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

BOB KRAVITZ} Pacers Savor Piece of Good Fortune

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    BOB KRAVITZ} Pacers Savor Piece of Good Fortune

    http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl.../1004/SPORTS04

    By Bob Kravitz

    One by one, the names came off the NBA draft board. One by one, the Pacers' front office staff started wondering if the ridiculous was somehow possible. The Toronto Raptors had picked up a stiff, Charlie Villanueva, at No. 7. The Los Angeles Lakers, looking for a new Shaq, took a high school center named Andrew Bynum. The Charlotte Bobcats chose Sean May at No. 13, a bit higher than expected.

    The NBA's teams were making a mockery of all the mock drafts.

    Now, the Pacers were nearing their selection, No. 17, a place where they figured they might pick up a Francisco Garcia. But then they looked at the board. And they were stunned.

    Danny Granger was still there.

    The same Granger who blew away the Pacers during an early workout in Indianapolis, even if the brain trust was resigned to the fact he wasn't going to be around at 17.

    "We've got a chance to draft this guy?" coach Rick Carlisle asked team president Larry Bird as they watched Granger work with three other players in early June at the fieldhouse.

    "No, probably not," Bird responded.

    Bird was so sure Granger wasn't going to be available at 17, he apologized to the New Mexico player for bringing him to Indianapolis for the workout.

    Every mock draft had Granger going in the top 10, even in the top five. Carlisle said Tuesday if the Pacers had the fifth overall pick in the draft, they would have taken Granger. But lots of strange things started to happen, Villanueva and Bynum and May, and suddenly, the Pacers' eyes were getting big as saucers.

    "We were holding our breath," Bird said, "thinking every pick that Granger was going to go next."

    It never happened. And when it came time to make the pick, the decision was more unanimous than an election in a dictatorship.

    "When Granger came down to us, we were amazed," Carlisle said.

    Later, Bird was still looking like he'd won the lottery after picking up a single ticket on a sidewalk.

    "I never dreamed he'd be there," he said.

    Nobody could believe it. Chad Ford, ESPN's online draft analyst, wrote the Pacers got "the big steal of the draft."

    So why did Granger fall?

    There's only one possible issue: After his junior season, Granger had offseason shoulder surgery. And six months ago, he suffered a torn meniscus, but returned later in the season and played brilliantly.

    Injury prone?

    Maybe that was it.

    Otherwise, it didn't seem to add up. Bird said that as Granger became available, he started to think about the 1998 draft, when Paul Pierce, a surefire top-five pick, somehow fell to Boston at No. 10.

    Granger, who Carlisle expects will compete for minutes immediately, gives the Pacers a lot of what they need.

    He gives them depth and insurance at shooting guard. He gives them a capable fill-in at small forward for Ron Artest. He gives them a useful backup at power forward behind Jermaine O'Neal.

    And he gives Bird the flexibility to make more moves. "We're not done yet," Bird said. "We've still got some things we want to do. We solidified two positions tonight, so that does a lot for us."

    Granger doesn't just bring them talent, something the Pacers already have in abundance. Maybe as important, he also brings them some maturity, some sanity. And that's no small issue with a team that has the chance to be very, very good or very, very dysfunctional. Face it: You put Artest, Stephen Jackson and Jamaal Tinsley together, something is going to happen, and it's not always going to be good.

    With Granger, we're talking here about a four-year college player, a Jehovah's Witness who has done missionary work, a young man who actually turned down Yale. When he moves to Indianapolis, he will be accompanied by his father, who has said he will shut down his forklift repair business and live with his son.

    When Granger was chosen, ESPN analyst Greg Anthony immediately invoked the name of Scottie Pippen. Later, Carlisle was not backing away from the comparison. Granger may not be another Pippen, but he has many of the same physical skills, like Pippen, or maybe a bulkier Tayshaun Prince.

    When somebody asked what position Granger would play, Carlisle answered like he was talking about the former Bulls' great:

    "On the floor."

    True, in 99 percent of all cases, when a team emerges from the draft room and says, "We couldn't believe Player X was still there," it's complete and utter nonsense, a transparent effort by the local management to convince its fans they pulled a fast one on the competition.

    This was a 1 per center.

    This wasn't supposed to happen. But it did. After a season of the worst luck imaginable, the Pacers got one of the franchise's best-ever breaks, choosing a young man who comes here from the same school that served the franchise well in the past, producing Mel Daniels.

    If you thought this front-office was happy on Tuesday, just wait a few years.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: BOB KRAVITZ} Pacers Savor Piece of Good Fortune

    He is one of those Jahovahs Witness missionarys that travel door to door proseltizing? I bet he'll get along great with all the guys =/

    I hope he is as good as everyone thinks he is, cause he sounds like he is living some weird very controlled life, with his parents moving in with him, hmm.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: BOB KRAVITZ} Pacers Savor Piece of Good Fortune

      Originally posted by Burtrem Redneck
      He is one of those Jahovahs Witness missionarys that travel door to door proseltizing? I bet he'll get along great with all the guys =/

      I hope he is as good as everyone thinks he is, cause he sounds like he is living some weird very controlled life, with his parents moving in with him, hmm.
      I heard he was raised as a Jehovah's Witness, thats not exactly the same as being a Jehovah's Witness. One of the ways Jehovah's Witness's train their children to proselytize is by taking them door to door with them. This is probably the extent of his proselytizing.

