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

Commisioners office nixes Paul trade

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

  • Re: Commisioners office nixes Paul trade

    [QUOTE=BRushWithDeath;1310978]


    The Hornets will have to keep Paul, who through protest may never report back, for this season. They will then lose him in free agency. /QUOTE]


    I agree with they will lose CP3 to FA at the end of the year, but I strongly disagree he will sit out the season over protest. He's going to give up 16 mil to protest? NO WAY!

    After he plays out the season, he can pick and chose where he wants to go as a FA.

    Comment


    • Re: Commisioners office nixes Paul trade

      [QUOTE=Justin Tyme;1311045]
      Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post


      The Hornets will have to keep Paul, who through protest may never report back, for this season. They will then lose him in free agency. /QUOTE]


      I agree with they will lose CP3 to FA at the end of the year, but I strongly disagree he will sit out the season over protest. He's going to give up 16 mil to protest? NO WAY!

      After he plays out the season, he can pick and chose where he wants to go as a FA.
      Which he should have just done in the first place.
      "The greatest thing you know Comes not from above but below" Danzig

      Comment


      • Re: Commisioners office nixes Paul trade

        After sleeping on this situation, I think the trade is very good, except for the Rockets, but that's their decision and their direction they want to go.

        I can't imagine a better trade coming to the Hornet's. I know some has said that the players the Hornets are getting are old and big contracts and the Hornets need young, low payroll for a sale of the team, but I disagree. Odom is a very good contract for veteran championship talent. Martin is one of the best shooter's in the league for a very fair contract. Scola is just a solid contract for his ability and the toughness he brings to a team. Goric, a very fair contract for him to come off the bench for 1.2mil a year. And they get draft pick(s). All these players are good assets and very tradable for the positive. Pacers could use Odom, Martin and Scola and I would love to have any of the them on our team. I wish we could have all these guys for just one of our players.

        It's totally lame for the Lakers not getting CP3, Lakers are giving up 2 championship allstar players for him, which is more then enough. Yes, this opens the door for salary to get Howard, but that is because Lakers have the assets to give and to get. Props to the Lakers for a job well done.

        Just cause the owners gave in on the CBA and didn't get their way with less movement, more restriction on players to balance the league, doesn't mean they should try and show their A-Hole now, when the trade is legit by NBA rules and the owners agreed too in the CBA.

        This is Lame and totally unexceptable by the league IMO.
        Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

        Comment


        • Re: Commisioners office nixes Paul trade

          Originally posted by Pacer Fan View Post
          After sleeping on this situation, I think the trade is very good, except for the Rockets, but that's their decision and their direction they want to go.

          I can't imagine a better trade coming to the Hornet's. I know some has said that the players the Hornets are getting are old and big contracts and the Hornets need young, low payroll for a sale of the team, but I disagree. Odom is a very good contract for veteran championship talent. Martin is one of the best shooter's in the league for a very fair contract. Scola is just a solid contract for his ability and the toughness he brings to a team. Goric, a very fair contract for him to come off the bench for 1.2mil a year. And they get draft pick(s). All these players are good assets and very tradable for the positive. Pacers could use Odom, Martin and Scola and I would love to have any of the them on our team. I wish we could have all these guys for just one of our players.

          It's totally lame for the Lakers not getting CP3, Lakers are giving up 2 championship allstar players for him, which is more then enough. Yes, this opens the door for salary to get Howard, but that is because Lakers have the assets to give and to get. Props to the Lakers for a job well done.

          Just cause the owners gave in on the CBA and didn't get their way with less movement, more restriction on players to balance the league, doesn't mean they should try and show their A-Hole now, when the trade is legit by NBA rules and the owners agreed too in the CBA.

          This is Lame and totally unexceptable by the league IMO.
          The Hornets aren't a championship caliber team, so they don't need championship caliber veterans. If those assets are so easily tradeable then it shouldn't be hard to get more teams involved to get them the young talent and picks that they need.

          Also, Odom has never been an allstar.
          "Danny Granger is one of the top players in the league. To move Danny, you better get a lot back." - Larry Bird

          Comment


          • Re: Commisioners office nixes Paul trade

            Originally posted by pezasied182 View Post
            I'm not sure how Larry Bird felt about PG back in December, but if the Pacers were offered Scola or Odom straight up for George a year ago, my guess is JOB and others in the organization wouldn't object. Would that trade happen now? No, but a year ago when he was getting no playing time it could have been plausible.

