Indy, Roy's average FG% is 46.7.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Cavs interested in Hibbert

                Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                The only way Cleveland does that is if they assemble pieces to send to Boston for Rondo or Phoenix for Dragic or OKC for Jackson. I think the Cavs probably have the pieces to get Jackson from OKC. It would start with Waiters. To get Dragic it would cost them Waiters and probably Varajeo and Thompson. With Phoenix sending them Dragic and maybe Len. Then again..... Bledsoe could go there too. In exchange for the same package. Then Kyrie comes here for Hibbert. I don't think Cleveland would trade Kyrie right now though...... didn't they just extend him?
                Sarcasm Grimp, Cleveland would never do that.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Cavs interested in Hibbert

                  Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
                  Sarcasm Grimp, Cleveland would never do that.
                  Grimp is psychologically incapable of detecting sarcastic trade proposals. Sort of like being color blind.
                  BillS

                  A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                  Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Cavs interested in Hibbert

                    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                    really weird post about field goal percentages and a debate nobody in their right mind would actually make
                    Hey Biyombo had a .611 FG%, I guess you can twist that into meaning he's comparable to a bunch of former MVP candidates and/or isn't as bad of an offensive player as we know him to be, or something else to fit your narrative of choice.


                    (Seriously, I know you love to play the extra sarcastic, advocate role but you're overreaching)

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Cavs interested in Hibbert

                      Presenting facts now is overreaching? Guess we have two different definitions of the word.

                      Just pointing out that your #1 offensive option shooting mid-40's doesn't sink your team ship. If that was the case, then JO wouldn't be the beloved player around here, that he is.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Cavs interested in Hibbert

                        Larry can't possibly believe that you can build a championship team around a center who has such an up or down game and such physical limitations.
                        If Hibbert can look good with increased work load Bird should trade him before you have to lock into 17million/year contract.

                        I'd flip him to Utah for Gordon Hayward and Rudy Gobert
                        I'd flip him to Portland for Wes Matthews and Robin Lopez
                        I'd flip him to Denver for McGee and Harris or Chandler.

                        Point being if he trades a decent Hibbert this season he can replace our 2 guard and get an athletic center.
                        You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Cavs interested in Hibbert

                          Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                          Larry can't possibly believe that you can build a championship team around a center who has such an up or down game and such physical limitations.
                          If Hibbert can look good with increased work load Bird should trade him before you have to lock into 17million/year contract.

                          I'd flip him to Utah for Gordon Hayward and Rudy Gobert
                          I'd flip him to Portland for Wes Matthews and Robin Lopez
                          I'd flip him to Denver for McGee and Harris or Chandler.

                          Point being if he trades a decent Hibbert this season he can replace our 2 guard and get an athletic center.
                          If Hibbert is "a center who has such an up or down game and such physical limitations" then we aren't getting the packages that you're proposing.

                          Basically, let's repost what Heisenberg said in the previous page:

                          Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                          I just don't get the guys that want to move Roy, cuz he's Roy basically from what I can tell, but then expect a big return. If he's worth a good package why the hell do you want to move him unless it's a big win for us? People rag on the dude all the time and want to move him, OK that's fine, but then they want to trade the guy that is just awful for All Stars and borderline top 25 league wide players. Gotta make up your mind at some point, or at least realize what you're actually saying.
                          People have to make up their minds and stay consistent.
                          Originally posted by IrishPacer
                          Empty vessels make the most noise.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Cavs interested in Hibbert

                            Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                            Larry can't possibly believe that you can build a championship team around a center who has such an up or down game and such physical limitations.
                            If Hibbert can look good with increased work load Bird should trade him before you have to lock into 17million/year contract.

                            I'd flip him to Utah for Gordon Hayward and Rudy Gobert
                            I'd flip him to Portland for Wes Matthews and Robin Lopez
                            I'd flip him to Denver for McGee and Harris or Chandler.

                            Point being if he trades a decent Hibbert this season he can replace our 2 guard and get an athletic center.
                            I can say with a great deal of confidence that Utah and Portland wouldn't ever consider those first two trades, and the Pacers wouldn't dream of making the third.

                            If you think Hibbert's limitations make him frustrating to watch... just wait 'til you get a load of Javale McGee. Watching him play drives me absolutely insane, and that's without having any emotional investment in him.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Cavs interested in Hibbert

                              Originally posted by spreedom View Post
                              I can say with a great deal of confidence that Utah and Portland wouldn't ever consider those first two trades, and the Pacers wouldn't dream of making the third.

                              If you think Hibbert's limitations make him frustrating to watch... just wait 'til you get a load of Javale McGee.
                              Watching him play drives me absolutely insane, and that's without having any emotional investment in him.
                              [sarcasm]But.....but......Javale can jump out of the arena, is super athletic, can rebound and block shots like there's no tomorrow. Isn't the grass ALWAYS greener on the other side of the fence. [/sarcasm]
                              Last edited by CableKC; 09-26-2014, 02:49 AM.
                              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Cavs interested in Hibbert

                                Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                                [sarcasm]But.....but......Javale can jump out of the arena, is super athletic, can rebound and block shots like there's no tomorrow. Isn't the grass ALWAYS greener on the other side of the fence. [/sarcasm]
                                No kidding, that's one proposed trade that we could easily get. Denver would even throw in something to sweeten the deal but there is a reason. McGee makes almost as much as Hibbert and we'd never be able to move him.
                                Denver fans would love us forever for taking that mistake off their hands.
                                Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X