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

Danny Article in Washington Post

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

  • Danny Article in Washington Post

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...021303460.html

    By Michael Lee
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Saturday, February 14, 2009

    Confidence Has Done Wonders for Granger


    "Some of the players that started off as big recruits, everybody always gave them their confidence," said Danny Granger. "It works the opposite way when people are telling you, 'You are not good enough.' Sometimes it can mess with your mind."


    Seated on a couch in a Georgetown hotel lobby, Indiana Pacers forward Danny Granger reached down and pulled up his pant leg to reveal a two-inch scar on his right shin. It's from a bullet that ricocheted off a street and grazed his leg when he about 12.

    Granger had been hanging out with friends in a dangerous neighborhood just outside of New Orleans that his father, Danny Sr., had warned him to stay away from. Granger, who was not the target, dove to the ground in horror during the drive-by shooting, which left behind a permanent lesson.

    Granger never told his stern and overprotective father about the incident for fear of punishment. He just patched himself up and limped home. "Back then, I was so afraid to tell my dad, I didn't really think about it. Now, when I look back, I got lucky that I didn't get killed," said Granger, who wears a protective pad on his leg during games.

    Granger, 25, has overcome much -- from escaping a drug-infested area in Metairie, La., to dealing with the pain of having his mother leave the family when he was a teenager, to later having a close friend commit suicide in college -- to become a first-time all-star this weekend in Phoenix. But when asked to name his greatest hurdle to NBA stardom, he didn't hesitate. "Convincing myself that I was good enough," said Granger, a fourth-year forward who ranks sixth in the NBA in scoring at 25.4 points per game.

    "Some of the players that started off as big recruits, everybody always gave them their confidence. You got so many people telling you you are going to be good, you start believing it, like, 'Yeah. I really am good.' It works the opposite way when people are telling you, 'You are not good enough.' Sometimes it can mess with your mind."


    Granger was lightly recruited coming out of Grace King High School, overlooked until late by Louisiana State and offered scholarships by just Birmingham-Southern and Bradley. His strong academic record and 30 ACT score also led to a financial package offer from Yale. The elder Granger pleaded for his son to get an Ivy League education, but Danny said he felt uncomfortable on his visit and elected to study civil engineering at Bradley. Even though he was Bradley's leading scorer as a sophomore, Granger said he never seriously thought about playing in the NBA. He often was the pessimist whenever his teammates discussed making it to the league. "When they would talk about the NBA I'd say: 'Y'all know the statistics of people going to the NBA. It's very low. You might as well use this to get a degree, so that you don't have hoop dreams your entire life,' " Granger said.

    After a coaching change at Bradley, Granger transferred to New Mexico for his final two seasons. He still didn't fully grasp his potential, even after leading the Mountain West Conference in scoring as a junior at 19.5 points -- even after the Lobos coach at the time, Ritchie McKay, told him that NBA scouts were watching and that Granger could someday share the spotlight with the likes of Kobe Bryant and LeBron James. "He said, 'Coach, if I'm just on the bench [in the NBA], I'll be happy,' " McKay said. "But [his success] was inevitable by the way he works. He was never satisfied."

    The summer before his senior season, Granger earned $10 an hour, five hours a day, four days a week, working at an Albuquerque racetrack, getting quarterhorses to the starting gate and cleaning the track. He had been working at that job since he arrived in Albuquerque because Bradley refused to release him from his scholarship, forcing him to pay for his first year at New Mexico.

    When Danny's father found out that he was still spending his summers at the horse track instead of working out at the gym, he immediately went to the bank, withdrew $5,000 and flew to New Mexico. "I said, 'You have NBA potential, you don't need to be picking up manure, you need to be in the gym,' " Danny Sr. recalled. "That's the kind of stock that I had in Danny."

    Granger quit his job and hit the gym. And McKay eventually persuaded Granger to attend longtime NBA assistant Tim Grgurich's camp for NBA and college players in Las Vegas. His father tagged along and was awestruck by NBA stars such as Jermaine O'Neal, Rasheed Wallace and Paul Pierce and coaches such as George Karl and Rick Carlisle. While Granger was slowly building his confidence, his father was seeking autographs.

    Near the end of the camp, Granger spotted him and told him to put away the pen and pad. "You don't need to get their autographs," he told his father. "I can handle this. I'm going to be a star."

