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

Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 301
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 16 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 36 76 126 301 template Next
  • #376
    Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

    As talks have stalled between the Los Angeles Clippers and Boston Celtics, LA is considering another deal involving its reserve point guard, Eric Bledsoe, and Pacers forward Danny Granger:

    Sources say that the Clippers, meanwhile, have already engaged the Orlando Magic and Indiana Pacers in separate trade discussions headlined by Bledsoe, with Orlando's Arron Afflalo and Indiana's Danny Granger as the respective trade targets. Indiana, according to sources, is leaning at present toward keeping Granger for the final season of his contract in hopes that the former All-Star swingman's return from knee surgery can help the Pacers close the gap on Miami in the East, but LA has been operating for months under the premise that Bledsoe, once Paul re-signs, will be dealt before becoming a restricted free agent in July 2014.

    Before the stalemate, sources says, officials from the Celtics and Clippers spent much of Saturday trying to hash out a deal that would meet Boston's compensation demands to rescind the non-compete clause in Rivers' contract and let him out of his contract. The pursuit of the Boston trio and targets such as Afflalo and Granger is all part of the Clippers' intent, as reported Thursday by ESPN.com, to be "very aggressive" and "shake every tree" in an attempt to upgrade the roster to the point that Paul not only re-signs when he becomes a free agent on July 1 but also to ensure that they are an unquestioned championship contender going forward.

    via Sources: LA Clippers resist trading Bledsoe - ESPN

    Bledsoe was a huge part of the Clippers' run last season, but will be a restricted free agent possibly looking for a massive contract extension next summer. The Clippers may feel they "have" Paul (who becomes a free agent in 14 days) and so are trying to cash in on Bledsoe's value while it's at its peak.

    For the Magic, Afflalo has surfaced in trade talks over the past few months. They're clearly looking to move him, and Bledsoe would give them a significant upgrade over Jameer Nelson, and would allow them to try and move Nelson's contract off the books. Afflalo would provide the Clippers with a consistent shooting guard who isn't over 30 and a scoring weapon who can also defend at a high level.

    Granger is a riskier prospect. He missed virtually the entire season with a knee injury that's hampered him for over a year. In his prime he was a versatile scoring combo-forward. Giving up Bledsoe for a player with those kinds of injury concerns has a lot of risk. It would also give the Clippers a super-sized lineup with Paul, Jamal Crawford, and Granger along with Blake Griffin and DeAndre Jordan.

    The Pacers would get back a guard who could help their bench, a desperate need for them. Would they want to pay Bledsoe next season what he's worth, though, when they have George Hill? That's a big gamble on their part, and with the Pacers' (slightyl inexplicable) attachment to the idea of keeping Granger, this may not work out.

    But don't give up on the idea of the Clippers and Celtics reviving talks. They've cooled off for now according to reports, but that deal still makes the most sense for the Clippers if they'll stop holding out for too much in the deal.

    For more on the insanity on the coaching carousel, check out Ken Berger of
    http://www.cbssports.com/nba/blog/ey...medium=twitter

    Leaning toward keeping Granger when Bledsoe is on the table??? That would be beyond idotic if true. We couldn't guard pgs in the playoffs Granger won't change that.


    Not to mention trading Bledsoe next off season in a S&T is very possible (so the excuse of not wanting to trade for a rental is stupid) he would be a RFA. Letting Granger walk is what will end up happening SMH.


    I just don't get this at all if true. Butler and Bledsoe would be a massive improvement to our bench and fix a major flaw of defending the pg spot. I don't think the Clippers are that stupid though.
    Last edited by pacer4ever; 06-16-2013, 12:39 PM.

    Comment

    • #377
      Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

      Originally posted by spreedom View Post
      Word is, the Rockets have made it official that they're not picking up team options for Francisco Garcia, Carlos Delfino, or Aaron Brooks. Delfino is my favorite of the bunch, but at the right price all three of those guys would be great additions to the Pacers' bench.

      That doesn't surprise me at all as they are clearing salary for a run at Howard. Defino has an unguaranteed contract. Houston's FO was smart and didn't give Delfino a fully guaranteed contract last season. Not to mention, paid him less than Green. He'd have been such a better option than Green.

      Brooks is now a possibility as a b/u PG option for the Pacers. He should be cheap.

      Comment

      • #378
        Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

        if you all think were going to get a better player than Bledsoe for Granger than you are crazy

        Comment

        • #379
          Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

          Danny would be great playing next to Chris Paul.

