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

MIN turns down offer of #10 for Flynn, have reportedly offered Flynn/16/23 for #10 + more

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

  • Re: MIN turns down offer of #10 for Flynn, have reportedly offered Flynn/16/23 for #10 + more

    Originally posted by Jim R View Post
    Get Sessions. He's better, and i"m utterly convinced Minnesota took Flynn to build him up and deal him later. They probably want to package him for something bigger for when Rubio comes to town.
    If that was their plan that was a stupid plan that backfired. His value was much higher 12 months ago than it is right now

    Comment


    • Re: MIN turns down offer of #10 for Flynn, have reportedly offered Flynn/16/23 for #10 + more

      The articles from Wells and Wojo seem very contradictory... somebody is wrong/ getting feed misinformation...

      Wojo at lest explained things out and made logic... so I'm going with him for now...
      "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

      Comment


      • Re: MIN turns down offer of #10 for Flynn, have reportedly offered Flynn/16/23 for #10 + more

        Originally posted by tadscout View Post
        The articles from Wells and Wojo seem very contradictory... somebody is wrong/ getting feed misinformation...

        Wojo at lest explained things out and made logic... so I'm going with him for now...
        Yeah I thought it was interesting how different they are. So who is telling the truth? This is why the draft is fun!

        Comment


        • Re: MIN turns down offer of #10 for Flynn, have reportedly offered Flynn/16/23 for #10 + more

          Originally posted by UncleBuck
          How good is Flynn going to be. He seemed like he was a major disappointment last season. Many blame it on the triangle offense. I admit I didn't see enough of him last season to know. I seem to remember in the Pacers vs T-Wolves game at Conseco the pacers had a nice lead and the T-Wolves made a furious rally in the 4th quarter and Flynn was the difference,
          I remember that, too.

          I understand the trade talk is all conjecture, but I don't understand why Flynn is seen as a disappointment or a failure.
          And I won't be here to see the day
          It all dries up and blows away
          I'd hang around just to see
          But they never had much use for me
          In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

          Comment


          • Re: MIN turns down offer of #10 for Flynn, have reportedly offered Flynn/16/23 for #10 + more

            Originally posted by Putnam View Post
            I remember that, too.

            I understand the trade talk is all conjecture, but I don't understand why Flynn is seen as a disappointment or a failure.
            His style of play just doesn't fit the triangle IMO. He's a scoring PG, and he is a stronger version of TJ. He had low shooting percentages and high TO numbers. Nearly 3 TOs a game. So I suppose that would be why. Did he get abused on D or does anyone know? He seems strong/athletic enough to hold his own despite his height.

            Comment


            • Re: MIN turns down offer of #10 for Flynn, have reportedly offered Flynn/16/23 for #10 + more

              Originally posted by tadscout View Post
              The articles from Wells and Wojo seem very contradictory... somebody is wrong/ getting feed misinformation...

              Wojo at lest explained things out and made logic... so I'm going with him for now...
              I'd like to believe Wojo myself, even though I'm not a fan of Flynn's, but in the end I bet it looks like Wells is right. It's far more likely to NOT make a trade than to make a trade.

              Comment


              • Re: MIN turns down offer of #10 for Flynn, have reportedly offered Flynn/16/23 for #10 + more

                I guess AJ and Flynn could relive the quadruple OT game from college.

                Comment


                • Re: MIN turns down offer of #10 for Flynn, have reportedly offered Flynn/16/23 for #10 + more

                  Some of the best point guards of alltime were high turnover guys. Kidd, Isiah, Nash. That doesn't bother me. I would much rather have a guy who can score and create shots for himself and his teammates at will but averages 3 turnovers per game then a guy who is what I call a status quo point guard (Watson) who has very low turnovers and yet isn't a scorer or creator.

                  Not suggesting Flynn is going to be that good, but the turnover number doesn't scare me off at all

                  disclaimer: I admit once again I have not seen enough of Flynn to know if his turnovers are because he is capable of doing so many good things or if he is trying to do things he isn't capable of doing.

