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

A Sixers Blog Asks...

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

  • #16
    Re: A Sixers Blog Asks...

    Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
    Why on Earth would Philly do this deal?
    They want to make the clippers look like a great franchise???

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: A Sixers Blog Asks...

      I'd hate to trade Tyler, but I'd do this deal.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: A Sixers Blog Asks...

        Yes sir, do it and then go back and RESIGN Magnum.
        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


        • #19
          Re: A Sixers Blog Asks...

          I've had my eye on a possible Iguodala deal for awhile. I just think with Evan Turner there, he is expendable. They aren't going to be competing for awhile and it's just a matter of time before he gets dealt. That said, I can't imagine this deal going down as listed. I would love to put together some sort of package for AI, and I would even throw in a top 10 protected first round pick in with this. AI would be a great complement to Granger, and his defense is really, really good. I think a Collison-Iguodala-Granger-Whoever-Hibbert lineup would be a tough out night to night.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: A Sixers Blog Asks...

            Originally posted by cdash View Post
            I think a Collison-Iguodala-Granger-Whoever-Hibbert lineup would be a tough out night to night.
            And spurts of a Collison - Rush - Igoudala - Granger - Hibbert lineup could be incredible. Igoudala's a heck of a passer and there's more than enough perimeter shooting there to "space the court" how OB wants it.
            "man, PG has been really good."

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: A Sixers Blog Asks...

              From the surface, it seems like a no brainer. But... we also have to consider the dollars. Without the trade, we are in line to have 36.34M in salary spread across 10 players for 2011/2012. With the trade as stated, we would have 46.97M in salary spread across 10 players. With or without the trade, we will still need 4-5 additional players to be drafted/signed next season.

              In other words, if we were to make this trade, we'd better be very certain that our primary need is strengthening the SG position, because there will be no dollars remaining under what will probably be a lower salary cap to sign a quality PF on the free agent market.

              I personally think that this trade made right now would be pulling the trigger a bit too quickly, and would paint us into a corner where we would have to make other trades to bring in additional quality players, as opposed to just being able to sign them outright through free agency.

              I can honestly state that I do not believe that either of Dunleavy or Rush is a long-term soluton for us at SG. However, I don't believe that we can say one way or the other whether George might be that solution. I would hate to spend nearly all of our projected cap space to bring in Iguoudala, only to discover a year from now that George can fulfill our needs at SG.

              I also believe that both Hansbrough and McRoberts are more promising for us than Speights. Therefore, I believe the trade would result in a weaker front court for us. Presently, we are not doing badly with the platoon system at PF, but I believe most of us would state that we are hoping for something better in the future... and most of us either aren't confident or at least aren't certain that either of Hansbrough or McRoberts can develop into the PF that we need.

              I believe Iguodala can be a very good option for us at SG. He is not known as a perimeter shooter, but is able to get a shot on his own and can get to the rim and the free throw line. But if we were to make this trade, I believe we are definitely making the statement that SG is far more important to strengthen than PF. Are we ready to make that statement, knowing that we are actually somewhat weakening our front court at the same time?

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: A Sixers Blog Asks...

                IMHO....this is a Pau Gasol like trade where the Team gets a borderline All-Star "Robin" level player....basically what Granger and Iggy are.

                I'd easily send PG+1st+Expiring for Iggy+Sixers 2nd round pick. I don't see why the Sixers would want to get rid of Speights as he's insurance if not the future for the Sixers PF or C positions.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: A Sixers Blog Asks...

                  Originally posted by beast23 View Post
                  From the surface, it seems like a no brainer. But... we also have to consider the dollars. Without the trade, we are in line to have 36.34M in salary spread across 10 players for 2011/2012. With the trade as stated, we would have 46.97M in salary spread across 10 players. With or without the trade, we will still need 4-5 additional players to be drafted/signed next season.

                  In other words, if we were to make this trade, we'd better be very certain that our primary need is strengthening the SG position, because there will be no dollars remaining under what will probably be a lower salary cap to sign a quality PF on the free agent market.