            I could see Martin going to a team like the Bulls for Gibson (not straight up obviously,) Odom was almost just traded for the #2 pick in last years draft and also Andre Iguodala (not saying this is what would happen, but I'm saying he could pull in some assets) Scola would have a massive market, and Goran Dragic could get traded to the Timberwolves for a 1st rounder, Derrick Williams, and Beasley, Kahn really really likes young PGs

            There's trades out there for these players, just not for anyone currently on the Pacer's roster.

            However, I really don't think a eight man rotation of Ariza, Odom, Scola, Dragic, Martin, Jack, Okafor and Bellinelli would be too bad. They would contend for a playoff spot IMO, but obviously wouldn't be a factor for a championship. For a team that is desperately trying to win fans in NO and stay there, making the playoffs is important. Without this trade, I don't see it happening.
            Odom wasn't almost traded for the #2. They talked to the Wolves and Kahn asked for... Bynum. Who is the type of player that may have that sort of value. I doubt Odom would net more than a lottery protected pick and an expiring to match salaries or cap-space. I mean, the Pacers need a starting PF and they'll be in the hunt for a playoff spot - what would you be willing to give up for Odom now?

            Kevin Martin's last trade value was Carl Landry. The Hornets own his Bird rights and apparently won't sign him to a new contract. He's a MLE type of player. Of course, if Martin's salary was in the Taj Gibson ballpark, his value would skyrocket.

            What would exactly be Scola's massive value? The Pacers are one of the teams that should value Scola more: he covers their needs in terms of position and skills. A PF with shot-creation/scoring ability. What would Indiana be willing to pay for Scola? Say they miss on Nenê and it goes down to West vs Scola. West should be asking for a contract a bit higher, but on the same ballpark. You can get West for cap space or Scola for cap space and... what else are you willing to offer? A first round? For a player who's 2 years older, comparable scorer, a lesser defender and slightly better rebounder? I suppose so - as long as you can protect it. But would you really give up more than that? Maybe they can get Anthony Morrow, a pick and cap room from the Nets.

            In the end, those guys are worth a couple of late first rounders. Put all of this together and they aren't getting the Minny first rounder the Clippers were offering, Rondo or Bynum.

            -------

            I agree they could contend for a playoff spot. But is that the goal? To be a 8th seed for the next two years? And then what? Because this core will quickly get older. Or it's just important next season? If so, they'd be better by keeping their team from last year, that actually made the playoffs. Or keeping Gasol. At least they'd be in playoff contention for the duration of his contract. Heck, surround him with some quality role-players and you could win 50 games.

            The right choice for the Hornets is to rebuild. If that's the goal, this trade is nonsensical. You don't rebuild by staying in playoff contention with a more expensive and older team. If that's not the goal, this trade is still nonsensical.

            --------

            Nixing the trade was pathetic. Beyond stupid from Stern. But Demps should be fired right away, he's running that franchise to the ground.
            Last edited by cordobes; 12-09-2011, 11:42 AM.

            Comment


            • Re: Commisioners office nixes Paul trade

              Originally posted by cgg View Post
              The Hornets aren't a championship caliber team, so they don't need championship caliber veterans. If those assets are so easily tradeable then it shouldn't be hard to get more teams involved to get them the young talent and picks that they need.

              Also, Odom has never been an allstar.
              First, you are wrong, Odom has been an NBA Allstar and he has won the sixth man award and he has won NBA championships.

              2nd, If CP3, West, Landry and their other FA's leave. The Hornets get acouple young players and picks from another trade. WTF will their team look like then. They can't get FA's, they are all leaving them. The talent level will be just awful. Atleast, this trade will save them face and have very good talent with the ability to improve.


              Also Lamar has much better stats then Nene and Lamar is 9mil with 2 yrs left on his cotract vs 4 yrs at possibly 14 mil for Nene. Really!

              http://espn.go.com/nba/player/stats/_/id/617/lamar-odom
              Last edited by Pacer Fan; 12-09-2011, 11:59 AM.
              Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

              Comment


              • Re: Commisioners office nixes Paul trade

                Which year was he an all star? Luke Walton has won championships too.

