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

Update on Mike brown, and Pacers interested in Stephan Jackson

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

  • Update on Mike brown, and Pacers interested in Stephan Jackson

    Appears the raptors will hire Sam Mitchell.

    The Hawks are still interviewing candidates. I hope Brown does not take the Hawks job, it is set up to be a failing situation.


    Stephan Jackson....interesting.

    OK ..here are the articles. Be a little patient.


    http://www.ajc.com/saturday/content/...2817f00c9.html

    Hiring coach is next up

    With the draft completed and no free-agent signings yet in sight, Hawks go back to work.

    Michael Lee - Staff
    Saturday, June 26, 2004

    The Hawks set the foundation of their rebuilding plans during the NBA draft Thursday night whey they selected Stanford's Josh Childress and local high school product Josh Smith. But general manager Billy Knight knows that his work has barely begun: He doesn't have a big man or anyone to coach the team.

    After working the phones diligently Friday in failed attempts to acquire one of the frontcourt players that slipped away in the draft, Knight said his attention has shifted toward hiring a coach.

    Knight still needs to meet with Detroit Pistons assistant Mike Woodson next week, and "after that, I'll make a decision," Knight said. He has interviewed Del Harris, John MacLeod, Dwane Casey, Mike Brown and Mike Fratello and hopes that the coach he hires will find a place for the players he has drafted.

    "I think the coach will like the kind of players that we have," Knight said. "We'll have that understanding when we do have a coach." Knight is hopeful that he'll have a coach in place in the early stages of the free agent signing period, which begins July 1.

    The salary cap will be set in mid-July and is expected to slide slightly from the $43.8 million of last season. That leaves the Hawks with roughly $18 million to spend this summer --- enough to sign a maximum-contract player, a collection of good side dishes or both.

    The Hawks have four players under contract --- power forward Alan Henderson, point guard Jason Terry and small forwards Chris Crawford and Boris Diaw --- and they are expected to pick up the extension on guard Travis Hansen in August. The first-year rookie salaries of Childress ($2.08 million) and Smith ($1.06 million) will put the Hawks' payroll at about $23.3 million. The Hawks also plan to sign second-round picks Donta Smith and Royal Ivey, which would add about $800,000 to the payroll.


    Stephen Jackson is not going to pick up the $1.1 million option on his contract and will be an unrestricted free agent this summer. He averaged a career-high 18.1 points last season and will be on the priority list of at least four teams this summer --- the San Antonio Spurs, Chicago Bulls, Portland Trail Blazers and Indiana Pacerss.


    The Hawks clearly have more pressing needs. "We need big people," Knight said. "If I'm walking down the street and I see a big guy, I might sign him." Expect the Hawks to make a push for restricted free agents Kenyon Martin of New Jersey, Stromile Swift of Memphis --- whom Knight drafted with the No. 2 pick in 2000 --- and Detroit's Mehmet Okur to bolster the frontcourt. They probably will attempt to re-sign Jason Collier, a 7-footer who played well in the second half of the season.







  • #2
    Re: Update on Mike brown, and Pacers interested in Stephan Jackson

    http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Toront...26/514949.html

    Raps get their man

    SOURCES SAY MITCHELL NEW COACH

    By BILL HARRIS, TORONTO SUN





    THE RAPTORS have decided to hire Sam Mitchell as their next head coach, according to NBA sources. Barring a last-minute change of heart, an official announcement could be made as early as Tuesday, following the Canadian federal election on Monday.

    Mitchell has been on the coaching staff with the Milwaukee Bucks for the past two seasons, but more recently he had been hired to be the lead assistant under coach/GM Bernie Bickerstaff with the expansion Charlotte Bobcats.

    Mitchell, a 13-year NBA player, was a candidate for the Raptors' coaching job last season, too, on the strong recommendation of then-Raptor and good buddy Antonio Davis.

    In fact, when the Raptors decided on the since-departed Kevin O'Neill as coach instead of Mitchell, it was the final nail in the coffin of the relationship between the Raptors and Davis. The Raptors traded Davis to the Chicago Bulls last December.

    Of course, the Raptors general manager last summer was Glen Grunwald. The onus this time falls upon new Raptors GM Rob Babcock.

    Mitchell, 40, is seen as one of the up-and-coming coaches in NBA circles. Just about everyone who knows Mitchell seems to agree he is going to be a good head coach, perhaps even a great one someday. But the question on everyone's lips is: "Is he ready?"

    Mitchell will inherit a Raptors roster that might undergo an overhaul before the team takes to the court again next fall. Vince Carter has requested a trade through his agent, but it's not known if the club will take that request seriously, or if it simply will wait for him to cool down.

    After Babcock took over on June 7, he said he would prefer to have a coach in place by the entry draft, but a more realistic target date was July 1. Babcock definitely wants a coach in place in time to monitor the Raptors' entry in the Minneapolis summer league, which takes place in the first week of July.

    Mitchell, a product of Mercer University, played in 994 regular-season games and 59 playoff games with the Minnesota Timberwolves and the Indiana Pacers.

    Other candidates to coach the Raptors this time around included Seattle SuperSonics assistant Dwane Casey and Detroit Pistons assistant Mike Woodson.

    ---

    SAM'S THE MAN

    A look at Sam Mitchell, whom sources say will be the next coach of the Raptors:

    PLAYER: Drafted 54th overall by Houston Rockets in 1985; played in CBA, in France and joined expansion Minnesota Timberwolves in 1989; traded to Indiana in '92 and re-signed with T-Wolves in '95; finished his career among club's leaders in many categories; known as a solid player at both ends whom many felt would one day be an ideal head coach.





