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

Interesting story on Giants LB Bryan Kehl

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

  • Interesting story on Giants LB Bryan Kehl

    Interesting story on Giants linebacker Bryan Kehl

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...TSecondStories


    Bryan Kehl leans back, smiles and says his dad has always been a "storyteller."

    He wraps exaggerated finger quotes around that last word to make it clear the stories his father tells aren't always rigorously fact-checked.

    Six of Gary and Nancy Kehl's nine children were adopted, including Bryan. As a rule, there were never any distinctions made about whose genes came from where: Everyone was to be treated equally. But there was always one exception—and it always involved Bryan.

    View Full Image
    kehl1
    Emile Wamsteker for The Wall Street Journal

    Giants linebacker Bryan Kehl, above after a preseason win against the Patriots, was adopted. He didn't find out until last year that his father was NFL journeyman running back Maurice Turner.
    kehl1
    kehl1

    In one of those yarns that his dad was so fond of telling, Bryan's biological father was an NFL running back. "I wasn't sure it was true," he says. "Like I said, my dad tells stories.''

    The first time Bryan touched a football, however, out in the family's backyard in Salt Lake City, he decided to play running back. All through youth football and until he went to high school, he was a running back. Now, some 20 years after that first run, he thinks his fondness for carrying the ball was influenced by family lore. "I'm sure that had something to do with it. My brothers all played defense."

    Mr. Kehl is a strapping 26-year-old linebacker entering his third season for the New York Giants. He's no longer a running back. He plays defense like the rest of the Kehls.

    But when it comes to his path to the NFL, there's something basic that Bryan Kehl doesn't know—whether his athletic talent was something bred into him by his parents, his siblings and his Utah childhood, or whether it was coded into his DNA.

    View Full Image
    Kehl
    Emile Wamsteker for The Wall Street Journal

    Kehl with his adoptive parents Gary and Nancy, and his wife Jessica.
    Kehl
    Kehl

    Unlike most people, whose sense of their origins grows deeper as the years go by, Bryan Kehl's has moved in the opposite direction. The mystery of who he is, and exactly how he got there, is still a deep one.

    Nancy Kehl had three children when she decided she wanted a fourth—a half-white, half-black baby girl the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints' adoption program couldn't place.

    Mrs. Kehl says she found out soon after the adoption why that might have been the case: Her neighbors told her that her children could no longer come over. Still, four years later, there were three more biracial Kehls: Bryan, Kortney and Ed. The first three arrived as infants while Ed came as a 12-year-old.

    View Full Image
    Kehl
    Kehl Family

    Bryan Kehl with his biological father Maurice Turner.
    Kehl
    Kehl

    The Kehls were a rambunctious and athletic lot, but Bryan's supposedly special "background" still earned notice. There were times when Bryan would juke a defender or make a great run and the neighborhood kids would say: "Yeah, his birth dad's an NFL player."

    The years passed. Bryan never searched any NFL rosters. He didn't go look at old college media guides, either. To him, it was just a story. And besides, he knew who his parents were.

    Meanwhile, up in the St. Paul, Minn., suburb of Shoreview, Maurice Turner would catch a college football game, hear the surname "Turner" and stop for a second, wondering if that was his son, the child his long-ago girlfriend Amy had put up for adoption. His other two sons, with wife Keren, played football.

    "I knew that the child's name wouldn't be Turner, but the thought runs through your mind," he said.

    Keren hadn't dated Mr. Turner for two weeks before he told her that he had a son. That son's birth date was etched first in Mr. Turner's dog-eared Bible, above where his marriage to Keren and the birth dates of their other children, Maurice Jr. and Billy, eventually went. "Our boys never felt cheated," Mrs. Turner says. "It was just something we all always knew—that one day we would find him and our family would be complete."

    The Turners searched for the baby over the years, even calling the LDS church. But Mr. Turner never knew where the child was born and he couldn't get comfortable with broaching the one tenuous connection he had: As college students at Utah State, he and Amy had set up one of his friends with one of hers and that couple had married.

    Amy—now Amy Smith—was in Utah, too, and raising five kids with her husband, Brian.

    She had once loved Mr. Turner. She had ignored that he was black and Catholic and that she was white and Mormon, even as her parents pulled her out of Utah State because they couldn't ignore it. She cajoled her way back to campus, where she and Mr. Turner reunited. Later, he graduated and she found out she was pregnant. She thought they would get married; he said it wouldn't work. She said she would put the baby up for adoption. He begged her not to, pleading that he would raise the child.

    "I didn't like that idea, either. I felt the baby deserved a family, to have a mom and dad that were stable," Mrs. Smith says. Then, more quietly: "Twenty-five years later, I have found out how much that affected him. I really didn't think he cared that much."

    Bryan Kehl certainly didn't care. Not at BYU, not on his LDS mission in Toronto and not even when he was drafted in 2008. Then a Giants physical found he had a sickle-cell trait, and head trainer Ronnie Barnes asked for a family medical history. "I had no idea," he remembers.

