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

No Pacer Trade Rumors?

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

  • #16
    Re: No Pacer Trade Rumors?

    Just a simple question, let's simply accept that the contract of Bib is prohibitive to say the least (thank God, 12.5.13.5.14.5 mio........) and you want to move tinsley for any of the ones mentioned on this page, who's going to be our point guard?
    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

    If you've done 6 impossible things today?
    Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: No Pacer Trade Rumors?

      Originally posted by able View Post
      Just a simple question, let's simply accept that the contract of Bib is prohibitive to say the least (thank God, 12.5.13.5.14.5 mio........) and you want to move tinsley for any of the ones mentioned on this page, who's going to be our point guard?
      I'll tell ya one kid who I think is going to be strong in a few years: Jordan Farmar. 3rd Strike mentioned him. I see a lot of the Stockton, Mark Price mold in him.

      Yes, he has some defensive problems, but so does Tinsley. What I find extremely appealing about him is tht I think ultimately he's going to be good at running a team and involving everyone in the game.

      I personally think he's going to end up being a top tier guard. Not very top, but up there.

      His is the only name that makes me perk up of the ones mentioned, but trying to trade Tinsley's salary for that of a rookie's would involve way too many fiscal gymnastics.
      Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: No Pacer Trade Rumors?

        Originally posted by able View Post
        Just a simple question, let's simply accept that the contract of Bib is prohibitive to say the least (thank God, 12.5.13.5.14.5 mio........) and you want to move tinsley for any of the ones mentioned on this page, who's going to be our point guard?

        That's a great question. Trading Tinsley for someone like Gibson or Farmar would be essentially throwing away the rest of this season. I can't see Donnie and Larry doing that.
        "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

        - Salman Rushdie

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: No Pacer Trade Rumors?

          Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
          That's a great question. Trading Tinsley for someone like Gibson or Farmar would be essentially throwing away the rest of this season. I can't see Donnie and Larry doing that.
          Why would it be throwing away the season? b/c they are rookies? We would still have other ballhandlers on the team as well. I actually like Farmar that's the guy I wanted in the draft, and he's obviously showed he can play, b/c Phil Jackson isn't big on playing rookies.

          And Tinsley won't be traded straight up for anybody, other players will be involved.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: No Pacer Trade Rumors?

            Tinsley Might get Traded.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: No Pacer Trade Rumors?

              i think it depends what we actually have in mcleod. a few years ago in utah when he was playing about 25min a game he averaged ~ 8pts and 5ast. not spectacular numbers by any means but decent. he's not a shooter and knows that. he's not going to be jacking up shots. i hear he's a pretty good defender, and a much better ballhander/playmaker than greene. i see him as a less talented chris duhon.

              so, if you've got a situation like keith/DA/Quis/Dunleavy handling PG-type duties throughout the game and were able to add a talented shooter/defender for tinsley, it may be worth it and not throwing away the season. im not saying it is ideal, but it all depends on what we feel keith can do for us. and if we could move tinsley to improve the team now, i don't think you necessarily condemn the season. i don't believe that is a long-term answer, but then spend the summer trying to get a PG instead of a PG and a SG. just an option if keith can pull together the type of performance he had pre-GSW
              This is the darkest timeline.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: No Pacer Trade Rumors?

                Originally posted by !Pacers-Fan! View Post
                Tinsley Might get Traded.
                Probably the post of the year. I know it's early, but, I'm calling it.

                If Kidd isn't being moved, Bibby's contract is too ridiculous to move, and LAL wants Tinsley for Farmar, I'd be in heaven. Jordan is who I wanted in the draft, and when we didn't get him (or any replacement for Tinsley), I was pretty bummed. If we got Farmar, I'd be a very happy fellow.
                It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: No Pacer Trade Rumors?

                  Originally posted by pizza guy View Post
                  Probably the post of the year. I know it's early, but, I'm calling it.

                  If Kidd isn't being moved, Bibby's contract is too ridiculous to move, and LAL wants Tinsley for Farmar, I'd be in heaven. Jordan is who I wanted in the draft, and when we didn't get him (or any replacement for Tinsley), I was pretty bummed. If we got Farmar, I'd be a very happy fellow.
                  Seconded, on both counts.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: No Pacer Trade Rumors?