                Their team will look the same as it will look 2 years after they make the trade.
                "Danny Granger is one of the top players in the league. To move Danny, you better get a lot back." - Larry Bird

                Comment


                • Re: Commisioners office nixes Paul trade

                  If anyone's thinking today, they will tweak the trade to perhaps get the hornets another pick or another young asset and push it through. Personally, I'm excited if this deal goes through. It looks all but decided that Dwight is going to New Jersey, so I really don't see how this will make the Lakers that much better if at all.


                  Comment


                  • Re: Commisioners office nixes Paul trade

                    Originally posted by cgg View Post
                    Which year was he an all star? Luke Walton has won championships too.

                    Their team will look the same as it will look 2 years after they make the trade.
                    2000

                    We are not talking about Walton, how lame to use him as an example.

                    Ok, go away now plz.
                    Go troll somewhere else.
                    Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

                    Comment


                    • Re: Commisioners office nixes Paul trade

                      Originally posted by cordobes View Post
                      I agree they could contend for a playoff spot. But is that the goal? To be a 8th seed for the next two years?
                      Am I crazy, or does this team look better than a questionable 8th seed?

                      J.Jack/Dragic
                      K.Mart/Jack
                      Ariza/Ewing
                      Scola/Odom/Andersen
                      Okafur/Scola

                      Comment


                      • Re: Commisioners office nixes Paul trade

                        My opinion on this whole thing is I think it's ok to do what Carmelo and LBJ did to get to their new teams because one way or the other they were going to sign with them in the long run anyways. Chris Paul has no chance in hell signing with the Lakers or the Knicks next summer unless he plans on taking a severe pay cut in order to do it. If you are going to force a trade to a certain team, then that team had better be under the cap otherwise you lose your leverage in saying "well I'm signing with them anyways so trade me there so you at least get something in return". It's sad to say I agree with Gilbert on this issue, they might as well name the other small market teams the Generals.

                        "I've got an idea--an idea so smart that my head would explode if I even began to know what I'm talking about." - Peter Griffin

                        Comment


                        • Re: Commisioners office nixes Paul trade

                          Originally posted by billbradley View Post
                          Am I crazy, or does this team look better than a questionable 8th seed?

                          J.Jack/Dragic
                          K.Mart/Jack
                          Ariza/Ewing
                          Scola/Odom/Andersen
                          Okafur/Scola
                          Their point guards aren't very good that's for sure.


                          Comment


                          • Re: Commisioners office nixes Paul trade

                            Originally posted by DGPR View Post
                            My opinion on this whole thing is I think it's ok to do what Carmelo and LBJ did to get to their new teams because one way or the other they were going to sign with them in the long run anyways. Chris Paul has no chance in hell signing with the Lakers or the Knicks next summer unless he plans on taking a severe pay cut in order to do it. If you are going to force a trade to a certain team, then that team had better be under the cap otherwise you lose your leverage in saying "well I'm signing with them anyways so trade me there so you at least get something in return". It's sad to say I agree with Gilbert on this issue, they might as well name the other small market teams the Generals.
                            Chris Paul did not force a trade to the Lakers!!!!

                            I cannot say that strongly enough. Dell Demps, who was supposed to be in charge of all basketball operations in New Orleans, chose to send him there because he liked the package of players that was offered as a part of that deal more than his other options.
                            "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                            -Lance Stephenson

                            Comment


                            • Re: Commisioners office nixes Paul trade

                              Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                              Their point guards aren't very good that's for sure.
                              Atleast Jack will have talented teamates to pass the ball to. LOL
                              Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

                              Comment


                              • Re: Commisioners office nixes Paul trade

                                Originally posted by Pacer Fan View Post
                                2000

                                We are not talking about Walton, how lame to use him as an example.

                                Ok, go away now plz.
                                Go troll somewhere else.
                                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_NBA_All-Star_Game

                                Lamar Odom was not an all star in 2010.
                                "Danny Granger is one of the top players in the league. To move Danny, you better get a lot back." - Larry Bird

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X