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

Did management do T.J. Ford dirty?

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

  • #46
    Re: Did management do T.J. Ford dirty?

    Originally posted by ballism View Post
    Me too, but I'm not a pro player. Most of these guys do love to play. So, if you (the team) can let the guy play elsewhere instead of wasting time at the end of his career, it's only honourable to do so. Especially when you can save a little money by doing so.

    That said, TJ (reportedly) received no interest from other teams. So I see nothing wrong in keeping him as an injury precaution. His current situation isn't any different in reality than had he been waived.
    The thing was if he really wanted to play he could have took the buyout wehich would have gave him almost all the money he was owed. But he chose not to thats on TJ. I cant blame him for not wanting all his money but if he really wanted to play he could of took the buyout. Boston signed carlos arroyo. Im sure Boston would of took TJ instead the guy could of got signed. Im sure the Bobcats would of took a look also. The Nets could of used him also. He chose not too so I cant feel bad for him he choose $$ over playing.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Did management do T.J. Ford dirty?

      Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
      The thing was if he really wanted to play he could have took the buyout wehich would have gave him almost all the money he was owed. But he chose not to thats on TJ. I cant blame him for not wanting all his money but if he really wanted to play he could of took the buyout. Boston signed carlos arroyo. Im sure Boston would of took TJ instead the guy could of got signed. Im sure the Bobcats would of took a look also. The Nets could of used him also. He chose not too so I cant feel bad for him he choose $$ over playing.
      Ok, but why are you sure? When there were reports to the opposite.
      Why would you assume money are just raining out there for TJ from playoff contenders? Has he been deep in the playoffs? Is he a known clutch performer? Is he a Ron Harper or Robert Horry or Derrek Fisher? No, he's a guy who spent his career on bad bad teams, can't shoot and hasn't been good for years. At least Mike Bibby and Arroyo can make a 3 and have been deep in the playoffs.

      There were reports that no playoff team was interested, and there's no reason to believe otherwise. That's why he didn't take a pay cut. If someone wanted him, I'm sure there would be a buyout. It's his contract year, surely he wants to play.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Did management do T.J. Ford dirty?

        Originally posted by ballism View Post
        Ok, but why are you sure? When there were reports to the opposite.
        Why would you assume money are just raining out there for TJ from playoff contenders? Has he been deep in the playoffs? Is he a known clutch performer? Is he a Ron Harper or Robert Horry or Derrek Fisher? No, he's a guy who spent his career on bad bad teams, can't shoot and hasn't been good for years. At least Mike Bibby and Arroyo can make a 3 and have been deep in the playoffs.

        There were reports that no playoff team was interested, and there's no reason to believe otherwise. That's why he didn't take a pay cut. If someone wanted him, I'm sure there would be a buyout. It's his contract year, surely he wants to play.
        He is better than Carlos Arroyo. Arroyo can shoot? since when? he is 34% from 3 for his career.
        Last edited by pacer4ever; 03-27-2011, 05:11 PM.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Did management do T.J. Ford dirty?

          Arroyo knows miami's playbook tho

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Did management do T.J. Ford dirty?

            Originally posted by dal9 View Post
            Arroyo knows miami's playbook tho
            I know Miamis playbook. It is just basic PnR basketball. Thats why Miami fans dont like Spo he runs very basic plays now that he has Bosh and Lebron. All the Pacers run is thumbs down which is basic pnr and some off ball action. Plus the alley hoop type pass from Roy to DG where DG comes off a back screen and gets open for the lob pass. Most teams know what the other team is gonna run. If you watch film on the team it wont take to much time to figure out the plays they run.Vogel proably knows every teams play book for the most part after watching film on the team gameplanning days before the game.
            Last edited by pacer4ever; 03-27-2011, 05:21 PM.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Did management do T.J. Ford dirty?

              P4E,

              I agree with you, but all reports were nobody wanted him.

              Who knows why, but I have a hard time seeing this as him being done "dirty"

              Now if I was the GM, I would think I would want him to be at practice at a minimum, but in the same breath you have to try to make both sides happy.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Did management do T.J. Ford dirty?

                If TJ isn't worth vet minimum then he is going to be very surprised next contract time.

                He made the choice not to lose any money.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Did management do T.J. Ford dirty?

                  Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                  He is better than Carlos Arroyo. Arroyo can shoot? since when? he is 34% from 3 for his career.
                  Which puts him right in the middle between TJ Ford and Ray Allen. In fact, if you genetically engineer a cross between Ray Allen and TJ, you'd have to name it Arroyo.
                  Look, Arroyo is terrible, and so is Mike Bibby btw at this point, and yet no sane person would want TJ taking a shot over Arroyo.

