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

Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

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

  • #16
    Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

    Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
    Thanks, I kind of thought that

    Its like Norwitzki is the perfect "obie player"
    yeah all offense and no defense
    I'm not perfect and neither are you.

    Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the esteem of Elohim,
    Ephisians 4: 32 And be kind towards one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as Elohim also forgave you in Messiah.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

      Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
      Am I the only one who thinks that TJ, with a different type of coach can actually be a very good player?
      Oh, sure. He's put up good numbers in other places.
      This space for rent.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

        Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
        Am I the only one who thinks that TJ, with a different type of coach can actually be a very good player?
        Very good? Dobutful.

        Adequate? Maybe.

        He's been handed the keys to the team twice already only to be traded out of town having had the keys revoked. Size and lack of 3 pt weapon at that size are both drawbacks. Should be a better defender than he is, IMO, if nothing else playing to his quickness/speed strength in terms of on-ball pressure and passing lanes.
        I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

        -Emiliano Zapata

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

          Bringing Miller in with AJ as the backup/apprentice for the next couple years would be a good situation.
          I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

          -Emiliano Zapata

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
            I wonder if they'd take TJ...
            Nate LOVES Steve Blake next to Brandon Roy - a guy that doesn't mind letting Roy create and can spot up and play off-ball. I doubt someone that dominates the ball as much as TJ would be an improvement on Miller.

            Originally posted by Speed View Post
            I've always like Andre Miller's game.
            Two concerns: poor 3pt shooter - that's been mentioned. But he's a defensive liability (though, that hasn't really been the case in Portland thus far). But he'd be a steadying presence at the 1 for us. I wouldn't be disappointed trading for Miller unless it involved Danny or Roy - though I'm not sure how much trading for Miller does for us.
            This is the darkest timeline.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

              Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post


              Two concerns: poor 3pt shooter - that's been mentioned. But he's a defensive liability (though, that hasn't really been the case in Portland thus far). But he'd be a steadying presence at the 1 for us. I wouldn't be disappointed trading for Miller unless it involved Danny or Roy - though I'm not sure how much trading for Miller does for us.
              Well, if not giving up the DG/RH pieces as you suggest, barring financials, it would definitely upgrade our point position tremendously. If you're expecting DG plus some of these young guys to improve over the next couple years, you might as well give them a legit point to help that along. Add a good draft pick or two and hope there's consistent improvement. It's not going to be an overnight thing regardless of what changes occur over the next couple seasons I don't think.
              I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

              -Emiliano Zapata

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

                Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
                Well, if not giving up the DG/RH pieces as you suggest, barring financials, it would definitely upgrade our point position tremendously. If you're expecting DG plus some of these young guys to improve over the next couple years, you might as well give them a legit point to help that along. Add a good draft pick or two and hope there's consistent improvement. It's not going to be an overnight thing regardless of what changes occur over the next couple seasons I don't think.
                I should have included "long term" in that sentence. How much does this type of move improve a team, even for this season? Enough for the playoffs or enough to just miss the playoffs yet again? What does it help us build for the future? I think Dre can still run a team at a high level this season but next? Possibly. Beyond that? Financially it appears to be less of a risk than I was originally thinking. Just glancing at Sham, it looks like 2011-2012 isn't (fully?) guaranteed.
                Last edited by avoidingtheclowns; 01-11-2010, 08:41 PM.
                This is the darkest timeline.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

                  so 22 posts and nobody has talk about Millers attitude? he had issues in Philly and now he is having the same issues with the trail blazers, no thanks?
                  @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

                    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                    so 22 posts and nobody has talk about Millers attitude? he had issues in Philly and now he is having the same issues with the trail blazers, no thanks?
                    I have yet to hear any confirmation about "attitude" in Philly. Can you give specific examples?
                    “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                    “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

                      Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
                      ...throw in Price ....
                      OK, I take this part back.
                      “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                      “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

                        Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
                        I have yet to hear any confirmation about "attitude" in Philly. Can you give specific examples?
                        I posted this long time ago but it seems like nobody really cares
                        http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/bal...urn=nba,177228

                        See, Andre Miller(notes), you got it all wrong.

