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

We need a trade

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

  • #91
    Re: We need a trade

    Originally posted by kester99 View Post
    Hey, I'll play.

    Danny Granger for Andres Nocioni and a first rounder.
    Danny Granger 1st round pick, 2nd rd pick for Noch and Chris Duhon!?
    sigpic

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: We need a trade

      Originally posted by andreialta View Post
      Danny Granger 1st round pick, 2nd rd pick for Noch and Chris Duhon!?
      Whatever we do, I don't think we should give up any draft picks for the foreseeable future. Acquire them, yes.


      [~]) ... Cheers! Go Pacers!

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: We need a trade

        Originally posted by edc View Post
        Would you be happy if we can get Ben Gordon, Noah, players to match salaries for Jermaine?
        Personally, if I were talking with the Bulls, I'd be talking about Tyrus Thomas. He's not really working out in Chicago, but I still love what he has going for him. His athleticism and defensive instincts and both world class. And his offensive game, while very raw, isn't horrible. I've seen him compared to a pre-injury Antonio McDyess, which I think he could end up at, but with even better defense. His value seems to be low right now, and with Chicago struggling and needing someone like J.O., I'd try to work something out. And if you don't want to take Ben Wallace, you could probably find a team willing to send expiring contract(s) for him.

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: We need a trade

          Originally posted by andreialta View Post
          Danny Granger 1st round pick, 2nd rd pick for Noch and Chris Duhon!?
          No offense, but that just made me ill....why would we ever trade away any picks at this stage of our franchise...blasphemy. Say...whats that on your nose...and that hat that so casually adornes your crown...BURN THE WITCH!!



          Ok, sorry long night at the bar has me feelin foolish....must be all the sauce. Go Hoosiers
          Roy Hibbert.... It's the POWER!!!

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: We need a trade

            Murphy for Cardinal and Stoudamire?

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: We need a trade

              Originally posted by iPACER View Post
              Murphy for Cardinal and Stoudamire?
              Grizzlies are rebuilding....they won't want Murphy's contract.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: We need a trade

                Originally posted by Kofi View Post
                Personally, if I were talking with the Bulls, I'd be talking about Tyrus Thomas. He's not really working out in Chicago, but I still love what he has going for him. His athleticism and defensive instincts and both world class. And his offensive game, while very raw, isn't horrible. I've seen him compared to a pre-injury Antonio McDyess, which I think he could end up at, but with even better defense. His value seems to be low right now, and with Chicago struggling and needing someone like J.O., I'd try to work something out. And if you don't want to take Ben Wallace, you could probably find a team willing to send expiring contract(s) for him.
                First thing....I love you new Avatar....

                Second thing.....I wouldn't mind getting either Tyrus or Sideshow Bob....but I doubt that they would take JONeal cuz of his contract. Wallace would be a steep price to pay given his contract....but I would think fits the defensive end and could be worth paying IF we could get Tyrus and Duhon ( can he agree to an extension ? )
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: We need a trade

                  Originally posted by Kemo View Post
                  It's really getting old...I truly believe that Diener could be another Stever Kerr / Jason Kidd .. if given the chance... TD is gonna end up being yet another Pacers player who's talent is squandered on favortism ..IMO
                  I'm thinking you meant Jason Williams here, hopefully. Steve Kerr is probably a little more realistic, even more than Jason Williams (or maybe Steve Blake). Owens gets more time because he's a better defender than Diener. Although, I agree that he's probably a better pg overall, his defensive limitations would really wear on us throughout the game, likely getting our bigs in foul trouble, drawing help from all over the floor, or getting gorged by the steady torching by his man. Our solution for a backup point is likely not on this roster. As for Tinsley, I think our losing is due to his absence. We're a better team when he's on the floor, on top of his game.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: We need a trade

                    I want Gordon because hes really good when the games on the line...

                    @Shade: Why you dont like Noah?

                    Comment


                    • Re: We need a trade

                      Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
                      Damon Stoudamire and Darko Milicic for Troy Murphy and David Harrison?
                      I thought of this exact trade, but my office counterpart made a load of sense. Darko is a cheaper, shorter term contract version of Murphy, so why take that long deal?

                      Comment


                      • Re: We need a trade

                        Originally posted by iPACER View Post
                        Murphy for Cardinal and Stoudamire?
                        People need to think from the point of view of the other team just as much as the Pacers' POV whenever they propose these trades that send Murphy in return for shorter/smaller contracts.

                        You're Memphis. You're rebuilding. You're young. What good is adding a middle aged player who at most is a fringe starter while at the same time taking on bigger salary for more years? What good does that do you? Murphy is a good, hardworking guy, but that alone doesn't warrant acquiring him to pay him the better part of 4 years and $42M.

