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

Pacer/Laker trade nears?

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

  • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

    Originally posted by CableKC View Post
    If Foster is included in the deal....I honestly wouldn't mind signing him to a reasonable deal. But if he costs too much...I would let him go.
    He'd have to really improve his numbers to be worth more than the MLE.

    Right now that's the most I'd give for him. He'd have to show he's a lot more than a 8-6 guy who plays decent defense to go above that.
    The poster formerly known as Rimfire

    Comment


    • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

      All I've read is a local GS columnist wanting/expecting him to be shopped. Otherwise nothing.

      Comment


      • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

        Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
        the biggest problem is that the pacers don't have to take a bad deal. so if they do take one its worse than the laker perspective because the lakers have been put into a poor bargaining position by kobe. the pacers are really under no absolute need to trade JO. should it happen? probably. but it doesn't have to, especially with a new coach. and at the very least we don't have to trade JO to the lakers if other deals are more appealing.

        so if the pacers get a bad deal that can only be attributed to poor management. if the lakers get a bad deal its because of unattractive players/contracts and their star's meltdown.
        With all this "rumored" chatter between the Lakers and the Pacers coupled with all this "apparent urgency" from the Lakers Front Office to try to make significant move to "placate" Kobe.....if a deal could have happened...it would have happened by now.

        I am completely guessing here.....but if the Lakers offered Kwame+Bynum+19th pick+filler for JONeal ( the best possible deal that the Lakers can put up WITHOUT giving up Odom )...if TPTB were that desperate to move JONeal and get back Bynum....they would have accepted it by now.

        But until JONeal does force TPTB to do something...its obvious that there is no pressing need to specifically make any deal from the Pacers POV. I really think that TPTB are waiting for better offers to come in from other teams....which may or ( more then likely ) may not....or they are waiting for the Lakers to "blink" and give up a few more consessions before consummating anything.

        This does give me some solace in all these "No Bynum" rumors....but there is still a small part of me that wouldn't be surprised if we end up with a deal that does not involve Bynum.
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
          With all this "rumored" chatter between the Lakers and the Pacers coupled with all this "apparent urgency" from the Lakers Front Office to try to make significant move to "placate" Kobe.....if a deal could have happened...it would have happened by now.
          Teams usually wait until the last minute when the best offers come in. Another thing. sometimes what deal is accepted depends on whether a certain player is there to be drafted.

          For instant say the rumors are true and the Lakers have two offers on the table, one that includes the #19 pick and the other that doesn't. The Pacers might wait to see who is there at the #19 pick before deciding on which deal they want.
          Last edited by Will Galen; 06-12-2007, 02:11 PM.

          Comment


          • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

            Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
            I think players that run are better than players that don't. I think they get around a lot faster!
            Funny guy.....
            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment


            • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

              I know it's Pincus, but here's the Lakers Draft article he post yesterday.

              http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_22287.shtml

              Comment


              • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
                I know it's Pincus, but here's the Lakers Draft article he post yesterday.

                http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_22287.shtml
                Not much to read there other then speculation on Pincus' part. I'm not knocking him....its clearly written from a Laker POV.....but nothing new that hasn't been written already.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                  That's indeed a really one-sided Lakers-POV article. First he mentions the Pacers want to rebuild and then he only mentions pick#19 and not Bynum? Like Odom alone is going to make it worth it to us (he mentions us beying able to "compete" with Odom around I thought he was talking about us wanting to rebuild a few sentences earlier? )

                  And Odom and Bynum are too much for JO? has Eric been drinking the last few years? I would rather keep Jamaal then go into his proposed "dumping" Jamaal onto the Lakers idea and I am not a fan of the Jamaal we have seen the last few years at all.

                  I'm surprised he doesn't want a Pacers pick after such an article .
                  Last edited by Mourning; 06-12-2007, 03:03 PM.
                  2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                  2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                  2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                    Pincus's article makes me feel that maybe it's better to just call this off. His "compromise" means that neither team gets any real benefit. Trades are supposed to benefit both teams, not neither.

                    IOW, if Bynum is still untouchable, forget it. We can do better elsewhere.
                    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                      Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                      Pincus's article makes me feel that maybe it's better to just call this off. His "compromise" means that neither team gets any real benefit. Trades are supposed to benefit both teams, not neither.