                    NO FARMAR, PLEASE. DUDE SUCKS.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: No Pacer Trade Rumors?

                      Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
                      NO FARMAR, PLEASE. DUDE SUCKS.
                      Very enlightening post.


                      My take is there is no one out there to move Tinsley for. Remember Bird says he'll do any trade as long as it improves the Pacers. Trading Tinsley even up is one thing, adding Foster or other players is another.

                      If Tinsley only plays about 23 minutes next game like he did last game against Memphis I expect we might be looking at how we would do without him. In that case I would think a trade 50-50 at best.

                      We play Milwaukee Wed. with the trade deadline Thur. at 3 pm.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: No Pacer Trade Rumors?

                        I think that the Lakers, Cavs, and Heat would have some interest in Tinsley if they can't get Bibby or Kidd.

                        My number one choice would be the Lakers. They have a lot to offer. I like either Smush Parker or Jordan Farmar, throw in maybe Sasha Vujacic, and then fill salary with Aaron Mckie (although he is retired) or Chris Mihm and cash for something like Tinsley and maybe Greene and Harrison. Or the deal could be bigger and something like Tinsley, Foster, Greene, for Brown, Farmar, Vujacic. I wouldn't mind starting Farmar, I think he has a lot of upside. This would keep us away from contending but I don't know that we will be anyways.

                        With the Cavs we wouldn't land as good of deal. About all we would get is salary relief. A deal that involes Eric Snow, Damon Jones, Scot Polllard, Ira Newble, Sasha Pavlovic. Maybe we can pry away Shannon Brown or Daniel Gibson from them. Still though, Snow or DJ wouldn't be an upgrade from Tinsley and Newble, Pollard, and Pavlovic just relieve us of salary.

                        I don't know about a deal with the Heat. Maybe if they give us their first round pick this year, which I doubt. It would be like a deal with the Cavs, all we would get is salary relief.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: No Pacer Trade Rumors?

                          Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
                          NO FARMAR, PLEASE. DUDE SUCKS.
                          Very insightful. You came to this conclusion how?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: No Pacer Trade Rumors?

                            Regarding Cleveland and Miami as possible trade partners...am I the only one that thinks that ( unless we get a very solid PG ) TPTB wouldn't want to trade a starter to a team that we will likely face in the Playoffs?

                            If the Lakers possible plan for acquiring Kidd falls through.....I could remotely see them having some interest in Tinsley. The problem is that the only PGs that they have is Smush Parker and Jordan Farmar.....either of which would be an acceptable backup PG....but not a solution for starting....which I guess...could be a start. The problem is that I don't think that the Lakers would have any other players to trade that would...from a Salary POV...make sense in the Long run.

                            But as some have pointed out......at best....trading Tinsley to the Lakers would be a lateral move.....which I don't think that TPTB will want to do.....unless the Lakers and Pacers can get a 3rd Party involved....which is unlikely.
                            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: No Pacer Trade Rumors?

                              Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                              But as some have pointed out......at best....trading Tinsley to the Lakers would be a lateral move.....which I don't think that TPTB will want to do.....unless the Lakers and Pacers can get a 3rd Party involved....which is unlikely.
                              That's the thing with trading Jamaal, it is going to be alateral move. Really no matter who we get.

                              Is it better to bit the bullet now and clear some cap space maybe and get a guy like maybe Jordan Farmar who could develope into a starting point guard? Maybe, maybe not.

                              Really no matter who we get for Jamaal we are going to be taking a step back. If you went through all the point guards in the league I think Jamaal would be right in the middle. At his salary, a fair salary for his production really, teams are not going to flock over him whenever he isn't a big upgrade if any for them. If he is an upgrade he is probably a pretty expensive one.

                              The Pacers might have to take a step back to take two steps forward. It's more likely to happen in the summer though.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: No Pacer Trade Rumors?

                                Pardon me, but doesn't Jordan Farmar suck? And that's just in comparison to Tinsley.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X