                        What hump or obstacle is Murphy pushing them over? What does it do for them from a short or long term perspective when it comes to eventually turning their team back into playoff caliber? There needs to be answers to those questions because there would be a lot of additional salary committed on their part.

                        If you want to do such a deal, you'll have to add sweetner, like a 1st round pick or Shawne Williams. Otherwise, there would be no incentive for another team to take on a bigger/longer contract for no apparent reason (or none that I can think of).
                        Last edited by d_c; 01-04-2008, 03:24 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Re: We need a trade

                          The reason I proposed the trade is because I believe Darko is a bust. The Griz have three stars in Gasol, Conley, and Gay. But Darko is abused in the post as his defense is bad (worse than Murphy's). Murphy also averages 11.2 and 6.7 whereas Darko averages 6.6 and 5.7. Murphy can also shoot from outside, compared to Darko.

                          Next, the benefit for Memphis to do this trade is that instead of spending 18 mil over this season and the next two on Cardinal, a 30 yr old forward, who avgs 7.9 minutes a game, they would get Murphy at 32 mil for this season and the next three at 32 mil. Throw in Stoudemires contract and ~ 9 mil and the trade is relatively close. Pacers get a backup PG and Memphis gets a starting C for a backup PG and a guy who isn't even in their rotation.

                          Comment


                          • Re: We need a trade

                            Originally posted by Kofi View Post
                            J.O.'s trade value is still significantly more than just expiring. If he were going for just expiring, every non-rebuilding team in the league would be trying to work something out for him. We can get at least a good draft pick and/or a nice young prospect out of a deal. I still think Chicago, Phoenix, or the Lakers makes sense for both sides.
                            Obviously I don't really agree completely. The problem in most cases is how does JO help the team he's going to, especially if they must send high caliber talent back.

                            We all know that his output per dollar is out of whack. That eliminates ALL up-and-coming teams and rebuilding teams.

                            The only teams interested are ones that need that last piece, and giving up other key pieces doesn't solve that, it just shifts the problem. That's why PHX wouldn't move Marion, for example, and why LA might be iffy on Odom+ as long as things are going smoothly.

                            Chicago is in a world of hurt, but then as people are mentioning most of what they would offer in return doesn't really fix our situation.

                            In classic Coen Brothers style I'll say the Pacers are in a tight spot.


                            BTW, I did a hard set of trades in 2K8 that moved Tins, Dun and JO, got Andre Miller, the #20 pick and tons of cap space with 1 and done players like Ricky Davis, plus the #2 pick in the draft. Midway through the next season I was fired by the game for massive losing despite the stud SG I drafted and signing Elton Brand as a FA.

                            In other words, trickier than it seems. I thought I'd done well, but the team chemistry sucked. It might just be a game, but there is some truth behind it.

                            Comment


                            • Re: We need a trade

                              Originally posted by iPACER View Post
                              The reason I proposed the trade is because I believe Darko is a bust. The Griz have three stars in Gasol, Conley, and Gay. But Darko is abused in the post as his defense is bad (worse than Murphy's). Murphy also averages 11.2 and 6.7 whereas Darko averages 6.6 and 5.7. Murphy can also shoot from outside, compared to Darko.

                              Next, the benefit for Memphis to do this trade is that instead of spending 18 mil over this season and the next two on Cardinal, a 30 yr old forward, who avgs 7.9 minutes a game, they would get Murphy at 32 mil for this season and the next three at 32 mil. Throw in Stoudemires contract and ~ 9 mil and the trade is relatively close. Pacers get a backup PG and Memphis gets a starting C for a backup PG and a guy who isn't even in their rotation.
                              Darko isn't that good, but he's a better defensive player than Murphy. He's bigger. He blocks shots. He's not great by any means but Murphy has been among the worst at his position for quite some time now. As much as Murphy's great shooting is talked about over and over again (I have no idea why), he's always been a guy who shoots in the lower 40s % wise.

                              Memphis would be comitting an additional $14M just for Troy Murphy. Why would they do that? What does that accomplish for them in their rebuilding phase, even if he's marginally better than Darko? If you're the Grizz's owner, your'e going to want to know why your GM wants to commit another $14M for a marginally better role player.

                              Morever, what's really important is the $12M that Murphy will be on the books for 2011/2012 as opposed to Damon and Cardinal, who won't count a single dollar against the cap by then.

                              Comment


                              • Re: We need a trade

                                No thanks to Ben Gordon... he flat out doesn't take good shots for the most part (I haven't seen so many contested fadeaways in traffic this side of Tracy McGrady) and I don't think he makes good decisions when he gets guarded aggressively.. not to mention the fact that he wants $11 mil per. I'd just hang on to JO for the time being and wait for him to expire.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X