    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Update on Mike brown, and Pacers interested in Stephan Jackson

      Didn't Billy Knight have a big guy that he traded away for almost nothing? ed:

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Update on Mike brown, and Pacers interested in Stephan Jackson

        Bullet do you think for a minute that Rasheed would have stayed in Atlanta? And to get anything in return in a sign and trade they would have been taking back bad contracts from the Knicks. While I am angry that he traded him to a contender for nothing I can understand why they did it. They got out from under a lot of bad deals and did not add new ones.

        As far as Jackson goes, he is a good player but come on what do we need another sf for. Unless of course we trade Bender, Al and Ron for T-Mac. If that happens then I could see signing Jackson but otherwise it seems like we have enough sf's we need a Brent Barry or even a Fred Hoiberg.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Update on Mike brown, and Pacers interested in Stephan Jackson

          Originally posted by Ragnar
          Bullet do you think for a minute that Rasheed would have stayed in Atlanta? And to get anything in return in a sign and trade they would have been taking back bad contracts from the Knicks. While I am angry that he traded him to a contender for nothing I can understand why they did it. They got out from under a lot of bad deals and did not add new ones.
          I'm just suggesting if a big man was such a concern to Knight he could've gotten more for Sheed than he did in a mid-season trade. The guy apparently lacks foresight. He almost single-handedly derailed our finals run with that asinine trade.

          Originally posted by Ragnar
          As far as Jackson goes, he is a good player but come on what do we need another sf for. Unless of course we trade Bender, Al and Ron for T-Mac. If that happens then I could see signing Jackson but otherwise it seems like we have enough sf's we need a Brent Barry or even a Fred Hoiberg.
          I hope we shoot higher than Barry or Hoiberg.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Update on Mike brown, and Pacers interested in Stephan Jackson

            Well, personally, I rather like Brent Barry and I think IF we were to trade Al for him we could get a few additional things from the Sonics aswell as he has indicated he wants to leave them, so that lowers the value they could get for him. Throw in Pollard in from our side and try to prey Murray and one their bad contract centers away from them. And we have strengthened our guard position quite considerably, while Center well.... it couldnt become weakened to what it was with Pollard, right? Best of all we dont need to trade half our team away and Brent is proven quality not some rookie who WILL MAKE MISTAKES at important moments in the coming year.

            Barry only scored very little over 10points per game, but look at his FG%, 3PT and his FT% than take into account he's on a team with virtually only shoot-first players, that tells me he shoots well and he's smart as he takes the good shots. He would shoot more on our team, I believe and he could help our PG share the playmaking duties, say if we were to sign AJ or a player like him again, we would have Barry who could bring up the ball much better IMO.

            Big question for me is, offcourse WHAT does Barry demand? How long a contract does he want, because thats where I think the Sonics didnt want to go along with him, together with the salary demand (how clichee can it be?).

            Regards,

            Mourning
            [edit=198=1088263919][/edit]
            2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

            2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

            2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Update on Mike brown, and Pacers interested in Stephan Jackson

              I mentioned them because they are free agents and could be signed to less than than (Hoiberg) or right at the mid level without giving up a single player.

              Now if we could do that and dump Pollard on a team under the cap like the Jazz, Nuggets or Hawks who are in need of a big man we would not even be in LT territory and would would have added a shooter to esentially last years team.

              We were extremely close to a title last year. We just needed a guy who could hit those big shots. Reggie didnt get it done. I think what we need now is our own Kerr/Paxson type of player.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Update on Mike brown, and Pacers interested in Stephan Jackson

                P.S. I realize we must move either Al or Ron but we could move one of them for other parts if we sign the right sg or trade for Q-Rich for cheap.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Update on Mike brown, and Pacers interested in Stephan Jackson

                  I would welcome Stephan Jackson , I think he could be a great additon and we wouldn't have to chop the team up , I like his energy and many other things.
                  Broadcasting Classic Rock Hits 24/7 SauceMaster Radio!!!!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Update on Mike brown, and Pacers interested in Stephan Jackson

                    Originally posted by TheSauceMaster
                    I would welcome Stephan Jackson , I think he could be a great additon and we wouldn't have to chop the team up , I like his energy and many other things.
                    Stephen Jackson wouldn't be a bad pickup, he performed very well for the Spurs in the Playoffs a couple of seasons ago.



                    "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Update on Mike brown, and Pacers interested in Stephan Jackson

                      It would depend on what moves we would do to accomodate Stephen. He's a forward, as someone has already pointed out.

                      Congratulations Sam Mitchell; I think he will have the Raptors in the playoffs either this year or the next.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Update on Mike brown, and Pacers interested in Stephan Jackson

                        People are saying he's a forward, but he started at 2 for the 2003 Spurs.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Update on Mike brown, and Pacers interested in Stephan Jackson

                          Originally posted by Hicks
                          People are saying he's a forward, but he started at 2 for the 2003 Spurs.
                          That's what I thought too.

                          "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Update on Mike brown, and Pacers interested in Stephan Jackson

                            he played some forward for the Hawks because they didn't have a small forward. So they played a lot of Jax at 3 and Terry at 2.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Update on Mike brown, and Pacers interested in Stephan Jackson

                              Congrats to Sam. Unless I'm mistaken, that makes 4 former Pacers players as current HC's (Johnny Davis, Scott Skiles, Byron Scott and Sam Mitchell.)

                              Speaking of Sam, I sure wish someone had video of his takedown of Rodman, what, 9 years ago. Funniest thing I've ever seen in a game.
                              Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X