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

Vescey: Pacers and Lakers talking Artest for Odom. New info, Friday night

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

  • Re: Vescey: Pacers and Lakers talking Artest for Odom. New info, Friday night

    I'm sure they do, but yet they have 2 different things being thrown out to them?
    I will believe KL before I believe a Internet reporter until then give me proof.

    Best Regards.

    Comment


    • Re: Vescey: Pacers and Lakers talking Artest for Odom. New info, Friday night

      Originally posted by GetOdom
      I'm sure they do, but yet they have 2 different things being thrown out to them?
      I will believe KL before I believe a Internet reporter until then give me proof.

      Best Regards.
      whos KL?

      Comment


      • Re: Vescey: Pacers and Lakers talking Artest for Odom. New info, Friday night

        I rather have Kwame then Nene and Watson, Nene will leave us at the end of his deal and Watson would be our 3rd string PG

        Comment


        • Re: Vescey: Pacers and Lakers talking Artest for Odom. New info, Friday night

          Originally posted by mulisha
          whos KL?
          Kev Lee.

          Comment


          • Re: Vescey: Pacers and Lakers talking Artest for Odom. New info, Friday night

            Originally posted by Jermaniac
            I rather have Kwame then Nene and Watson, Nene will leave us at the end of his deal and Watson would be our 3rd string PG
            i dont think Watson is part of the Denver rumor, i heard the denver deal was Nene and leonard, not watson. I also read Watson is being shopped to Seattle for Flip Murray.

            Comment


            • Re: Vescey: Pacers and Lakers talking Artest for Odom. New info, Friday night

              I've spoken to some contacts about this - they say the Lakers aren't trading Odom. Make your own opinion about that . . . no reason to take my word for it.

              Comment


              • Re: Vescey: Pacers and Lakers talking Artest for Odom. New info, Friday night

                Originally posted by CableKC
                If such an Odom/Artest deal does happen....does it require the use of a 3rd team?

                With the other deals.....like the Kwame+George+Draft Pick or the Watson/Nene potential deals....those required a 3rd team...I thought more to make it enticing to the Pacers to make it happen.

                In the case of Odom....if he is the center piece for the Lakers end....do we need to include a 3rd team? or are we able to throw in fillers to make things work?
                The reason a 3rd team was needed in the Denver deal was;
                • Denver wanted Artest, Indiana didn't want what Denver was offering for Artest. (Nene & Watson/Lenard)
                • Indiana wanted Harrington, Atlanta didn't want Artest.
                • Atlanta was potentially interested in Nene & Watson/Lenard
                • Thus we get Artest to Denver, Harrington to Indiana, Nene & Watson/Lenard to Atlanta.
                • Everybody gets what they want, everybody's happy



                And no, no 3rd team is needed in an Artest/Odom deal. Indiana would however have to send several more million in salary to the Lakers to make the deal work.
                For Odom, Artest and any 1 of the following players works: (according to the RealGM trade checker)
                Jonathan Bender, Scot Pollard, Stephen Jackson, Jamaal Tinsley, Jeff Foster, Sarunas Jasikevicius, Anthony Johnson, Fred Jones

                However, if the Lakers wanted Artest and Austin Croshere, they could throw in any of their lower-salaried players to get it to work.

                Comment


                • Re: Vescey: Pacers and Lakers talking Artest for Odom. New info, Friday night

                  from our two most respected sources at CL.com

                  mvp - Emplay makes a good point. Indy's options are a low talent offer from Minny, a risky and expensive move for Nene, and LA. If the Lakers are of the opinion that Nene is a bluff, then they take this course, bending over backwards in everything but talent by taking on contracts and offering the Miami #1, young bench guys, last years, and whatever incentives Toronto will give for taking Jalen's contract off their hands. Eric believes that will still be enough, because no one who wants Artest can beat it. That assumes Indy passes on Nene due to cost and risk.

                  Emplay also says that it's not like the Lakers to make a blanket denial that Odom will not be offered, that Kobe backed it up, and that they handed this to the Times. It's even more rare for them to make that statement and then back off of it. He may well be right. It's not like the organization to do this, and would be even more unlike them to reneg on it.

                  So if LA is adamant on no Odom, and confident that Nene is a bluff, then Mitch tries to sell them on Devean, Kwame and throw-ins offering contract relief and picks. Toronto gives them their latter #1, Lakers offer the Miami #1, LA gives up Luke and Cook, someone takes Anthony Johnson, etc. Play up the other aspects of the offer as much as possible. Is it enough to win Artest? Only one way to find out.

                  It's a game of chicken between Walsh and Kupchak. Who blinks first?

                  Comment


                  • Re: Vescey: Pacers and Lakers talking Artest for Odom. New info, Friday night

                    It sounds to me like a lot of Laker fans living in denial to be honest. They want a Kobe/Artest/Odom trio, and wanna pawn mediocre talent off on us to get it done.


                    And using the whole "Lakers deny Odom will be traded" story as proof is just plain stupid, imo. GMs deny players are being traded if they're not being traded, GMs deny players are being traded if they're being traded. Fact - GMs almost always deny players are being traded.

