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

Pacers.com : Young players developing under fire

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

  • Pacers.com : Young players developing under fire

    http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/update_060110.html

    GRANGER, HARRISON STARTED LAST 5
    Young Players Developing Under Fire


    By Conrad Brunner | Jan. 10, 2006
    Silver linings are sometimes hard to see, when your team is going through another frustrating year as the victim of circumstances beyond its control. But there is some substantial good news for the Pacers, borne of those very same circumstances.
    The team's nucleus of youth has been put on the developmental fast track and, despite some wobbles, has handle the accelerated responsibility.
    Danny Granger and David Harrison, the team's last two first-round picks, both started the last five games together and fared well. Granger averaged 12.2 points, 6.8 rebounds and 2.2 steals while shooting 48.8 percent at small forward. Harrison moved in at center and averaged 16.6 minutes, 6.4 points and 4.4 rebounds while shooting 51.7 percent.
    Add 2002 first-round pick Fred Jones to the mix and the Pacers have a strong wave of young talent in the pipeline. After a slow start, Jones has come on strong of late, averaging 15.7 points and 3.7 assists while shooting 47.6 percent off the bench in the last seven games.

    Carlisle

    "All three of these guys have worked very hard to get ready for this kind of opportunity and they're doing a good job with it," said Coach Rick Carlisle. "There's going to be some inconsistency, especially with rookies like Danny, and a guy like David that didn't play that much last year although he had some periods where he got extended minutes. But the only way they get better is to get out there. We're pleased they've worked hard to get into this position."
    This season wasn't supposed to be about developing youth, but injuries and Ron Artest's trade demand have forced a change in priorities, at least temporarily. With the young players all contributing, the Pacers went 2-2 on their final prolonged Western Conference road trip of the season and at 18-14, fifth in the East.
    It's not a bad position when considering only one East team has played more than their 18 road games, and none more than their 17 games against the Western Conference. But the schedule doesn't relent quite yet. Beginning Wednesday night against Milwaukee at Conseco Fieldhouse, the Pacers play nine games in 14 nights.
    And so the young players must continue to produce under pressure, with relatively little practice time to hone any dull edges. The team should be much better at the end of the season because of their trial by fire even if times are somewhat tough while the flames are highest.
    "Right now, that's our reality," Carlisle said. "Of course, it's a silver lining to any difficult situation when you have this kind of opportunity that presents itself and guys get a chance to develop.
    "I think it certainly is one of the positives that comes out of a tough situation, but going into it this is not what we had in mind. We figured these guys would be able to play some and were talented enough to do some good things but they've been thrust into this whether it's fair to them or not. And now they've got to deal with it."
    The team returned healthier, with Jermaine O'Neal back in the starting lineup for the first time in six games in Monday night's 96-90 loss to the Lakers in Los Angeles. Austin Croshere could be back after sitting out Monday night's game with a mild concussion sustained when he banged heads with Jeff Foster Sunday in Sacramento.

    Tinsley

    But all is not quite well. Jamaal Tinsley has missed six in a row with a right biceps injury isn't expected back Wednesday night.
    "He continues to show gradual progress," Carlisle said of Tinsley. "We're talking about a partially torn muscle in his shooting elbow, so it's going to take a while longer but he is better. He's working out but he has not practiced with the team yet and it's going to be hard to get him practice reps in the next 10-15 days because of the schedule, but we'll have to figure it out and find a way to get him ready." NOTES: Jeff Foster has averaged 10.5 rebounds in the last six games. … Sarunas Jasikevicius has averaged 11.2 points while shooting .417 from the arc but .371 overall in the last five. … Anthony Johnson has gone 4-of-24 from the 3-point line in the last 10. … The team has shot 24.1 percent from the arc in its last 11 losses and 44.7 percent in its last 11 victories. … The bench has averaged 37.8 points in the last six games.

    Word on the street is he doesn't want your money, he only wants to please your ears...
    Bum in Berlin on Myspace

  • #2
    Re: Pacers.com : Young players developing under fire

    I hope this continues for the rest of the season.
    “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

    “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Pacers.com : Young players developing under fire

      After the Artest trade, they could get their minutes cut. Let's hope not too much.
      Word on the street is he doesn't want your money, he only wants to please your ears...
      Bum in Berlin on Myspace

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Pacers.com : Young players developing under fire

        Let's face facts....the only way that Harrison is going to get any significant minutes to make the type of impact that Granger has on the team ( basically where he can show off his skills ) is if Carlisle is left with ZERO options at the 5 spot. This means that the only time we can see this happen is when JONeal, Foster and Pollard are all injured and he has no choice but to play Harrison.

        I was thinking about how most teams are clamouring for a Big Man that can score inside, rebound and block shots and realized that despite the fact that Harrison is foul prone....I am guessing that this is something that is not uncommon for Big Men that play in their 2nd season. As I understand it...Big Men at the Center spot take longer to develop compared to any other position.

        I don't mind being patient with Harrison and having him play 15-20 minutes a game until he has earned Carlisle's trust over the next 1-2 seasons....as long as he is given minutes on the court and not pulled / played for the wrong reasons.
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Pacers.com : Young players developing under fire

          I want the DH/JO/DG frontcourt to stay. I really like Jeff off the bench filling in for Hulk. And Danger is simply "amasing."
          You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Pacers.com : Young players developing under fire

            Originally posted by vapacersfan™
            You are aware you mis-spelled "amazing", right?
            Either that or or "amassing". Both words work.
            “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

            “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Pacers.com : Young players developing under fire

              Originally posted by vapacersfan™
              You are aware you mis-spelled "amazing", right?
              Yup
              You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Pacers.com : Young players developing under fire

                Why I like Danger:

                1) He blocks shots
                2) Hits the three
                3) Soars over the rim for fast break dunks
                4) Plays great man2man defense on Kobe
                5) Drives the lane with creativity
                6) Plays with toughness and passion
                7) Works on his game (Reggie-like)
                8) Great character guy...unselfish
                9) Unbelievable...did I say unbelievable fundamentals for a rookie

                ....the list could go on, but you get the message. He does all of this in the same game on a good team. Usually top rook performers play on a dog. He is simply an amazing rook.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Pacers.com : Young players developing under fire

                  I agree with everything that has been said here about Danny. That being said, I am concerned that a story like this appeared on the Pacers' homepage. This is the tact taken by bad teams to generate interest and sell tickets. You know, the "we may be bad now, but our future is bright" line. This smacks of a concession speach, folks, and I don't like it one bit!
                  Slug 'em Sabres!!!!!
                  http://youtube.com/watch?v=cj1SUF4wzu0

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X