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

Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

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

  • Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great




    http://blogs.indystar.com/pacersinsi...stephenso.html

    I talked with Lance Stephenson's agent today, and he said his client is thrilled to get a multi-year deal from the Pacers.

    The thing that stuck out the most to me was how Stephenson's agent described his client's feelings for playing basketball in Indianapolis.

    "The deal reflects a commitment by both sides," Al Ebanks told me today. "This marked the realization of a lifelong dream and at the same time the start of a new and exciting chapter in his life.

    "He is playing for a great coach, for a Hall of Fame boss and in a town rich in basketball history. Who could ask for more?"

    The contract is for three years with an option for a fourth, according to a source. Stephenson will make $700,000 the first year, $800,000 the second, possibly more with incentives.
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

  • #2
    Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

    Gotta suck up to the coach to get that playing time.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

      lol its Stephenson's agent talking, not Stephenson :P
      Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

        ya he cant really say what we all know already. i would love to hear what some of the players say about JOB when he's not around.
        2012: Pacers return to glory

        Paul George All Day

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

          Guys I have become one of the biggest JOB bashers on here and believe me the sooner we can get rid of him the better.

          However to be honest with you Stpehenson may have every reason in the world to be thrilled with JOB. If he can drive the lane and get his shot, as long as he can control the ball while he dribbles without excessive turnovers, then this may be a marriage made in heaven between the two.

          Yes, we all know Jim likes to shoot the three. But he really wants to open up the driving lanes and if Lance can even do 1/3 of what he did in the summer league this may be the first high impact rookie we have had since way back when Chuck Person played.


          Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

            Agents always talk out of there ***. They are like a step below politicians. Meh.

            I do hope Lance gets plenty of play time though.
            First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

              "He is playing for a great coach, for a Hall of Fame boss and in a town rich in basketball history. Who could ask for more?"

              I didn't know Bird was going back to the bench.

              Honeymoons are great.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

                If the salaries reported are accurate, since they are well above the minimum, a statement is certainly made for how much the Pacers value Stephenson.

                3 years + an option for a fourth. From what I've seen so far, I'm very pleased with the length and low cost of the contract.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

                  Yeah Agents Are Always Full Of Hot Air.

                  But Really Ive Been Thinking About Who Would Be Good Candidates To Take Over The HC Position.

                  I Would Hope That We Ended Up With A Guy Who's HIGHLY Respected In League Circles.

                  Someone Who's "Battle Tested" But Not Out Of Touch With The Youth Of The Team And The Ways Of Today's NBA Game.

                  The More I Think About It, Some Good Candidates Would Be Mo Cheeks, Sam Mitchell, Lawrence Frank Just To Name A Few.

                  Ive Thought About Mike Brown Because Of His Emphasis On Defense But A Knock On Him Is His Lack Of Offensive Coaching Ability.

                  Id Love to Here Some Of You Guys Thoughts On Who Would Be A Good Fit For Us Going Forward.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

                    Originally posted by LA_Confidential View Post
                    Yeah Agents Are Always Full Of Hot Air.

                    But Really Ive Been Thinking About Who Would Be Good Candidates To Take Over The HC Position.

                    I Would Hope That We Ended Up With A Guy Who's HIGHLY Respected In League Circles.

                    Someone Who's "Battle Tested" But Not Out Of Touch With The Youth Of The Team And The Ways Of Today's NBA Game.

                    The More I Think About It, Some Good Candidates Would Be Mo Cheeks, Sam Mitchell, Lawrence Frank Just To Name A Few.

                    Ive Thought About Mike Brown Because Of His Emphasis On Defense But A Knock On Him Is His Lack Of Offensive Coaching Ability.

                    Id Love to Here Some Of You Guys Thoughts On Who Would Be A Good Fit For Us Going Forward.
                    I don't mean to be, well, mean, but isn't it harder to type when you make nearly every word capitalized?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

                      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                      I Don't Mean To Be, Well, Mean, But Isn't It Harder To Type When You Make EVERY Word Capitalized?
                      Fixed.

                      But To Answer Your Question, No Not Really. I Guess Ive Never Thought About It.

                      Is It Harder To Read?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

                        A little bit, but not a lot. Thanks for answering my question.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

                          The comments in this thread expose what may be the weakest aspect of our community. People assume that they know what all the player-player and player-coach relations are, and I'd bet they are wrong.

                          Cynical fans assume that, because they don't like O'Brien, none of the players like him either. They assume that because a couple of players snarl at each other in the heat of a game that those players are irreconcileable enemies and incapable of playing together.

                          This kind of attitude toward the players and coaches is mean-spirited, but it is probably also wrong. The players, in general, like each other. And they respect the coach. O'Brien frustrates us fans because he seems to say one thing and do another, and because he seems to dwell only on one thing. And in his public comments he does. But how many of you really believe that a Pacers practice consists of nothing more than 12 players running around with O'Brien yelling, "SHOOT IT!! SHOOT IT FROM OUT THERE!!! NO, NO, THAT WAS TOO CLOSE!! SHOOT FROM FARTHER AWAY!!


                          It is said that "Familiarity breed contempt." But I think the opposite is true. The Pacers lockeR room (where, admittedly, I've never set foot) is probably characterized by good will and trust among people who see and hear each other every day. But fans, who know nothing but what they see via the media, hate the coach and assume people are lying.

                          O'Brien isn't John Wooden great, but he is a good man and there's no cause to besmirch the comment made by Stephenson's agent. He simply said O'Brien is a great coach because he meant it.


                          Peck has it right:

                          Originally posted by Peck
                          If Stephenson can drive the lane and get his shot, as long as he can control the ball while he dribbles without excessive turnovers, then this may be a marriage made in heaven
                          Yep. O'Brien has been trying to spread the floor for a reason. TJ Ford has proven himself incapable of being the reason. I dunno if this rookie is capable of filling the needed role, but he is going to get the chance to try and fill it and that is all the agent of a second-round pick can ever hope for.
                          And I won't be here to see the day
                          It all dries up and blows away
                          I'd hang around just to see
                          But they never had much use for me
                          In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

                            Originally posted by Peck View Post
                            Guys I have become one of the biggest JOB bashers on here and believe me the sooner we can get rid of him the better.

                            However to be honest with you Stpehenson may have every reason in the world to be thrilled with JOB. If he can drive the lane and get his shot, as long as he can control the ball while he dribbles without excessive turnovers, then this may be a marriage made in heaven between the two.

                            Yes, we all know Jim likes to shoot the three. But he really wants to open up the driving lanes and if Lance can even do 1/3 of what he did in the summer league this may be the first high impact rookie we have had since way back when Chuck Person played.
                            I agree. JOB definitely thinks he's found a PG that can finally overwhelm his opposing PG and get into the paint and either take it to the rim, draw in the post players, and dish to either our own C/PF combo, or fire the bullet pass to Danny, George, or Rush on the wing for the 3pt shoot or mid-range shot.

                            Works for me!!!! Go Lance and the Boys!!!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Lance Stephenson's agent calls JOB great

                              Originally posted by LA_Confidential View Post
                              Is It Harder To Read?
                              Yes.
                              This space for rent.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X