                    More fact....
                    • Kobe appearantly wants Artest
                    • Jackson appearantly wants Artest
                    • Kobe and Odom don't get along,and had to be seperated by security
                    • The Lakers have lost 3 in a row and are in danger of sliding out of the playoffs
                    • The Lakers would gain several million in capspace, depending on when Indys "filler" expired


                    All the time Artest has been damaged goods whom his teammates dont want.....and now Odom has become somewhat damaged goods whom Kobe probably doesn't want around....and ofcourse LA is trying to make it look like a very minor altercation, they don't wanna lose any of their leverage in a potential deal.

                    I'll say what Donnie Walsh is probably saying to Mitch Kupchek - No Odom, no deal.

                    And remember Laker fans, probably 80% of GMs would agree that Artest is the superior player, so you're winning in that department. And yes Artest has major past issues, but if I'm not mistaken, Odom himself has had drug and attitude problems in his past. Remember those two things before you come out with your "Odom wont be traded to get Artest" lines.

                    And finally, I have almost no idea whats true or whats false at this point. Donnie Walsh is very secretive when it comes to his wheelings and dealings. He's been known to lie to purposely set "smoke screens" to throw off the media and other GMs. I could see a deal for Odom going down tommorow, yet at the same time I wouldn't be shocked with a trade at the deadline involving someone never even mentioned in trade rumors.

                    Just someone please get a deal done so this can all end.

                    Please?

                    Comment


                    • Re: Vescey: Pacers and Lakers talking Artest for Odom. New info, Friday night

                      Just to lay this to rest.....

                      http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog...sheridan_chris

                      Artest Watch: Odom staying home?

                      posted: Thursday, December 29, 2005

                      Lamar Odom got caught up in the Ron Artest rumor mill Thursday, and the Lakers acted quickly to put it to rest internally.

                      A source close to the Lakers told ESPN.com that Odom had received reassurance from the team, which told him he had not been included in any trade offers made to the Indiana Pacers. The Lakers were apparently responding to rumors floating around the league that Los Angeles had become open to the idea of trading Odom in an Artest deal.

                      That is all they had posted on the ESPN insider.

                      Here is the phrase that you need to focus on.....had not been included .

                      That simply means as of that moment an offical trade offer with Odom's name on it had not been made to the Pacers.

                      Had they talked about trading Odom? maybe

                      Will they offer Odom in the coming hours? maybe

                      Had Odom already been offered for Artest? no, not yet!

                      Comment


                      • Re: Vescey: Pacers and Lakers talking Artest for Odom. New info, Friday night

                        And here's a phrase you need to pay extra attention to.....posted: Thursday, December 29, 2005

                        Not trying to be a smart aleck, but things change in a hurry, particular after the alleged Kobe/Lamar incident on the Lakers team bus.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Vescey: Pacers and Lakers talking Artest for Odom. New info, Friday night

                          **** l.a. i'd bench ron untill his contract expires. we'll still be decent. the trade doesn't need 2 happen. we lost 2 the raptors. we will play better cuz we just hit r low. i'd rather have al anyway.
                          1 - 2, Tinsley's coming for you.
                          3 - 4, You're not a team no more.
                          5 - 6, He's gonna plead the 5th.
                          7 - 8, He's gonna stay out late.



                          Comment


                          • Re: Vescey: Pacers and Lakers talking Artest for Odom. New info, Friday night

                            keep ron and prove a point.
                            1 - 2, Tinsley's coming for you.
                            3 - 4, You're not a team no more.
                            5 - 6, He's gonna plead the 5th.
                            7 - 8, He's gonna stay out late.



                            Comment


                            • Re: Vescey: Pacers and Lakers talking Artest for Odom. New info, Friday night

                              A source close to the Lakers told ESPN.com that Odom had received reassurance from the team, which told him he had not been included in any trade offers made to the Indiana Pacers. The Lakers were apparently responding to rumors floating around the league that Los Angeles had become open to the idea of trading Odom in an Artest deal.
                              There's your key: they have not offered him, but once Wals said: "Odom or not" they said; "ok let's talk business".

                              See they have not lied a word, they never offered him, yet when asked for, made him available.
                              So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

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

                              Comment


                              • Re: Vescey: Pacers and Lakers talking Artest for Odom. New info, Friday night

                                Originally posted by GetOdom
                                Some Pacer fans think Vescey is best with Pacer news so let's see what happens.


                                Well we really won't becauae all Vescey said is the Lakers and Pacers have just begun talking about Odom for Artest and the Lakers are finally open to the idea. OK so if the trade does not go down, does that mean Vescey was wrong. NO. Now if he comes out tomorrow and says there will be a trade of Ron for Lamar and it doesn't happen, then he is wrong.

                                But Vescey can say really anything he wants as far as "they are talking" or "considering"



                                EDit: A week ago I was not too thrilled with the prospect of getting Odom. He has a huge contract, but at this point I would make the trade. Yes Odom will require the Pacers change 80% of their playbook but at this point maybe that is a good thing.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X