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

Denver rejects Knicks offer?

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

  • #31
    Re: Denver rejects Knicks offer?

    Originally posted by Tom White View Post
    Why are so many angry with Denver over this whole thing? They have made a huge investment in Anthony over the years, and it seems all they are trying to do is protect the best interests of the team.

    If you were in their shoes, would you have accepted that load of poop that NY offered? I wouldn't.

    Listen, at this point Denver is bending to the wishes of the player as far as who they have talked to. I don't blame them for trying to maximize their end of the deal. I'd say Anthony.
    I don't disagree that the Nuggets should get the most out of moving Melo....what I ( as an NBA Fan and casual observer ) is irritated by...is that the Nuggets got ( what many think ) was the best offer that anyone can expect from the Nets ( 2 1st round picks, a top prospect along with Expirings ) WHILE pushing ( along with Melo's Agent ) the Nets into taking on Billups ( not bad ) and Rip Hamilton ( sort of bad )....then p*ssed it all away ( allegedly ) by asking the Nets to take on the the journeyman mistake that is Harrington ( and his $18 mil over 3 years contract ).

    If any of this is in anyway close to the truth....the Nuggets asked the Nets to do everything that they wanted ( which the Nets Owner was more then willing to do DESPITE the rumored concerns expressed by Billy King and Avery Johnson that they were essentially overpaying for Melo ) just to land Melo...and then asked them to take on even more.

    I have no problem with the Nuggets asking for a lot for Melo...I have a problem with them asking for a lot....likely getting the Nets to go along with it ...then go back and asking for them to take on more. The deal was already great for the Nuggets that seemed barely reasonable....then went back to the well to ask for more in return. That's plain stupidity if you ask me.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Denver rejects Knicks offer?

      Originally posted by Kstat View Post
      call me crazy, but david west or wilson chandler when you could have had favors and two lottery picks DOES sound bad.

      Then again, Hollinger doesn't even watch basketball.
      Probably shouldn't even respond to that, but here's his twitter feed, where he livecasts Hawks games: http://twitter.com/#!/johnhollinger. He's a solid analyst.

      Anyway, he starts off by saying the Nets offer is best, but if it really is off the table, the Knicks offer will still be available in the sumer. It's a good point.
      2010 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champion Baltimore Bulldogs

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Denver rejects Knicks offer?

        I suspect that the deal with the Nets fell through more due to Melo not wanting to sign the extension with the Nets then with the Nuggets asking for too much. It was a really good deal for Denver under the circumstances however. At this point I don't see why the Nuggets would agree to a mediocre young prospect and a mediocre 1st. round pick. Melo gains a lot more in getting the additional 30-40 mil then the Nuggets do from the NY offer. They can probably get that much from a team willing to take the chance on a 1 yr. rental.
        They should call his bluff and just let this play out and only offer the extension to stay with the team. I doubt if Melo would take that kind of pay cut just to play in NY regardless of what he says.
        Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Denver rejects Knicks offer?

          Originally posted by speakout4 View Post
          First he can go to NY; no question.
          Second he is part of an organized system that requires some parity and therefore limits his mobility. Don't mix up his personal freedoms with his so called rights. To make a living we give up some personal choices such as you get a job with a national organization and they say Dallas and you say NY? You go into the military and they say iraq and you say California.
          His personal freedom is no more violated than yours or mine.
          -Limits are a non-issue, there is a place he wants & they want him.
          -He is not being made to choose, nor does he have to, he has already chosen.
          -His rights hase not been violated, but his choice to use those rights is being questioned/ attacked.
          Last edited by PacerGuy; 01-22-2011, 09:11 PM.
          "Larry Bird: You are Officially On the Clock! (3/24/08)"
          (Watching You Like A Hawk!)

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Denver rejects Knicks offer?

            Originally posted by PacerGuy View Post
            -Limits are a non-issue, there is a place he wants & they want him.
            -He is not being made to choose, nor does he have to, he has already chosen.
            His rights hase not been violated, but his choice to use those rights is being questioned/ attacked.
            That's the fan's RIGHTS as well so what is the big deal?

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Denver rejects Knicks offer?

              Originally posted by speakout4 View Post
              That's the fan's RIGHTS as well so what is the big deal?
              They/we all have the right to be disappointed, question motive, decessions, or acts, but we can not/ should not say he is doing anything "wrong", nor wish him "ill will" as the poster I quoted did. It was that content that I built my soap box on. I get annoyed when I see people say that because they don't understands the motives of an individual, or because of how much that individial makes, his rights are any less then what theirs are. If anyone of us were in his shoes, & were villified because we exersized our right to free will, were honest and upfront, yet were wished harm by others, we would be upset & hurt. Thats all.
              "Larry Bird: You are Officially On the Clock! (3/24/08)"
              (Watching You Like A Hawk!)

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Denver rejects Knicks offer?

                I hope Melo just walks away in the summer into the open arms of NY, leaving the Nuggets like a bride at the alter.

                He doesn't owe the Nuggets anymore than he's already given them. How quickly we forget how LUCKY they were to get him in the first place.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Denver rejects Knicks offer?

