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 interested in Camby?

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

  • Lakers interested in Camby?

    Tried to do a link to this, but messed up, so I copied the article.


    Lakers move to soothe Kobe

    01:03 AM PDT on Friday, June 1, 2007

    By BRODERICK TURNER
    The Press-Enterprise

    Video: Broderick Turner shares his insight on Kobe Bryant

    Survey: Should the Lakers trade Kobe Bryant?

    Thursday was a quiet day in the Lakers' kingdom, and finally a peaceful one in Kobe Bryant's world, which was turned upside down during a four-day period of interviews ripping the organization.

    The Lakers began taking steps towards healing those wounds when owner Jerry Buss reached out to Bryant before leaving for a trip to China, to assure his disgruntled star that he and the rest of Lakers management are committed to him and intent on making improvements.

    "I talked with Kobe this morning and assured him that I share his frustration, and more importantly, I assured him that we will continue to pursue every avenue possible to improve our team with him as the cornerstone," Buss said in a statement. "I told him that we will keep him apprised of our progress, and we agreed that we will talk again in the very near future."

    Bryant's frustration reached a boiling point Wednesday when he demanded to be traded. Then Bryant rescinded that demand later in the day, saying, "I don't want to go nowhere. I want to stay here."

    As Bryant vented, he said no one from the Lakers called him and that he wanted to hear from Buss.

    But Buss was dealing with his own problems. The 74-year-old was arrested early Tuesday for investigation of driving under the influence of alcohol. The California Highway Patrol reported that Buss drove his car the wrong way on a street in an unincorporated section of Carlsbad and was taken into custody shortly before 1 a.m. Tuesday. Buss was released around 10:30 a.m. that day.

    Bryant, frustrated by another disappointing season, boiled over after being recently informed by Coach Phil Jackson that the Lakers were on a five-year rebuilding plan.

    Bryant felt misled. When he signed his seven-year, $136 million extension during the summer of 2004, he said Buss told him that the Lakers would do what it takes to remain an elite team.

    The Lakers already have been trying to appease Bryant, who has four years and $88.59 million left on his contract.

    According to sources close to the team, the Lakers called Denver to see about the availability of center Marcus Camby, the defensive player of the year who will make $9 million next season and has three years and $26.65 million left on his contract.

    Sources also said Indiana called the Lakers to gauge their interest in former All-Star forward Jermaine O'Neal, who will make $19 million next season and still has three years and $64.1 million left on his deal.
    Neither deal is imminent, sources said.

    Lakers public relations director John Black said the team received more than 500 e-mails from season-ticket holders, and that more than 90 percent said to keep Bryant.

    Reach Broderick Turner at bturner@PE.com

  • #2
    Re: Lakers interested in Camby?

    I don't think Camby is who Kobe had in mind when he said he wanted changes. He will go in to rage mode if that happens.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Lakers interested in Camby?

      Sounds like some posturing going on to let the Ps know there are other big men available.
      You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Lakers interested in Camby?

        The Lakers would be better off keeping Bynum than getting Camby. Total smokescreen.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Lakers interested in Camby?

          Originally posted by RWB View Post
          Sounds like some posturing going on to let the Ps know there are other big men available.
          But, Is Camby available?

          Camby is pretty cheap for the production that the Nuggets are getting out of him. I just don't see the Nugs giving Camby away for less then what we are asking.


          You know what?

          By the way mgmt. has been working since the Al Harrington trade has been very quiet on moves. We didn't hear anything about the G.S. trade and the O'brien trade was totally off the radar. So, why are we convinced that this whole Laker deal isn't just a smoke screen or posturing in another deal that we don't know about.
          ...Still "flying casual"
          @roaminggnome74

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Lakers interested in Camby?

            Originally posted by Roaming Gnome View Post
            You know what?
            Come on Gnome, you know the second Camby put on a Pacer uniform every bone in his body would shatter like Sam Jackson in Unbreakable.
            Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Lakers interested in Camby?

              Originally posted by Roaming Gnome View Post
              But, Is Camby available?

              Camby is pretty cheap for the production that the Nuggets are getting out of him. I just don't see the Nugs giving Camby away for less then what we are asking.


              You know what?

              By the way mgmt. has been working since the Al Harrington trade has been very quiet on moves. We didn't hear anything about the G.S. trade and the O'brien trade was totally off the radar. So, why are we convinced that this whole Laker deal isn't just a smoke screen or posturing in another deal that we don't know about.
              When the Nuggets pulled the trigger on the AI Deal.....they essentially forced themselves into a corner with 4 huge long term contracts that are between 11 to 20 mil a year for ( at least ) the next 3 seasons. I think that they are really looking to move Camby for an Expiring Contract and some decent prospect.

              A Camby + filler for Kwame+Bynum could help them out in the long run. I don't think that it will put the Lakers over the hump.....but it will give them a reliable defensive presense inside while giving them a reliable scoring 3rd/4th scoring option Big Man that can easily give the team a double-double every night.

              If either team would consider it.....which they may not cuz both are in the same Conference......then it could make a difference for the Lakers. Not a significant one...but Camby is a decent Center.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Lakers interested in Camby?

                Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                Come on Gnome, you know the second Camby put on a Pacer uniform every bone in his body would shatter like Sam Jackson in Unbreakable.
                Where is MagicRat and his photoshop skills when we need it?

                We would need one for Tinsley and Camby
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Lakers interested in Camby?

                  Should have known he'd be the villain... the kids used to call him "Mr. Glass."
                  This space for rent.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Lakers interested in Camby?

                    Originally posted by RWB View Post
                    Sounds like some posturing going on to let the Ps know there are other big men available.
                    They might be trying to get Camby for Kwame's expiring contract. Then they do the Pacer trade and have a lineup of;

                    F JO
                    F Walton
                    C Camby
                    G Kobe
                    G Farmar

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Lakers interested in Camby?

                      Not a bad lineup Will but they can't do our trade without giving us Kwame. He's the only way they can match salaries without Radmon and we shouldn't take Radmon off their hands. I can't see them getting both Camby and Oneal.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Lakers interested in Camby?

                        Originally posted by Roaming Gnome View Post
                        You know what?

                        By the way mgmt. has been working since the Al Harrington trade has been very quiet on moves. We didn't hear anything about the G.S. trade and the O'brien trade was totally off the radar. So, why are we convinced that this whole Laker deal isn't just a smoke screen or posturing in another deal that we don't know about.
                        You know what? Im starting to agree. We are almost always completely wrong about the moves TPTB are gonna make and something ends up coming out of nowhere when we least expect it(see GS trade).

                        Heres my prediction (and hope): these LA trade rumors will slowly die out and come draft night TPTB will throw down some blockbuster trade involving JO, but NOT the Lakers.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Lakers interested in Camby?

                          Neither deal is imminent, sources said.
                          This is the part that should be in bold. It goes completely against Vescey "it's basically done already" reporting from his own "sources". Someone's sources are obviously wrong at this point.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X