      Jehovah's Witnesses do have missionary's just like every religion, but the missionary's are picked from outstanding members that have proselytized for several years. Danny simply couldn't do that and play basketball too.

      Most likely Danny was just a regular member that went from door to door since all members are expected to proselytize.

      I heard his father was going to move in with him, I didn't hear anything said about both parents.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: BOB KRAVITZ} Pacers Savor Piece of Good Fortune

        His beliefs and his private life are his own.
        Several members of this team are very religious, including JO, Jax and Artest, as long as it doesn't interfere with their basketballskills I nay care what they do in private.
        So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

        If you've done 6 impossible things today?
        Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: BOB KRAVITZ} Pacers Savor Piece of Good Fortune

          Alot of Athletes have different beliefs. There is one that Carl Everett of the Chicago White Sox has where they don't beleive that dynosaurs every existed and that they were created by Walmart.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: BOB KRAVITZ} Pacers Savor Piece of Good Fortune

            The Pacers brass had to be salivating, orgasming - whatever you want to say - right about at 14 when they realized that Graham, Granger or Wright would be available when they picked. That's how I ranked those 3 BTW - but I had Graham as the 3rd and Granger the 5th best players in the draft (Green between them). I had Wright as 11th I think - weaker defense.
            The poster formerly known as Rimfire

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: BOB KRAVITZ} Pacers Savor Piece of Good Fortune

              I think Granger is better than Joey Graham, even thought Graham have more media exposure for playing in OSU. This guy is 6'8 and he averages 2 blks per game, that's pretty impressive for even thought he is playing against college players. And, we finally got someone that's not so "street" and isane, know you guys are dissing on that, just happy that we got this lottery talent fall into our laps.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: BOB KRAVITZ} Pacers Savor Piece of Good Fortune

                I think DG's religious beliefs are nothing but a positive. Whether you agree with his beliefs or not, it will serve him well in his life.

                I don't understand how or why some are complaining about this. And God forbid his father move in with him. I'd much rather have his posse move him with him. yeh right

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: BOB KRAVITZ} Pacers Savor Piece of Good Fortune

                  Originally posted by DisplacedKnick
                  The Pacers brass had to be salivating, orgasming - whatever you want to say - right about at 14 when they realized that Graham, Granger or Wright would be available when they picked. That's how I ranked those 3 BTW - but I had Graham as the 3rd and Granger the 5th best players in the draft (Green between them). I had Wright as 11th I think - weaker defense.
                  I was thinking along the same lines, but I started seeing it around 12. IMO, NJ really screwed up taking Wright over either Graham or Granger.
                  Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: BOB KRAVITZ} Pacers Savor Piece of Good Fortune

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck
                    I think DG's religious beliefs are nothing but a positive. Whether you agree with his beliefs or not, it will serve him well in his life.

                    I don't understand how or why some are complaining about this. And God forbid his father move in with him. I'd much rather have his posse move him with him. yeh right
                    Sorry UB, but some of us can't help but still fear another "God told Jax to go to Toronto" situation.
                    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: BOB KRAVITZ} Pacers Savor Piece of Good Fortune

                      Originally posted by Kegboy
                      Sorry UB, but some of us can't help but still fear another "God told Jax to go to Toronto" situation.
                      Why would you fear that? It proved to me that God was a Pacer fan.
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: BOB KRAVITZ} Pacers Savor Piece of Good Fortune

                        Originally posted by Anthem
                        Why would you fear that? It proved to me that God was a Pacer fan.
                        Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: BOB KRAVITZ} Pacers Savor Piece of Good Fortune

                          Originally posted by Anthem
                          Why would you fear that? It proved to me that God was a Pacer fan.
                          And then God proved he had a sense of humor by trading Jax to New York.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: BOB KRAVITZ} Pacers Savor Piece of Good Fortune

                            Back when I was a milk drinker (college student) I spent a very stupid summer selling books door to door. I was a terrible salesman, but I developed a soft heart for JWs, because they would always buy from me. They would tell me I was terrible, but they knew how much it sucks going door to door!
                            "If you ever crawl inside an old hollow log and go to sleep, and while you're in there some guys come and seal up both ends and then put it on a truck and take it to another city, boy, I don't know what to tell you." - Jack Handy

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: BOB KRAVITZ} Pacers Savor Piece of Good Fortune

                              I love that his father is moving in for a bit to help him out. Mainly because it will help him not be overwhelmed by life in the NBA, but can you imagine if Ron Artest was his primary father figure?

                              We don't exactly have the greatest guys for our rookies to learn from and look up to.
                              You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X