    Granger suddenly believed. "Now that I have that confidence, it's over," said Granger, who signed a five-year, $60 million contract last October. "Right now, I don't think nobody can stop me. Even if I have a bad game, it's not because somebody played good defense, it's because I did something wrong. That's the way I look at it."

    Danny Sr., now retired after owning a business repairing backhoes and forklifts, raised his three kids to have successful careers after his ex-wife and their mother, Janice, left the family in 1998. Granger's older sister, Jamie, is an engineer in Phoenix and his younger brother, Scott, has been a background singer for Alicia Keys and is currently on tour with "American Idol" winner Jordin Sparks. (Danny Granger's great aunt is legendary gospel singer Mahalia Jackson, but he said he didn't inherit her musical talent.)

    Granger said he has had sporadic conversations with his mother and hasn't spoken with her in more than a year. "It's difficult. It's funny when you're in the NBA, a lot of people try to come into your life. Nobody is trying to get out of your life," Granger said, turning away, voice drifting.

    When the Pacers selected him 17th overall in 2005, Granger said he paused for a second after shaking David Stern's hand to think about Bill Feeney, his best friend at New Mexico. Feeney hung himself before the two could make their debut for the Lobos. "That was one of the hardest things I had to deal with, emotionally. It hit me so hard because we were so close," Granger said. "It took a long time to get over."

    Granger has watched close friends from his old neighborhood make bad decisions, too. Some sold drugs, including one friend Granger said is in a Texas prison and in a wheelchair after getting shot 18 times. Granger credits his father for keeping him focused on academics and basketball as a kid. "He just wanted me to stay straight, get out of the neighborhood and have a good life. He never wanted me to sell myself short," Granger said.

    To keep an eye on his son -- not necessarily to groom an NBA player -- Danny Sr. built a 60-by-40-foot court in a lot next to his house, using a rim donated from a local school.

    He would often rough up his son on the court, at times pushing him to tears. He also recruited the toughest kids on the block to test Danny with physical one-on-one games, nodding in approval whenever he traded elbows and hard fouls. Now that tough love has produced an all-star.

    "I feel definitely blessed with how far I've come," Granger said. "I'm so grateful for the journey that I've taken to get here. Lord knows, it's been hard."
    Last edited by MyFavMartin; 02-14-2009, 03:09 PM.

  • #2
    Re: Danny Article in Washington Post

    Good read.
    There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Danny Article in Washington Post

      His strong academic record and 30 ACT score also led to a financial package offer from Yale.
      From day 1 I've seen Danny have awareness issues on the court, and you just know it can't be a smarts thing. I think myself and several others chalk it up to over thinking on plays and I'd say this info added to his degree support that just a tad.

      Another player who is bad about over thinking plays and lacks confidence due to his own awareness of the odds against him and the talent of others - Brandon Rush. I really do expect a similar slow progression from Rush and always have. One reason I liked the drafting of Roy and Rush is that mentally, emotionally they appear to be coming from the same place as Danny.

      The good thing here is that DG is ahead of them and has found his confidence and fire. So often a bunch of good guys like this mature together and yet still need that outside vet to put that final touch of attitude into them. In this case I think Roy/BR can follow Granger's lead as an example. He's not a lot older, but he is the "older brother" on the path to developing confidence in the face of knowing your limitations and weaknesses.

      forcing him to pay for his first year at New Mexico
      Wow. There's a serious character gut check.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Danny Article in Washington Post

        Interesting read.......a few years ago he was cleaning up Horse poop....now he's a multi-millionaire. I'm glad things worked out for him and that he's a Pacer.
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Danny Article in Washington Post

          wow that was a rly nice read. I didnt realize he was a victim of a drive by

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Danny Article in Washington Post

            Seriously, PR wet dream. I've probably said it 100 times over the past year.


            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Danny Article in Washington Post

              I thought about putting a few of you in cardiac arrest by putting "Danny involved in shooting" in the thread title.

              Wonder how much grief the author will get for talking about Danny's town. As much as Kravitz?

              Dick move by Bradley. Guess they won't be getting any donation from the DG foundation.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Danny Article in Washington Post

                Good read, thanks for posting. I hope Danny's game and confidence continue to grow ever higher.
                "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Danny Article in Washington Post

                  There's also a nice Granger article in the NY Times today - it's pretty similar to the Post article so I won't start a new thread or post the text:

                  http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/16/sp...r=1&ref=sports
                  The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X