                        You're supposed to loaf and go through the motions after you sign a free agent contract at age 33. Not before you sign a new deal. Not in a contract year.

                        Now, I can understand why you might be taken aback with my sly, smart-alecky opener. 16 points, 6.5 assists and 4.5 rebounds a game hardly seems like taking it easy, especially when you play 82 games. And if you pay attention to PER, which we do, Dre has turned in some of his best two seasons in 2007-08 and 2008-09, at least since his first year in Denver.

                        And for a guy who turned 33 in the last month of the season, a point guard especially, that's pretty good.

                        But if you watched the games, man, this guy sure did take plays off. Quarters off, even. It was obvious he was having no fun working for the Philadelphia 76ers in the final year of his contract, and especially interim coach Tony DiLeo, and either he tried to make it as obvious as possible, or he's really bad at not letting things that are completely obvious come off as supremely obvious.

                        What I'm trying to say is that Miller obviously chose the wrong year to try and take it easy. The rumor now is that he'll take a one-year, $5.8 million deal to play for the Knicks in 2009-10, but it's a clear one-year rental. And how hard is it going to be to bring it every night when you know you won't be back the next season?


                        If 2008-09 is any indication, for Miller, it's pretty damn hard.

                        Dre's a tremendous player. An 18.6 PER at his age is fantastic, and it's more than possible that he will sustain or even top that production next season, for any team. But he probably assumed himself a perfect fit for the Portland Trail Blazers, especially with all their cap space; and apparently the Portland Trail Blazers didn't want to know. Whoops.

                        I can't tell you with any degree of certainty that the league-wide disinterest in Miller has anything to do with what I saw from him last season. It could be an economics thing, or teams may have been turned off by the way he skipped out on his final team meeting with the 76ers following their first round playoff loss to the Orlando Magic last spring.

                        But it is possible that they saw what I saw. And while I'm not happy that Miller is struggling to find work, it is nice to see a little bit of possible payback in a league where owners still want to trade for Zach Randolph(notes), or pay for Allen Iverson to join your team.

                        For the Knicks? Miller should be fine. As I pointed out, even with the attitude issues he still came through with terrific production for a team that made the playoffs. And the last time he tossed up a stinkbomb for a team he wanted nothing to do with - his disastrous turn as a Los Angeles Clipper back in 2002-03 - Miller rebounded with a career year as a Denver Nugget the following season, leading them to the postseason even as every mainstream commenter around pinned the resurgence on Carmelo Anthony(notes).

                        It's just a little funny to me, how this worked out. I expected this guy to destroy things in 2008-09, working for that contract, while turning into a poison pill that some team would swoop up with a regrettable three-year contract this summer. Instead, we got nearly the opposite.
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

                          We have AJ Price now, move along, nothing to see up in Portland.
                          You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

                            Sounds like horse hockey. No quotes. No confirmation. No story. Nothing in there but the writer's "observations" about ... what exactly? Gameplay? Body language? I have no idea. The writer says right in there that Miller was hella productive.

                            "He looks like he's not having fun but boy is he still productive" is not a confirmed attitude problem in my book.
                            “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                            “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

                              Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
                              Sounds like horse hockey. No quotes. No confirmation. No story. Nothing in there but the writer's "observations" about ... what exactly? Gameplay? Body language? I have no idea. The writer says right in there that Miller was hella productive.

                              "He looks like he's not having fun but boy is he still productive" is not a confirmed attitude problem in my book.
                              you can say the same thing about TJ there is more info about your guy:

                              http://blog.oregonlive.com/behindbla...erupts_at.html

                              Trail Blazers practice on Thursday was halted nearly 60 minutes into the workout when veteran point guard Andre Miller and coach Nate McMillan engaged in a shouting match that lasted for nearly 30 minutes.
                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

                                Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
                                But he's a defensive liability (though, that hasn't really been the case in Portland thus far).
                                That threw me.

                                I thought he was known for good defense.
                                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X