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

The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

    Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
    Deal doesn't make the Knicks much of anything, in response to your first comment.
    ahem.

    However a key for the Pacers has to be the 3rd piece. I do not think Collins gets it done though the thought of him at C, Krstic at PF is intriguing. But PG is a huge need - that means Williams or a pick.
    By "doesn't get it done" do you mean from the Pacers' perspective, or from the Nets'?

    I don't think you have much to worry about though. LB always overvalues his players and waits until everything crashes down before making a trade - and when he gets around to it he'd be begging for the deals - from either NJ or LA - that were on the table this summer.
    Which trades can we offically place at LB's feet?

    - Harrington/Jackson/Jasikevicius/Powell for Diogu/Murphy/Dunleavy/McLeod?
    - Croshere for Daniels?
    - Artest for Peja?
    - AJ for Armstrong/Powell/Marshall?
    - TE/#1 for Harrington/Edwards?
    - future #2 for Stanko?
    - JJones for future #2?
    - Alexander Johnson/2 future #2s for White?

    Honestly. Does LB have enough of a trade history (apart from DW) to judge at this point? And how do we know where DW ends and LB begins in these deals?

    I definitely have my issues with some of the trades listed above, but it's slippery slope when people start placing every bad deal at LB's feet while praising every good trade as the sole masterwork of DW.

    Just want to keep us all honest here.
    Last edited by blanket; 08-09-2007, 07:31 PM.
    "I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
    -Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05

    Comment


    • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

      The way I see it - if we want to compete NOW, we need to try and get someone like Jefferson BESIDE Jermaine.

      Just getting these guys FOR jermaine is not going to help us either way. With the emergence of Boston, the Heat and Pistons still in that top level, Bulls on the verge also, we cannot "compete" now. Not possible.

      Our best and smartest move is to build for 3-4 years from now so we are on the up when these others have the windows closed...

      The Jefferson deal doesn't allow for that. And for whoever said he's a great defender, you are kidding yourself. He may be the best defender on the Nets, but, that's not saying much...

      If we make the Jefferson/Kristic trade, basically, we become the Nets, minus Kidd and Carter. ie. Terrible. And even if we do somehow manage playoffs, we are one and done, miss out on good draft picks.

      Why try and get good enough, just to get beat by Celtics/Miami, etc.???

      Comment


      • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

        Originally posted by count55 View Post
        I'll tell ya what. You find one NBA GM (not named Mitch Kupchak) that would trade Greg Oden for Andrew Bynum, then we'll talk.
        I bet after averaging 10 fouls a game in summer play, there is alot more then you think. GMs are victims of media hype just as much as you and me. Thats why they make dumb decisions year after year. They know just as much as we do. I guess thinking for yourself is a lost concept nowadays.
        Last edited by Bynum Brigade; 08-09-2007, 07:34 PM.

        Comment


        • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
          Assuming that the best deal that the Lakers can offer is a non-Odom deal....then any deal centered around RJeff+Krstic will help the Pacers NOW.

          Although we would have an All-Forward lineup , it would certainly be better then with a lineup with Kwame ( who only is a solid Big Man Defender ), Bynum ( who...at worst...will probably put up comprable #s...if not...at least...slightly better #s..in the upcoming season ) and Crittenton ( who clearly isn't ready...at least not until his sophmore season ).

          I'm not disagreeing with you the Laker Kwame+Bynum+Crittenton deal is a better option then the RJeff+Krstic deal for the LONG-TERM....I just don't think that Pacers FO are thinking like that.

          One more thing....honestly IMHO, there is as much of a chance that the Pacers keep JONeal then trade him to the Nets for an RJeff/Krstic combo.


          I don't fully believe this stuff ( only because I am not a fan of playing players out of position all the time )....but I think the Pacers FO does. They want to compete now....getting Kwame+Bynum+Crittenton does not allow them to do that.

          It's that simple.
          Then WTF is your FO thinking? They'd rather make the playoffs with a team that isn't good enough to contend than rebuild with a core of young players that could potentially do some damage in the EC? It makes no sense, if I were a Pacer fan I'd be up in arms over this.

          Comment


          • Re:

            Originally posted by 1980ROY View Post
            We need to build for 3 years time when the Heat and Celtics window is closed/closing...

            That is the smart move.
            You get it. There is also a buisness end to it. Selling tickets. It's all about the bottom line.

            Comment


            • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

              Originally posted by 1980ROY View Post
              The way I see it - if we want to compete NOW, we need to try and get someone like Jefferson BESIDE Jermaine.

              Just getting these guys FOR jermaine is not going to help us either way. With the emergence of Boston, the Heat and Pistons still in that top level, Bulls on the verge also, we cannot "compete" now. Not possible.

              Our best and smartest move is to build for 3-4 years from now so we are on the up when these others have the windows closed...

              The Jefferson deal doesn't allow for that. And for whoever said he's a great defender, you are kidding yourself. He may be the best defender on the Nets, but, that's not saying much...

              If we make the Jefferson/Kristic trade, basically, we become the Nets, minus Kidd and Carter. ie. Terrible. And even if we do somehow manage playoffs, we are one and done, miss out on good draft picks.