                  Are they turnovers like the ones TJ commits or like Nash commits - there is a huge difference
                  Last edited by Unclebuck; 06-22-2010, 09:32 AM.

                  Comment


                  • Re: MIN turns down offer of #10 for Flynn, have reportedly offered Flynn/16/23 for #10 + more

                    Jim R.-

                    Just for the record, I'll be happy to lead the parade 'blasting' Bird
                    and crew for drafting either Orton (from what I've heard, he had
                    behind the scenes, attitude issues at KY somewhat similar to
                    Cousins, but given his minimial at best role down there, they
                    weren't fodder for media discussion, etc.) or Whiteside at #16.

                    As for the Flynn-T.J. Ford comparison, 'at this point', I suppose I
                    can see the comparison. But Flynn is 21 yrs old. T.J. is 26 yrs old.

                    Is it fair to lump in a kid with plenty of time to continue developing
                    his game at the PG spot with an NBA veteran who obviously is what
                    he is at this point ?

                    Comment


                    • Re: MIN turns down offer of #10 for Flynn, have reportedly offered Flynn/16/23 for #10 + more

                      from hoopsworld

                      http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=16541

                      More Draft Buzz: With the 2010 NBA Draft just two days away there are a lot of things floating around, but as more and more insiders are saying projecting this draft class after the top 10 is going to be crazy, but here are some things we know today:

                      Minnesota Is Crazy: The Minnesota Timberwolves have to officially be classified as crazy.

                      The Wolves have offered virtually every team in the league some kind of trade proposal, so at this point there could be as many as 29 trade combinations that drop.

                      The Wolves have offered almost everyone on their roster at some point this month and they have tried almost every angle imaginable to obtain another top 10 pick in this year's draft.

                      Sources close to the Clippers say that Minnesota offered the #16 pick and Corey Brewer to the Clippers in exchange for the #8 pick, they have offered multiple player and pick packages to the Indiana Pacers for the #10, and last night league sources said the Timberwolves had at least agreed to the idea of swapping the #16 and Corey Brewer with the Toronto Raptors for the #13 and Hedo Turkoglu - a deal that couldn't drop until July 1st because of cap reasons.

                      Raptors' sources said last night it wasn't happening as did Wolves sources, but it should illustrate how insane the process is becoming.

                      Hedo Turkoglu? Really?

                      The one thing that is crystal clear is that Minnesota is chumming up the trade waters trying to make things happen and that almost anything you hear connected to Minnesota could be just one of many attempts by the team to drum up something splashy.

                      There are some that believe Philadelphia would trade the #2 overall pick, if they got back two top ten level picks, hence why Minnesota is feverishly trying to make a move.

                      Word is the #16 and Corey Brewer have been shopped to a half-dozen teams, so just because Minnesota is linked to your team, doesn't mean a deal is anywhere close to happening, it just means your team happened to be one of the teams that took the phone call.

                      Whats the perception of hoopsworld around here?

                      Comment


                      • Re: MIN turns down offer of #10 for Flynn, have reportedly offered Flynn/16/23 for #10 + more

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        Some of the best point guards of alltime were high turnover guys. Kidd, Isiah, Nash. That doesn't bother me. I would much rather have a guy who can score and create shots for himself and his teammates at will but averages 3 turnovers per game then a guy who is what I call a status quo point guard (Watson) who has very low turnovers and yet isn't a scorer or creator.

                        Not suggesting Flynn is going to be that good, but the turnover number doesn't scare me off at all

                        disclaimer: I admit once again I have not seen enough of Flynn to know if his turnovers are because he is capable of doing so many good things or if he is trying to do things he isn't capable of doing.

                        Are they turnovers like the ones TJ commits or like Nash commits - there is a huge difference
                        Funny you mention Earl Watson. On DX's profile of Flynn his "Best Case" was Earl Watson. For a 6th overall pick? Ouch. Not saying I agree, just thought that was funny.