    Turns out Mr. Barnes was adopted, too, and Mr. Kehl felt a seed of curiosity. That seed sprouted last fall, when on a random November night he decided to see if a 1983 draft list lived on the Internet.

    There it was, in the 12th round to the Vikings, a running back from Utah State named Maurice Turner.

    Mr. Turner, who had spent five years bouncing around the NFL, was listed at 5-foot-11 and 200 pounds. In high school, Mr. Kehl had found an old form in a filing cabinet listing his birth parents' races, ages and personal traits. The mother was smart and good-looking. The father was gregarious, 6-feet-tall and weighed 200 pounds. "Honestly, I still thought it was a coincidence," he says.

    Still, he casually mentioned it to his mother at Thanksgiving. The next week, while in California, Mrs. Kehl told her girlfriends and suddenly these Utah housewives had a case to crack. One friend started Googling Mr. Turner, another found a number and Mrs. Kehl dialed it.

    Is this Maurice Turner? Did you play football at Utah State? Did you give up a child for adoption 25 years ago?

    "He said, 'I have waited 25-plus years for this phone call,' " Mrs. Kehl remembers. "He was so humble, so sweet. He was awesome. But why wouldn't he be? Bryan is, too."

    She gave him her son's number—their son's number—and minutes later, on Dec. 3, Mr. Turner and Mr. Kehl started what would become a two-hour conversation. They talked about life, family and faith with voices that sounded eerily similar. Mr. Turner cried. Their wives emailed pictures as they talked and the two men knew: This was real. "He right away let me know that he felt he had a great life, that he had been loved, that he had been very well taken care of. There's a sense of relief that he had not been abused," Mr. Turner said. "At the same time, there's a sense of anger: Those same things, I could've given him."

    As Bryan and Maurice talked, Mrs. Kehl put off telling her husband, calling various children first. Until she called Ed, who, ever-conscious of their dad's feelings, scolded her.

    "I was blindsided," Gary Kehl says. But with a cheer his children say is characteristic, he adds, "That's my wife, full-steam ahead."

    As fate had it, the Giants closed their season at the Vikings on Jan. 3. The Kehls flew out from Utah, the Turners met them in the team's Minneapolis hotel and Bryan's wife, Jessica, said hugging Mr. Turner "felt familiar."

    Surreal, awe-inspiring, indescribable—the Kehls and Turners run through a litany of adjectives trying to explain that first meeting. "You don't want this person to have a negative impact on your son because you've worked so hard to raise him this way," Gary Kehl says. "That was solved as soon as we met him. I started telling him about Bryan, he got emotional and I knew then. I put my arm around him and I said, 'Hey, I understand.' "

    The Giants wrapped up their ignominious season in Minnesota and a few days later, Bryan and Jessica flew to Utah. In mid-December, Mr. Kehl had reached Amy Smith through the wife of that old friend of Mr. Turner's, and now he wanted to meet her, too. "If it's sitting right there, you want to know," he says.

    The easy familiarity took longer with Mrs. Smith. She'd never considered that the baby would find her, and she still harbored shame from the out-of-wedlock pregnancy all those years before. She prayed and she worried, and it took one stilted meeting, one better lunch and six weeks before she told her kids.

    She invited Bryan and Jessica to her home, she called her parents and six siblings and the ice officially broke when her 11-year-old son, Max, not realizing Mr. Kehl is biracial, said, "Wow, he's been in the sun."

    One of her sisters bawled when she saw him, her father kissed him and Amy's brother John, a monstrous BYU fan, insisted he'd always felt some sort of inexplicable affinity for Mr. Kehl. "Everything about this story is crazy," Mr. Kehl says.

    Crazy and inspiring and wrenching, too, Mrs. Smith says.

    "Maurice had been praying for this for 25 years. I hadn't," she says. She uses the words "grateful" and "blessed" to describe meeting Mr. Kehl, and she expresses happiness that he is in her life. But she also says she felt more in control before, and this "is a little tricky."

    There's no guidebook on how any of this works. Mrs. Smith doesn't know how often to call. Mr. Turner can't call enough. Mr. Turner always said he had three sons. Mrs. Smith is bothered when someone refers to Mr. Kehl as her son. "That's for who raises you," she says.

    So what about the old "story" Gary Kehl used to tell his son that his birth father was an NFL running back?

    Mr. Kehl says he remembers someone at the adoption agency telling him that, although he can't remember the details and never saw any paperwork. His wife, Nancy, still suspects that her husband made the whole story up.

    Either way for Bryan Kehl, whether the story is true or not and whether he owes his talent to nature or nurture, it's all the same. "I went to two parents who love me and were the best parents that a kid could ever have and I was born to two parents who are awesome parents," he says. "I know I'm lucky. This could be a very different story."
Working...
X