              Why try and get good enough, just to get beat by Celtics/Miami, etc.???
              I think you'll find many of us agree that it would be better to effectively start rebuilding now -- which would mean deals for young prospects/exp contracts/picks -- but we're trying to be realistic about what's LIKELY to happen based on LB's comments on "tweaking" the roster rather than "rebuilding." It might not be what many of us want, but we're more or less resigned to the fact that that's Bird's MO. That's why we're discussing the merits of LO/Bynum vs RJ/Krstic instead of Bynum/Brown/Crit/pick/filler -type deals.

              In fact, as has been suggested by others, it seems making a deal like JO for RJ/Krstic/Collins is LB's way of rebuilding without having to say he's rebuilding. RJ is a young/tradable asset, Krstic is on his rookie contract, Collins comes off the books in 2 years at the same time as Foster and Daniels.
              "I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
              -Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05

              Comment


              • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

                [QUOTE=Tuco;587516]
                Originally posted by DgR View Post

                Are you suggesting playing C is his prefered position?
                No, what I am suggesting is that he played better as a Center.
                Are you suggesting that getting double and triple teamed every night had no effect on his game?
                The effect of the double and or triple team on his scoring was negated by his increased output in other notable statistical categories, therefor a higher EFF number.
                Did you consider our team was way unbalanced- with no shooters to relieve pressure from post a player?
                Even so O'neal played better as a low post player.
                Besides- 28 games out of 69 is not "from time to time" - it's actualy more than 40%
                That was in response to your notion that O'neal spent the majority of his time as a Center last season not as a Power forward, when in fact it was the opposite way around.
                And if JO almost matched his yearly averages with all these problems, well, all I can say is that he's gotten better, not worse
                OK...
                JO played the best basketball of his career at PF
                Playing C is what's getting JO injured so frequently
                JO is our no.1 offensive option and getting double/triple team is BAD. He doesn't make up for it by getting 2 more apg- if we had any good shooters- maybe it would've been slightly better. JO is meant to put a lot of points on the board and whenever he doesn't- it presents a problem to the team. what other statistics-more important than ppg- did he improve significantly to make up for that lack of productivity?

                Comment


                • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

                  Originally posted by oneofthesedays View Post
                  Then WTF is your FO thinking? They'd rather make the playoffs with a team that isn't good enough to contend than rebuild with a core of young players that could potentially do some damage in the EC? It makes no sense, if I were a Pacer fan I'd be up in arms over this.
                  It's about selling tickets, too. If trade your franchine player for picks/potential/cap space, it's going to be clear that your in rebuilding mode and fans won't show up to watch a team built to lose.
                  "I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
                  -Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05

                  Comment


                  • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

                    Originally posted by 1980ROY View Post
                    The way I see it - if we want to compete NOW, we need to try and get someone like Jefferson BESIDE Jermaine.
                    well yes, that would be nice. but who would new jersey want on our roster? granger? probably but they're really wanting a big... foster? they're looking for post-offense. kinda thinking foster isn't the guy. murphy? no one will be taking that albatross of a contract off our hands any time soon...
                    This is the darkest timeline.

                    Comment


                    • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

                      So your saying Pacer fans by and large would not watch a core of young guys growing and maturing together?

                      Comment


                      • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

                        I'd take either, but my incredible foresight (that others here lack) is telling me to go with the Lakers deal if available. Krstic can score, but he's a lousy rebounder and defender. Andrew Bynum, on the other hand, is the total package when it comes to young big men. It's not a question of if but when will he become a dominant force? Jefferson isn't bad, but we all know he's a SF, one of our few set positions. Sure he can play some SG, but at a decreased level. He's also overpaid, which is a huge turnoff.

                        Do the Lakers deal, and if the Lakers won't give up the closest thing to a new Shaq this league will see for some time aka Andrew Bynum, then go with New Jersey.

                        Comment


                        • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

                          Originally posted by oneofthesedays View Post
                          So your saying Pacer fans by and large would not watch a core of young guys growing and maturing together?
                          hard core fans of course. casual fans that large market teams like ny and la thrive on? not so much. maybe a few years ago but not since the brawl. the pacer rep among casual fans is still "they're a bunch of thugs" which i don't blame them... seriously you don't want to look at dunleavy the wrong way. he'll f#ck you up, hardcore.
                          This is the darkest timeline.

                          Comment


                          • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

                            Originally posted by blanket View Post
                            It's about selling tickets, too. If trade your franchine player for picks/potential/cap space, it's going to be clear that your in rebuilding mode and fans won't show up to watch a team built to lose.
                            It's all about marketing. IMO fans would get more satisfaction watching young players grow. With the thought someday that young team has a chance to really do something, rather then watch a team with no shot in heck of ever getting anywhere but the typical first round exit. Especially when even a first round exit is a stretch. Fans are not as stupid as GMs think.

                            Comment


                            • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

                              Originally posted by oneofthesedays View Post
                              So your saying Pacer fans by and large would not watch a core of young guys growing and maturing together?
                              look at the ticket sales for the hawks
                              "I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
                              -Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05

                              Comment


                              • Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread

                                Originally posted by oneofthesedays View Post
                                So your saying Pacer fans by and large would not watch a core of young guys growing and maturing together?
                                Of course we would...but only if those young guys are maturing into stars and we're not all quite sold on Bynum and JC...especially not Critt.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X