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

Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

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

  • #31
    Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

    Originally posted by skyfire View Post
    I just dont see any reason why Paxson would tear apart a promising young team in a reasonable salary cap position, to partner Kobe with Ben Wallace and Hienrich. I just dont see that team being being significantly better than what they have now but in a much worse cap position. Given that LA has no leverage based upon Kobe's actions, why would Paxson make that play? He knows Kobe only wants to play in a few places, the Knicks cant provide a better offer than the Bulls, so he might aswell lowball LA in the hopes that they will give Kobe up and allow them to hang onto Deng.
    How often do you have the chance to add a Kobe to your team and all the added tix sales, tv revenue, and Kobe/Bulls gear sales that would come with him? How many years before ANY of the prospects you trade away have that kind of impact? As far as that goes...it would be a great move for the NBA too ...at least in "gear" sales.
    Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

      DD00....(excuse the double post)

      You keep mentioning the cap savings and using them for FA's in the future. I thought we were so far over the cap that even these reductions would only have minimal effect to our ability to sign FA's. Now if you said we'd never ever have to worry about the luxury tax............


      Do I need to go back and cruch some real numbers or can you show me where I'm mistaken???
      Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

        pretty sure dd meant space under the luxury tax...

        geezer, i anticipated and have already crunched some numbers here

        http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-...ad.php?t=31744

        i think this deal is pretty reasonable btw

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

          I'm sorry, but I had trouble following all of that. So let me just say.

          Is it possible that the Pacers might trade JO to the Lakers and agree to do so without Odom being involved? I doubt it. But maybe if the Pacers can get rid of at least either Murphy or Tinsley (or maybe both, if that is even possible) in other words the Pacers somehow must come away from the trade with their salary cap situation in great shape because of the trade. I don't know if the Lakers have the contracts to match that expire soon though.

          OK, I just looked up the Lakers salary cap situation. I realize hoopshype is often wrong, afterall they had Bender still on the Pacers cap situation for long after he was off. And right now Hoopshype has Brain Grant on the Lakers cap.

          But if the Lakers could trade Brain Grant and his expiring huge contract. Then maybe something like this might just work.

          Lakers trade:
          Grant,
          Mihm,
          McKie,
          Shammond Williams (all have expiring contracts, July 1st) - that equals $24 M, off course throw in the:
          19th pick, Kwame Brown (who only has one year left, at $9M) Bynum and Farmar. (that is about $35M)

          In exchange for JO, Murphy and Tinsley (32M) - I would probably do that trade. Pacers would be in great salary cap position this summer and next summer.
          Last edited by Unclebuck; 06-19-2007, 06:45 AM.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

            The "pipe dream" part of all this that I keep thinking about is this. What if Kwame finally "gets it"? I know, that is what Washington hoped for, and that is what the Lakers hoped for, but...

            If Brown improved his hands and offense even a bit he and bynum could be quite a pair to have. After having been turned loose by two teams, his re-signing might not be as expensive as one might think at first.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

              Originally posted by LAKERERIC View Post

              Bynum, Brown, Mckie (for cap purposes, which the Pacers would get back in from the Lakers in cash), Evans, 2007 #1(19), 2007 #2 (40), and 2009 #1. Honestly, I can't see a trade working out that is not similar to this.
              Okay, this deal would give us Granger, Harrison, Williams, Diogu, Bynum, #19, #40, and two 1st round draft picks next year. That's to many young guys to develop even if you figure Harrison won't ever amount to anything.

              So even though it's a reasonable offer from your point of view, it's not reasonable from ours. An established player like Odom could be used to trade for another established piece that we really need. I think we get Bynum and Odom or there's no trade.
              Last edited by Will Galen; 06-19-2007, 08:07 AM.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                Originally posted by intridcold View Post
                ...that is not going to land you an already perennial all-star.
                Would JO have made any all-star teams in his entire career if he were in the West? Is he better than Elton Brand, who is always left off?

                JO is an all-star because he has been in the East and there just aren't many options as opposed to the West with Duncan, Amare, Dirk, Yao, Garnett, Brand, now Oden and Durant as more talented big men.
                Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 06-19-2007, 09:22 AM.
                The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                  Originally posted by diamonddave00 View Post
                  The Knicks offers are lousy and its questionable if Ainge would include #5 in any trade for JO.
                  can you tell us what NY has offered?
                  "I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
                  -Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                    Originally posted by blanket View Post
                    can you tell us what NY has offered?
                    i think he just means hypothetical offers...

                    it would take something like francis, crawford, lee, pick for jo and tinsley

                    he just means nothing that they offer is as attractive as bynum, picks and cap space.
                    This is the darkest timeline.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                      The cap reasoning is because if its basicly Bynum at 2.5 mil , pick 19 cap slot 1mil left after one year it amounts to a 17.5 mil reduction in the cap numbers removing JO's contract.

                      The Pacers salary totals for 2008-09 are $68.9 mil currently including JO(21.4 mil) Foster's(6.2) opt out year, plus Harrison's 2 mil qualitying offer. The NBA cap conservatively should be 56 mil , so technical they are almost 13 million over.

