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: Lakers will be acquiring JO

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

  • Re: Vescey: Lakers will be acquiring JO

    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
    Rad fits the filler on trade checker. I suspect it will be Rad because the Lakers would be giving up almost all their size. ...and IMO, we get a steal if we not only get Odom, Bynum and their first round pick...but also an expiring contract. It would be too good to be true.

    I think the best possible case will be Rad and Farmar as filler.
    Agree, which bothers me. We have absolutely no need of Rad, and should have insisted on moving Murphy at the same time.
    This space for rent.

    Comment


    • Re: Vescey: Lakers will be acquiring JO

      As far as when this trade can be official. I don't know for sure, but I don't think any trades can be done until after the NBA Finals are over (I know trades have been announced in the past a couple of days after the finals are over and a few days prior to the draft.

      Comment


      • Re: Vescey: Lakers will be acquiring JO

        Wait a minute!!!

        You mean to tell me most of you would be fine w/trading JO, a 6-time All-Star, and Tinsley, a bonafied top 10 PG per ESPN.com, for a PF who statistically is a hair or 2 below JO and 2 or 3 up-and-coming players who have barely sniffed the NBA?

        You people are insane!!!

        Before you fall in love with this Lakers/Pacers trade proposal, I suggest you do a player-to-player comparison by position, i.e., JO-to-Odom, Tinsley-to-Farmer. If you come back with that same level of enthusiasm I'm thinking some of you need to lay off whatever it is you're smokin'!!

        Making such a trade will put the Pacers right back where they were to end the season - NO WHERE! Tweak the roster; don't throw it into total chaos! My goodness, people. Think about what you're asking.

        Comment


        • Re: Vescey: Lakers will be acquiring JO

          Well for once it appears we're dealing from a position of strength, especially if Kobe loves JO as much as we're lead to believe. We need to milk this for every cent it's worth.
          Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

          Comment


          • Re: Vescey: Lakers will be acquiring JO

            Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post
            Wait a minute!!!

            You mean to tell me most of you would be fine w/trading JO, a 6-time All-Star, and Tinsley, a bonafied top 10 PG per ESPN.com, for a PF who statistically is a hair or 2 below JO and 2 or 3 up-and-coming players who have barely sniffed the NBA?

            You people are insane!!!

            Before you fall in love with this Lakers/Pacers trade proposal, I suggest you do a player-to-player comparison by position, i.e., JO-to-Odom, Tinsley-to-Farmer. If you come back with that same level of enthusiasm I'm thinking some of you need to lay off whatever it is you're smokin'!!

            Making such a trade will put the Pacers right back where they were to end the season - NO WHERE! Tweak the roster; don't throw it into total chaos! My goodness, people. Think about what you're asking.
            As far as I'm concerned, the only direct comparison that matters is JO and Odom. JO is a great player on both ends of the floor. Odom, in my opinion, is bizarrely overrated and I ain't a fan of his game. Plus he really isn't that good to begin with, not even near JO's level.

            That's all that matters, because with Odom as a #1 option, the Pacers are destined for a 20-win season.

            Comment


            • Re: Vescey: Lakers will be acquiring JO

              Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post
              Wait a minute!!!

              You mean to tell me most of you would be fine w/trading JO, a 6-time All-Star, and Tinsley, a bonafied top 10 PG per ESPN.com, for a PF who statistically is a hair or 2 below JO and 2 or 3 up-and-coming players who have barely sniffed the NBA?
              If we used that logic we never would have gotten JO in the first place. So, maybe that means Peck doesn't want to do this...
              Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

              Comment


              • Re: Vescey: Lakers will be acquiring JO

                Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                Well for once it appears we're dealing from a position of strength, especially if Kobe loves JO as much as we're lead to believe. We need to milk this for every cent it's worth.
                Agree. There's no reason to take VladRad back. The filler should be Kwame. If LA needs more frontline guys, they can have Murphy and Harrison.
                This space for rent.

                Comment


                • Re: Vescey: Lakers will be acquiring JO

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                  As far as when this trade can be official. I don't know for sure, but I don't think any trades can be done until after the NBA Finals are over (I know trades have been announced in the past a couple of days after the finals are over and a few days prior to the draft.
                  Trades can officially be made once a team's season is over.

                  In addition, teams cannot trade players under the following circumstances:
                  • For two months after receiving the player in trade or claiming him off waivers, if the player is being traded in combination with other players. However, the team is free to trade the player by himself (not packaged with other players) immediately. This restriction applies only to teams over the salary cap. (Also see question number 72 for a special case where players can be traded together in less than two months.)
                  • When the trading deadline has passed. Teams are free to make trades again once their season has ended, but cannot trade players whose contracts are ending or could end due to an option or ETO.
                  • For three months or until December 15th of that season (whichever is later) after signing a contract as a free agent. This obviously does not apply to the trade completing a sign-and-trade transaction (see question number 76). Interestingly, however, it is unclear whether this rule prevents a player who has been signed-and-traded from being traded agiain prior to three months/December 15 (see question number 80).
                  • For 30 days after signing as a draft pick.
                  • Without the player's consent when the player is playing under a one-year contract (excluding any option year) and will have Larry Bird or Early Bird rights at the end of the season. This includes first round draft picks following their fourth (option) season, who accept their team's qualifying offer for their fifth season. When the player consents to such a trade, the team loses its Larry Bird/Early Bird rights, and the player is considered a Non-Bird free agent. Note: when there is an option year involved, they can get around this regulation by invoking the option prior to the trade.
                  • For one year after exercising the right of first refusal to keep a restricted free agent (however, the player can consent to a trade to any team except the team that tried to sign him).
                  • After claiming a player on waivers, for 30 days if the player was claimed during a season, or until the first day of the next season if the player was claimed during the offseason.
                  • A team cannot reacquire a player they traded away during that season (a season being July 1 - June 30) unless the player has been waived.
                  • In the special case of players waived through the amnesty provision (see question number 18), the player cannot be reacquired for the length of the terminated contract.
                  http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#85