                  I personally think that this trade made right now would be pulling the trigger a bit too quickly, and would paint us into a corner where we would have to make other trades to bring in additional quality players, as opposed to just being able to sign them outright through free agency.
                  I would do this trade in a second ( as stated above in my trade scenario ) where this would essentially be our 2011-2012 FA signing and then take my chances on McBob ( if he's willing to stay with us ), Hansbrough and try to draft the best PF that we can.
                  Originally posted by beast23 View Post
                  I can honestly state that I do not believe that either of Dunleavy or Rush is a long-term soluton for us at SG. However, I don't believe that we can say one way or the other whether George might be that solution. I would hate to spend nearly all of our projected cap space to bring in Iguoudala, only to discover a year from now that George can fulfill our needs at SG.

                  I also believe that both Hansbrough and McRoberts are more promising for us than Speights. Therefore, I believe the trade would result in a weaker front court for us. Presently, we are not doing badly with the platoon system at PF, but I believe most of us would state that we are hoping for something better in the future... and most of us either aren't confident or at least aren't certain that either of Hansbrough or McRoberts can develop into the PF that we need.

                  I believe Iguodala can be a very good option for us at SG. He is not known as a perimeter shooter, but is able to get a shot on his own and can get to the rim and the free throw line. But if we were to make this trade, I believe we are definitely making the statement that SG is far more important to strengthen than PF. Are we ready to make that statement, knowing that we are actually somewhat weakening our front court at the same time?
                  Improving the Team in the next 2 seasons does not necessarily mean that we have to sign a top tier PF in Free Agency....getting a young core of Collison/Iggy/Granger/Hibbert/McBob/Hans/AJ/Lance is a very good start.

                  IMHO......improving the Team can come in the form of getting a Starting quality SG and/or a Starting quality PF. I'd say that getting a Starting quality SG like Iggy with some combination of McBob+Hansbrough manning the PF spot would would get us to the Playoffs this season.

                  If getting Iggy simply cost us ( at most ) PG+1st rounder+Expiring Contract, I'd would hope that Bird would pull the trigger.
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: A Sixers Blog Asks...

                    Replace Dahntay Jones w/ Paul George and add in a first round pick and this deal is a bit more realistic. Would be tough to give up on George that early and Igoudala is not one of my favorite players but I think I'd still do the trade.
                    "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

                    ----------------- Reggie Miller

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: A Sixers Blog Asks...

                      Originally posted by Cactus Jax View Post
                      Replace Dahntay Jones w/ Paul George and add in a first round pick and this deal is a bit more realistic. Would be tough to give up on George that early and Igoudala is not one of my favorite players but I think I'd still do the trade.
                      IMHO...that'd be low-balling the Sixers.

                      The problem is that Granger is a Iggy-level player...both are much better as "Robin" then they are "Batman" on their Teams.

                      Would you accept a trade for Granger that involved a long-term 7th-8th SG role-Player, an Expiring Contract and a 1st round pick?

                      My guess is that you wouldn't.

                      Although I'm sure that the Sixers would get many offers.....if the Sixers were to rebuild....having PG play next to Evan Turner makes way more sense.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: A Sixers Blog Asks...

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        I would hate to see Tyler go.

                        So would I.

                        At the same time, I'd do this trade in a NY minute. As to those wanting to throw in Paul George in some sort of doing this trade....NO!!! PG is going to be special, and will end up being better than Iggy.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: A Sixers Blog Asks...

                          Originally posted by Robert Swift View Post
                          hell yes

                          sorry tyler but id rather deal him than mcroberts i wouldnt want to deal either of them but if it means getting iguodala and another young pf in return, im down

                          hey would philly take solo instead and we dont get speights

                          i would rather keep hansbrough than get speights
                          Yeah I would prefer not to trade Josh or Tyler unless it's a trade like this.

                          I hope we re-sign Josh soon. As of now, he's worthy of a well paid, long term deal.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: A Sixers Blog Asks...

                            If given the choice I'd rather trade McBob then Tyler, I just see a higher ceiling for Tyler.
                            I'd do this trade either way though. Iggy would be our second best player next to Granger.
                            Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: A Sixers Blog Asks...

                              As much as I want this, I think Philly will not be interested. They can get a better deal for AI from other teams.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: A Sixers Blog Asks...

                                Originally posted by 15th parallel View Post
                                As much as I want this, I think Philly will not be interested. They can get a better deal for AI from other teams.
                                Like?

                                Not disagreeing, just wondering about market price.
                                This space for rent.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X