                        Comment


                        • Re: MIN turns down offer of #10 for Flynn, have reportedly offered Flynn/16/23 for #10 + more

                          Originally posted by focused444 View Post
                          from hoopsworld

                          http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=16541

                          More Draft Buzz: With the 2010 NBA Draft just two days away there are a lot of things floating around, but as more and more insiders are saying projecting this draft class after the top 10 is going to be crazy, but here are some things we know today:

                          Minnesota Is Crazy: The Minnesota Timberwolves have to officially be classified as crazy.

                          The Wolves have offered virtually every team in the league some kind of trade proposal, so at this point there could be as many as 29 trade combinations that drop.

                          The Wolves have offered almost everyone on their roster at some point this month and they have tried almost every angle imaginable to obtain another top 10 pick in this year's draft.

                          Sources close to the Clippers say that Minnesota offered the #16 pick and Corey Brewer to the Clippers in exchange for the #8 pick, they have offered multiple player and pick packages to the Indiana Pacers for the #10, and last night league sources said the Timberwolves had at least agreed to the idea of swapping the #16 and Corey Brewer with the Toronto Raptors for the #13 and Hedo Turkoglu - a deal that couldn't drop until July 1st because of cap reasons.

                          Raptors' sources said last night it wasn't happening as did Wolves sources, but it should illustrate how insane the process is becoming.

                          Hedo Turkoglu? Really?

                          The one thing that is crystal clear is that Minnesota is chumming up the trade waters trying to make things happen and that almost anything you hear connected to Minnesota could be just one of many attempts by the team to drum up something splashy.

                          There are some that believe Philadelphia would trade the #2 overall pick, if they got back two top ten level picks, hence why Minnesota is feverishly trying to make a move.

                          Word is the #16 and Corey Brewer have been shopped to a half-dozen teams, so just because Minnesota is linked to your team, doesn't mean a deal is anywhere close to happening, it just means your team happened to be one of the teams that took the phone call.

                          Whats the perception of hoopsworld around here?
                          Peronally, I generally think they're full of it. But this I can believe. Kahn is...interesting....

                          Comment


                          • Re: MIN turns down offer of #10 for Flynn, have reportedly offered Flynn/16/23 for #10 + more

                            I can just go off his Syracuse career, I never watched the Wolves, but I must say I don't see the TJ/Flynn comparison at all. I guess they're the same size, but Jonny was a lot more physical. Better shooter, too. TJ was a jitterbug before injuries slowed him down.

                            Now that I read Rambis is running the triangle, man, when will Phil's former assistants ever learn. :shakehead
                            Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                            Comment


                            • Re: MIN turns down offer of #10 for Flynn, have reportedly offered Flynn/16/23 for #10 + more

                              Yeah, Flynn and TJ are not comparable outside of their size, and even then Flynn is much stronger, broader shoulders. Built more like a defensive back in football than a track and field guy which is how I would describe TJ's build type.

                              I liked Flynn a lot out of college, and I still do like him. I think he would honestly probably thrive in JOB's system, which I know is going to scare a lot of people off. I do think he has a great sense of the moment, and is not afraid to take big shots.

                              Personally, I think he's the second best PG we've looked at based on production since he entered the league after Collison. Lawson IMO is way overblown on this board and in the NBA in general. He'll be a solid pro, but nothing to get extremely excited over. I think Flynn on the other hand, can be a rich man's Jameer Nelson. He compares much closer to Nelson than he does Ford.


                              Comment


                              • Re: MIN turns down offer of #10 for Flynn, have reportedly offered Flynn/16/23 for #10 + more

                                If we're not willing to give up Hibbert..what makes you guys think that Minny is willing to give up Love (without Granger being involved)

                                Theres no way Love is being packed to us without Granger being involved. The Wolves dont really care to get expirers in return because they are already under the cap
                                "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X