                      A trade w/ a team say the Lakers in which basicly you get Bynum (2.7 mil) #19 (1 mil salary slot) , Brown's 9 mil expiring contract , Vujacic (1.7 expiring) and resigned McKie (3 mil paid by Lakers w/ cash inclusion then McKie waived) would mean you have 3.7 mil in assets from the trade for 2008-09 as opposed to JO'S 21.4 MIL =16.7 mil savings not extending Harrison the 2 mil qualifying offer now means a 18.7 mil savings

                      Removing 18.7 mil from 68.9 leaves you at 50.2 mil now 5.8 mil unders the cap . If you traded Foster for an expiring contract when you deal JO and go to rebuild mode thats an additional 6.2 mil removed you are now 12 mil under the cap.

                      At that point with so many young pieces and 12 mil in cap space , you are situated to add a piece which you need after giving all the kids extended playing time for a year. At point Daniels (6.8) is entering his final guaranteed year of his contract (could be important either health reason's or a trade). The cap numbers are not real pretty but trading JO for 2 or 3 young building blocks and expiring contracts ease them considerabily expecially if you are going into a rebuilding mode.

                      I'd love a boatload return on JO but currently the offers are not there , as a result it may be in the long term youth and cap space is the best we can expect.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                        Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                        Okay, this deal would give us Granger, Harrison, Williams, Diogu, Bynum, #19, #40, and two 1st round draft picks next year. That's to many young guys to develop even if you figure Harrison won't ever amount to anything.

                        So even though it's a reasonable offer from your point of view, it's not reasonable from ours. An established player like Odom could be used to trade for another established piece that we really need. I think we get Bynum and Odom or there's no trade.
                        I agree. A team of NOTHING BUT young prospects and no leadership or star power with the refs is a team looking for trouble.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                          Originally posted by pacertom View Post
                          Would JO have made any all-star teams in his entire career if he were in the West? Is he better than Elton Brand, who is always left off?

                          JO is an all-star because he has been in the East and there just aren't many options as opposed to the West with Duncan, Amare, Dirk, Yao, Garnett, Brand, now Oden and Durant as more talented big men.
                          If JO was a center in the West he still would be a perinnal all-star. Conferences aside JO is a perinnal all-star and Bynum might be a perinnal all-star. That is my point. JO's numbers will stay the same or go up if he goes to LA. And if Odom and Walton remain, JO is the center. Name two centers in the West that are better than JO.

                          Yao-yes
                          Miller-no
                          Okur-no
                          Amare-maybe(yes if Marion is traded)
                          Kaman-no
                          Biedrins-no
                          Oden-yes(damn Portland for getting that pick)

                          Well forget it maybe not. But he will still put numbers up like an all-star right? Who knows

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                            Originally posted by intridcold View Post
                            If JO was a center in the West he still would be a perinnal all-star. Conferences aside JO is a perinnal all-star and Bynum might be a perinnal all-star. That is my point. JO's numbers will stay the same or go up if he goes to LA. And if Odom and Walton remain, JO is the center. Name two centers in the West that are better than JO.

                            Yao-yes
                            Miller-no
                            Okur-no
                            Amare-maybe(yes if Marion is traded)
                            Kaman-no
                            Biedrins-no
                            Oden-yes(damn Portland for getting that pick)

                            Well forget it maybe not. But he will still put numbers up like an all-star right? Who knows
                            How are you saying Oden, a guy who has seen ZERO NBA basketball experience, is better than Jermaine O'Neal?

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                              Originally posted by Cobol Sam View Post
                              How are you saying Oden, a guy who has seen ZERO NBA basketball experience, is better than Jermaine O'Neal?

                              I am not. But remember the fans vote in the starters. Being on Portland ODen could put up 15 11 next year.

                              I am listening to Colin and people are saying that Oden's wrist may never fully heal and his back is bad. Could just be jargon put out by Seattle so that Portland will pass

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                                Originally posted by skyfire View Post
                                I think the Lakers are going to get screwed one way or another. If I were the Bulls, Deng would be untouchable. Deng and Gordon is too high a price to pay to get Kobe. The Pacers are likely to demand atleast Bynum and Odom. Its debatable whether getting someone like Gasol would be enough to appease Kobe.
                                I love that some of you guys think Deng and Gordon is too much for Kobe whereas Bynum and Odom is barely enough for JO. (Not tryna pick on you specifically, Skyfire, just using this as a good example of the point I'm trying to make.)

                                Kobe is one of the top guards of all time. JO is one of better big men currently in the League...when healthy.

                                You realize asking for Odom and Bynum is asking for more than LA got for Shaq from Miami (Odom is better now, and Bynum is much more highly regarded than Caron was then), and much more than Philly got for AI. And those guys were both legit Hall of Famers.

                                You could argue that LA is desperate. But that's a) speculation, and b) doesn't relate as directly to what they'd give up to get JO as we might hope. They're still not gonna grab their ankles to get Jermaine O'Neal. He's not some sort of savior for them. They have LOTS of options, including KG, Gasol, Randolph, Antawn Jamison, Chauncey and any other number of players around the league that are known to be available. Plus those that we don't know are available. Plus those they could pull off some very savvy deal for. Or they could trade Kobe. It's easy to say "nah, they'd never trade Kobe." But they could. And I think it's more likely than bending over in a deal just to get Jermaine O'Neal.

                                I'm not sure how JO goes from a guy who's routinely criticized on this board and who's game is generally disliked by it seems like half of you, to a guy that warrant more in return in a trade than LA got for Shaquille O'Neal in his prime.

                                I think LAKERERIC is being pretty realist and objective in his analysis. Probably time some of us start trying to do that too.
                                Read my Pacers blog:
                                8points9seconds.com

                                Follow my twitter:

                                @8pts9secs

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X