                      IOW, if Bynum is still untouchable, forget it. We can do better elsewhere.


                      Bynum AND Odom with Bynum more then Odom beying the key for us doing this deal.
                      Last edited by Mourning; 06-12-2007, 03:04 PM.
                      2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                      2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                      2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                        I have no idea why people are assuming Bynum is not in the deal. I spoke with someone in the know yesterday at night and he told me directly there is a better chance the deal gets done with Odom held off.

                        Bynum will be in the deal.
                        "To accomplish great things, we must not only act, but also dream; not only plan, but also believe." - Anatole France

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                          Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                          For instant say the rumors are true and the Lakers have two offers on the table, one that includes the #19 pick and the other that doesn't. The Pacers might wait to see who is there at the #19 pick before deciding on which deal they want.
                          I dunno about the rest of you guys, but this makes a lot of sense to me from a Pacers standpoint.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                            Don't get me wrong.....I would include Tinsley in the deal if the Lakers would be willing to take him on. I just get the sense that they won't.

                            There were 2 things I was trying to highlight in my post. First, IF the Pacers insist on taking on Kwame's Expiring Contract ( and therefore another contract is included ), I think that the Lakers are going to insist on taking on Marquis instead of Tinsley. Second, although TPTB would probably want to move Tinsley ( for obvious reasons ), I wonder if TPTB would "cave-in" to the Lakers ( just to get the deal done ) and "kill 2 birds with 1 stone" by including Marquis so that we could find a way to give more minutes to a Dunleavy/Granger/Shawne SG/SF rotation while keeping a "somewhat acceptable" PG option in Tinsley.

                            I would have ZERO problem with Marquis running and starting at the PG spot.....whenever I use Marquis as my Starting PG on NBA2K7, he seems to do fairly well. If it works on a video game...it should work in real life right?
                            Till he gets hurt again, and as long as he ignores JOB's advice and passes up the 3PA chances instead.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                              For instant say the rumors are true and the Lakers have two offers on the table, one that includes the #19 pick and the other that doesn't. The Pacers might wait to see who is there at the #19 pick before deciding on which deal they want.
                              Makes sense to me as well.

                              Originally posted by Mal View Post
                              All I've read is a local GS columnist wanting/expecting him to be shopped. Otherwise nothing.
                              Exactly. And I hate to kill this horse but that guy is way off base I think. Jackson is not going to do anything worse than what he just did for them. He lost his cool with the refs, got tech'd a few times, got fined, turned it over, took bad shots, got cold with his jumper....
                              and
                              played great defense, got hot with his jumper, gave his team an emotional spark, was actually a calming influence on teammates at times, helped win games, and so on.


                              I never said the guy was without fault which is why I was in so many debates around here about it, I just get sick of the cartoon version of Jackson that people pick up on due to the brawl and the vague version of Rio (like people turning firing a gun in the air into firing AT a car driving away).

                              That writer is afraid of the bad side of Jackson. Guess what, YOU JUST SAW IT. Those losses to Dallas, the struggles vs Utah. That's the bad part, and it is annoying. The good part was your team was in round 2 after beating the #1 seed. How was it going before the trade in recent years?

                              I think people here want him on the market to boost morale about the GS trade. Frankly it's too late for that when I hear rumors like "there is NO market for Dunleavy or Murphy". GS hit round 2, the Jack/Al portion is done with and it didn't make Indy look good. Now we must move on to how they deal with this end of it which is not done with by any stretch.

                              Rather than Jack on the market to boost morale, how about Dunleavy finding his 3 and some defense instead. That's what I'm interested in.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                                Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                                Teams usually wait until the last minute when the best offers come in. Another thing. sometimes what deal is accepted depends on whether a certain player is there to be drafted.

                                For instant say the rumors are true and the Lakers have two offers on the table, one that includes the #19 pick and the other that doesn't. The Pacers might wait to see who is there at the #19 pick before deciding on which deal they want.
                                the only problem here is if the pacers are interested in trying to move up from #19 they'd need it before the move.

                                also chances are one of fernandez, belinelli, n. young, crittenton, almond would be available. something tells me they'd prefer one of them to having vujacic as the best PG option on the team by dumping tinsley for brown and no pick.
                                This is the darkest timeline.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X