                  Originally posted by LA_Confidential View Post
                  I hope Melo just walks away in the summer into the open arms of NY, leaving the Nuggets like a bride at the alter.

                  He doesn't owe the Nuggets anymore than he's already given them. How quickly we forget how LUCKY they were to get him in the first place.
                  For him to "walk into the Knicks arms," he would have to not only give up the extra extension only the Nuggets can offer under the current CBA, but he would have to sign for significantly less the max. The Knicks will not have the space to offer a max contract, especially if the salary cap is decreased under the new CBA.

                  That's something that I only recently learned and it does suggest that no matter what the Nuggets will get at least a few assets back for Melo. The Knicks will be forced into a sign and trade.
                  2010 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champion Baltimore Bulldogs

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Denver rejects Knicks offer?

                    Originally posted by bulldog View Post
                    For him to "walk into the Knicks arms," he would have to not only give up the extra extension only the Nuggets can offer under the current CBA, but he would have to sign for significantly less the max. The Knicks will not have the space to offer a max contract, especially if the salary cap is decreased under the new CBA.

                    That's something that I only recently learned and it does suggest that no matter what the Nuggets will get at least a few assets back for Melo. The Knicks will be forced into a sign and trade.
                    I dont buy this. If It were all about a max deal I think he would have jumped all over the extension the Nuggets offered in the first place. Dude wants out. One way or the other he's gonna get out.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Denver rejects Knicks offer?

                      Originally posted by LA_Confidential View Post
                      I dont buy this. If It were all about a max deal I think he would have jumped all over the extension the Nuggets offered in the first place. Dude wants out. One way or the other he's gonna get out.
                      Mmm...not sure. I think he's signaled that he's willing to let the extension go, and that's why Prokorov backed out of negotiations: Melo said he's not going to the Nets.

                      But now we're talking about leaving millions more on the table. Not only is it a lot of money, but he could have his cake and eat it too if the Knicks just work out a sign and trade with the Nuggets in the summer. This also makes sense for the Knicks since they'd have to cut many of the pieces they're offering to the Nuggets to afford Melo. Seriously, read that Hollinger post I put up a while back, he really does make a compelling argument.

                      The central point is that this weak Knicks offer will still be around in the summer, and while it's not nearly as good as the Nets offer, if Melo has his mind set on the Knicks that's the best they're going to get. On the other hand, a sign and trade makes sense, so they're almost guaranteed to get something.
                      Last edited by bulldog; 01-22-2011, 10:05 PM.
                      2010 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champion Baltimore Bulldogs

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Denver rejects Knicks offer?

                        Give me derrick favors and 2 good drack picks over "something."


                        You think the cavs wished they had traded lebron last season?

                        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Denver rejects Knicks offer?

                          Originally posted by bulldog View Post
                          Hollinger made a strong case that they should just keep Melo:
                          http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insid...PERDiem-110121
                          That's a good bit of insight by Hollinger.

                          What he missed though is that the Knicks could also clear the necessary cap space without Denver's cooperation, by sending some of those assets to an under the cap team. Could end up benefiting a team like the Pacers.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Denver rejects Knicks offer?

                            Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                            I sure hope it isn't the Pacers because Randolph is in no way worth a 1st round pick, maybe a couple second rounders, but hell no to a 1st.
                            plus, i think we are gong to get a good pick. i definitely see a top 10 pick coming our way. i don't think he is worth a lottery pick.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Denver rejects Knicks offer?

                              Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                              I don't agree. Carmello has every right to play for what team he wants. And he was nice enough to tell Denver that he most likely will sign with another team, so that Denver has the opportunity to get something for him.

                              Yes, he loses a lot of money if there's no sign and trade. But he makes enough money that in the end, it probably won't be too huge of a concern.
                              Nothing about playing in the NBA is a right, it is a privilege. These players need to take a look at their lives compared to the rest of us, and put up or shut up.
                              "The greatest thing you know Comes not from above but below" Danzig

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Denver rejects Knicks offer?

                                Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                                I don't disagree that the Nuggets should get the most out of moving Melo....what I ( as an NBA Fan and casual observer ) is irritated by...is that the Nuggets got ( what many think ) was the best offer that anyone can expect from the Nets ( 2 1st round picks, a top prospect along with Expirings ) WHILE pushing ( along with Melo's Agent ) the Nets into taking on Billups ( not bad ) and Rip Hamilton ( sort of bad )....then p*ssed it all away ( allegedly ) by asking the Nets to take on the the journeyman mistake that is Harrington ( and his $18 mil over 3 years contract ).

                                If any of this is in anyway close to the truth....the Nuggets asked the Nets to do everything that they wanted ( which the Nets Owner was more then willing to do DESPITE the rumored concerns expressed by Billy King and Avery Johnson that they were essentially overpaying for Melo ) just to land Melo...and then asked them to take on even more.

                                I have no problem with the Nuggets asking for a lot for Melo...I have a problem with them asking for a lot....likely getting the Nets to go along with it ...then go back and asking for them to take on more. The deal was already great for the Nuggets that seemed barely reasonable....then went back to the well to ask for more in return. That's plain stupidity if you ask me.

                                This is what happens when daddy fires his FO and lets sonny run the show.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X