                  Lets see, I'm the Celtics. I need a guy to play 8 min a game in the playoffs, and not screw it up while Rondo gets a breather.

                  Do I take a guy who shot 295-634 (.465) over the last two years (Arroyo), or a guy who shot 276-647 (.425) (Ford)?
                  Do I take a guy who averaged 4 turnovers per 48 minutes the last two years (Ford), or the guy who averaged 2 (Arroyo)?
                  Do I take someone who was in the finals (Arroyo) or someone with first round no-pressure, cannon meat experience (TJ)?
                  Finally, if I have to choose between two terrible players, do I take the one with huge kahones (remember the US - Puerto Rico)?

                  If I want a guy for 8 mins in the finals, no way I'm taking TJ over Arroyo. Arroyo is the lesser evil.
                  Last edited by ballism; 03-27-2011, 06:49 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Did management do T.J. Ford dirty?

                    I dont understand what happened?

                    Did he do something wrong?

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Did management do T.J. Ford dirty?

                      Originally posted by Peck View Post
                      Whenever you are dealing with professional sports you almost have to throw the "they are paying him ___ amount of money so no he is not being done dirty" thoughts out the window.

                      Yes, if you get paid to play a game or in this case not play any one of us can rightfully say that they are making money to do nothing. I'll freely concede that fact. So in that case nobody who plays a game for pay has any right to complain about anything. I get that.

                      However beyond that, these guys are human. They are the best at what they do and have dedicated their entire lives to being the best at what they do. To them this is the life that they know, money is a very large part of it no doubt. But at some point in time there are rewards beyond monetary compensation.
                      I understand what you are getting at but based on the premise that sometimes playing and winning is more important, in TJ's case that was not the situation. He chose full salary guarantee. He could have taken less and played probably for someone. There are a lot of facts we just don't know.
                      {o,o}
                      |)__)
                      -"-"-

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Did management do T.J. Ford dirty?

                        Originally posted by owl View Post
                        I understand what you are getting at but based on the premise that sometimes playing and winning is more important, in TJ's case that was not the situation. He chose full salary guarantee. He could have taken less and played probably for someone. There are a lot of facts we just don't know.
                        I really dont think a player who has a guaranteed contract should be put in a position to choose whether or not he wants to play or get paid. He and the Pacers signed the deal and that part is history. On the playing side, who in their right mind could argue that he is not worthy of playing time. No way AJ will ever be as good as TJ is now. TJ is also better than DC is now too. So, the best pg on the roster is not getting to play. Doesnt sound fair to me. But I am not crying for a guy making $8mill.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Did management do T.J. Ford dirty?

                          Originally posted by troyc11a View Post
                          I really dont think a player who has a guaranteed contract should be put in a position to choose whether or not he wants to play or get paid.
                          Why not? Let's suppose he was unarguably the worst of the 3 so getting paid or playing would be very reasonable.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Did management do T.J. Ford dirty?

                            Originally posted by Bball View Post
                            Is this speculation or do you know this? Obviously, no trade came up that the Pacers liked but that doesn't mean no one was interested in trading for him. And has anyone in a position to know actually stated there was no interest in signing him if he was released?

                            I'm curious if you're stating some inside info or just making an educated guess?
                            Educated guess. By 'no interest' I meant not enough to get a deal done. But I'm still doubtful interest was ever even particularly high. Not at that salary. Especially when you see how his would-be free agency before March 1st played out.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Did management do T.J. Ford dirty?

                              By the way, even if we switch up the wordplay and go with 'poorly handled' instead of 'done dirty', I still don't agree. This is professional in BOTH directions, and it's a business. Just because he might have gotten his feelings a little hurt, that's not nearly enough 'badness' for me to say it was handled poorly or that he was mistreated enough to have a thread asking about it in the first place.

                              If you're asking me if TJ feels like things could have worked differently, I'd say maybe, but that's as far as it goes as far as I'm concerned.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Did management do T.J. Ford dirty?

                                Originally posted by speakout4 View Post
                                Why not? Let's suppose he was unarguably the worst of the 3 so getting paid or playing would be very reasonable.
                                But that is clearly not the case. My point was that he shouldnt have been put in that position because he is arguably the best pg on the team. If he was the worst, then I would agree with you that being put in that position is not a bad thing.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X