                  Comment


                  • Re: Vescey: Lakers will be acquiring JO

                    Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post
                    Wait a minute!!!

                    You mean to tell me most of you would be fine w/trading JO, a 6-time All-Star, and Tinsley, a bonafied top 10 PG per ESPN.com, for a PF who statistically is a hair or 2 below JO and 2 or 3 up-and-coming players who have barely sniffed the NBA?

                    You people are insane!!!

                    Before you fall in love with this Lakers/Pacers trade proposal, I suggest you do a player-to-player comparison by position, i.e., JO-to-Odom, Tinsley-to-Farmer. If you come back with that same level of enthusiasm I'm thinking some of you need to lay off whatever it is you're smokin'!!

                    Making such a trade will put the Pacers right back where they were to end the season - NO WHERE! Tweak the roster; don't throw it into total chaos! My goodness, people. Think about what you're asking.

                    I don't judge trades on a player-to-player comparison. I judge trades on several other things. Like who is the best player involved in the trade. Well that is obviously JO, but I also judge a trade based upon who will be the best player in the trade in two or three seasons. And I really believe Bynum will be a better player than JO in three seasons. JO is so injury prone and he is starting to show a ton of wear and tear - I think in 2 years JO will be clearly on the downside of his career - I mean like Chris Webber is right now.

                    But more than anything I judge trades on what the roster will look like after the trade. No one is arguing that the Pacers would be better next season if this trade goes down, but in two season I think the pacers will be better than they would have been without this trade.

                    One last thing, I consider Tinsley to have negative trade value, meaning the pacers are forcing the Lakers to take him - I really doubt the Lakers want him at all. Pacers are saying if you want JO, you must take JT off our hands

                    Thanks 2Clava for the info on trades

                    Comment


                    • Re: Vescey: Lakers will be acquiring JO

                      Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                      Agree. There's no reason to take VladRad back. The filler should be Kwame. If LA needs more frontline guys, they can have Murphy and Harrison.
                      OMG. That sounds funny. Dumping Murph's contract on them for Brown's expy. Pushing head case and Tinman. Great!

                      Comment


                      • Re: Vescey: Lakers will be acquiring JO

                        Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                        I'll be intrigued to find out what the filler is.

                        Kwame+Farmer=Awesome.

                        Radmonovic=Terrible
                        I'd say Radmanovic. I really doubt the Lakers would trade both their centers. Yes they have Chris Mihm listed but he had season ending surgery himself. Of course if they do that trade before July 1, then Mihn and his $4m expiring contract could be part of the deal.

                        And Brown just had ankle surgery, so Brown wouldn't be high on the Pacers list.

                        As for Odom, I would try and trade him and the 19th pick to Minn. for their 7th pick to be used on Brewer.

                        I wouldn't worry about our point guard. Draft express has 19 point guards listed in their top 30 mock draft for 2008.

                        http://www.draftexpress.com/mymock.p...cial&year=2008

                        I think things are looking great if this trade goes though.
                        Last edited by Will Galen; 05-31-2007, 07:31 AM.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Vescey: Lakers will be acquiring JO

                          A few things to remember here... Just because we trade J.O. doesn't mean it's the last deal we'll make.

                          J.O. said it himself, if he is to be traded, it'll happen sooner than later.

                          I've said it repeatedly "The Pacers will either be drafting, or receive a player from this years draft."

                          Comment


                          • Re: Vescey: Lakers will be acquiring JO

                            Thanks for the great info, Uncle Buck!

                            This deal would complete the blow up and rebuild theory. Not sure all of the parts laid out on the table can be put back together into a competitive NBA team. Should be interesting...
                            Go Pacers!
                            Indy Cornrows

                            Comment


                            • Re: Vescey: Lakers will be acquiring JO

                              Buck - no problem.

                              I don't believe the deal is finalized for a week or so but I do believe its done with Odom being the principle coming back, not Bynum.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Vescey: Lakers will be acquiring JO

                                Originally posted by 2Cleva View Post
                                Buck - no problem.

                                I don't believe the deal is finalized for a week or so but I do believe its done with Odom being the principle coming back, not Bynum.
                                Big mistake. We have a premier all-star big man and we are dumping salary. That would be a true downgrade in terms of talent as well as the future. This would be a coup for LA.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X