          Comment

          • #380
            Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

            Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
            http://www.cbssports.com/nba/blog/ey...medium=twitter

            Leaning toward keeping Granger when Bledsoe is on the table??? That would be beyond idotic if true. We couldn't guard pgs in the playoffs Granger won't change that.


            Not to mention trading Bledsoe next off season in a S&T is very possible (so the excuse of not wanting to trade for a rental is stupid) he would be a RFA. Letting Granger walk is what will end up happening SMH.


            I just don't get this at all if true. Butler and Bledsoe would be a massive improvement to our bench and fix a major flaw of defending the pg spot.

            I'm not in the camp of trading Granger, but some deals you just have to look at closely. This is one of them. Bledsoe and Bulter's salaries are 10.6 mil with the Clippers being able to give the Pacers back a 3.4 TE too. Bulter is an expiring 8 mil for next year. You just have to feel that Bledsoe and Butler can replace Granger. Then on top of that it saves Herb almost 3.5 mil. That's a hard deal to walk away from.

            Comment

            • #381
              Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

              do this trade, sign Korver, draft a backup PF

              same starting 5

              bench
              Bledsoe
              Korver
              Butler
              Pick
              Mahinmi

              Comment

              • #382
                Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

                Originally posted by solid View Post
                I realy do not think so.
                Hibb was amazing in the playoffs and could be even better if we could get him the rock on the aprox. 7 extra times per game he was in perfect position and came up dry.

                PG has amazing potential and may become the best Pacer we've ever had, BUT Roy was clearly our star in the later part of the season. Awesome D (like Paul) and a consistent threat to score in the post where Paul looked... youthfull, unsure of himself. He needs better handles, and a post up game. Do not doubt me.

                LOOK at the tape. Over and over again Roy posts up deep for a non-defensible hook and we just can't get it to him.

                A very strong post passer would easily add 3 or 4 buckets and 4 foul shot per game to his stats. add 9 or 12 points to his total an see how that measures up. Too often we instead just pound it outside till time runs outit and jack up a three.

                Because we can't pass!

                I've been watching BBall a long time. Roy is the best we have right now and we are wasting a third of his effect.

                Paul's a great kid, really, but he's not the best Pacer... yet.

                Hmm, seems like I've found a favorite player. I need a Roy beast Photo... comming soon for my profile!
                You need to remember Roy was being guarded by Birdman, Bosh, and Haslem, he should be getting deep position on all of them, no excuse for him not to, while George was being guarded by Wade and James, both of whom are very good defenders, Hibbert played great, but George is better

                Comment

                • #383
                  Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

                  Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                  Getting Bledsoe seems like a short-sighted decision. Our bench would get significantly weaker without Granger. I find it hard to believe that adding Bledsoe to a bench of Young, Green, Hans, and Ian would make us a better team.

                  As a side note, the salaries don't even match. Personally, I'm interested in finding out everything we would get in this trade. Otherwise, they can have Green if it's 1 to 1 player trade.
                  It would probably be Caron Butler and Eric Bledsoe for Granger

                  Comment

                  • #384
                    Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

                    So the starting line up would be Bledsoe Hill and Lance as the 6th man. I personally don't think you can keep bledsoe and lance. And not go into the LT.

                    Comment

                    • #385
                      Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

                      This trade talk sounds like leveraging for the bigger deal. It's letting the Celtics know that the Clips don't need them.

                      Comment

                      • #386
                        Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

                        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                        http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/93...n-celtics-deal
                        So we are in discussions for a Bledsoe for Granger deal, but the Pacers FO is leaning towards keeping Granger to see if he can get healthy? If he comes back healthy that would be great, and obviously the Pacers FO knows more about the injury than any of us, but Bledsoe is a very attractive player

                        Comment

                        • #387
                          Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

                          I don't think the Clippers are that stupid, yes I know they are the Clippers but I still don't see it happening.
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment

                          • #388
                            Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

                            Problem with dealing Granger is what if he comes back 100%? He could be a huge help to our team, but Bledsoe is a very interesting trade piece

                            Comment

                            • #389
                              Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

                              Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
                              Problem with dealing Granger is what if he comes back 100%? He could be a huge help to our team, but Bledsoe is a very interesting trade piece
                              and if granger gets hurt again we get screwed.......

                              Comment

                              • #390
                                Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

                                Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post

                                So the starting line up would be Bledsoe Hill and Lance as the 6th man. I personally don't think you can keep bledsoe and lance. And not go into the LT.
                                You worry about that when that comes. Great situation to be in to have to decide which to keep, Stephenson or Bledsoe!! You walk away a winner one way or the other.

                                Comment

                                Previous 1 16 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 36 76 126 301 template Next
                                Working...
                                X