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

Mike Wells: 5 questions heading into training camp

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

  • Mike Wells: 5 questions heading into training camp

    I thought question #3 was a little insulting - Granger is going to sulk during the NBA season because he didn't play much for Team USA - that makes no sense.


    http://www.indystar.com/article/2010...to-5-questions


    Pacers success hinges on finding answers to 5 questions

    Sep 27, 2010 | 12 Comments
    TwitterFacebookShare
    Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Facebook Twitter Newsvine Buzz up!FarkIt EmailPrintAAA

    Written by

    Mike Wells

    The Indiana Pacers' optimism comes from their new 6-foot point guard who turned a lot of heads with his dazzling play in his 37 starts with the New Orleans Hornets last season.

    They also have a third-year center who put in the type of work during the summer that should earn him some more touches in the post.

    Their small forward, who has averaged at least 19 points a game each of the past three seasons, will play with a chip on his shoulder after riding the bench with Team USA over the summer.

    Now the Pacers have to turn all the optimism into more victories.

    The Pacers have media day today at Conseco Fieldhouse and start two-a-day practices Tuesday.

    Here are five key things -- in order of importance -- to pay attention to during training camp.

    Who will be the starting power forward on opening night in San Antonio on Oct. 27?

    That was the question seconds after the Pacers traded Troy Murphy to New Jersey in a four-team deal last month.

    Team officials have acknowledged they have a big hole at that position.

    Tyler Hansbrough, Josh McRoberts, Jeff Foster, Solomon Jones and even Danny Granger will get a look at the position. But each has a significant concern.

    Hansbrough was just cleared for contact last week after dealing with vertigo for nearly nine months. McRoberts isn't ready to be a starter. Foster is coming off back surgery. Jones is too inconsistent. Granger can't play that position on a full-time basis.


    Will Jim O'Brien let Darren Collison play his game?

    O'Brien is about to have his third opening night starting point guard in four seasons.

    He gushed over Jamaal Tinsley and T.J. Ford at the beginning only to end up with an oil-and-water relationship with both players.

    The Pacers hope the same won't happen with Collison.

    O'Brien wants his players to move the ball in his "passing game." Collison excels in pick-and-roll situations.

    The two will have to meet in the middle to avoid another bad point guard-coach affair.


    Will Danny Granger play with motivation or sulk?

    Granger got a big piece of humble pie when he only played 9.7 minutes -- third fewest -- a game with Team USA because of his inability to defend well enough for coach Mike Krzyzewski.

    (Page 2 of 2)
    Pacers officials hope Granger will use the snub -- and what he learned from playing with Kevin Durant -- to get back on track defensively so he can become a better all-around player.


    Can the defense stop anybody?

    The Pacers have talked about playing better defense as much as the Colts have talked about improving their rushing.

    Teams have shot 45.4 percent, 45.8 percent and 45.3 percent against the Pacers in O'Brien's three seasons.

    Perimeter defensive flaws have allowed opponents lanes to the basket for easy points.
    The Pacers have gotten more athletic on the perimeter and they got rid of Murphy, a defensive liability.


    Will the Pacers make Roy Hibbert a factor in the post?Hibbert put in the work during the offseason.

    He worked with Hall of Fame center Bill Walton. He took up kickboxing to improve his conditioning. He got his body fat down to 10 percent.

    None of that will mean anything if the Pacers don't work through him in the post offensively and do a better job containing the perimeter defensively to help keep Hibbert out of foul trouble.

  • #2
    Re: Mike Wells: 5 questions heading into training camp

    All that third question tells me is that we're officially past the honey moon period with Granger, and that if we don't see some improvement this season, the media and a lot of the people on this board will be clamoring to hang him by his thumbs from the Soldier's and Sailor's monument on the Circle a la when JO jumped the shark around here.


    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Mike Wells: 5 questions heading into training camp

      I think Granger hasn't had some good talent around him and has had to carry too much on his back the last couple years. I'm not ready to sell him up the river yet.

      DC2 adds a real PG and Roy's continued development brings a FC presence we've lacked for quite a bit of time.

      If DC2 is a PnR PG and JOB is about movement and getting the ball out of the PG's hands and getting scoring from the wings as opposed to dumping it into Roy, I'm fretting our coaching situation and it not adopting a new system to fit our personnel.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Mike Wells: 5 questions heading into training camp

        I thought last season the pacers perimater defense was much improved from the previous two seasons. With Watson, Rush, and D. Jones - the perimeter defense wasn't the problem. The interior defense was the problem IMO.

        I think the Darren Collision question is the most important and relevant of the 5. I'll be watching that very closely. I've contended for 3 seasons that if Jim gets a point guard who is worthy, he'll adjust the offense. So we'll see.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Mike Wells: 5 questions heading into training camp

          Originally posted by MyFavMartin View Post
          I think Granger hasn't had some good talent around him and has had to carry too much on his back the last couple years. I'm not ready to sell him up the river yet.

          DC2 adds a real PG and Roy's continued development brings a FC presence we've lacked for quite a bit of time.

          If DC2 is a PnR PG and JOB is about movement and getting the ball out of the PG's hands and getting scoring from the wings as opposed to dumping it into Roy, I'm fretting our coaching situation and it not adopting a new system to fit our personnel.
          Danny's been forced to become 1 dimensional because of what else we had on the floor.
          He doesn't need to do that any longer and he'll be a much better player if he can adapt back.

          If OB can't get along with THIS (another) pg, it's time to get rid of the coach.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Mike Wells: 5 questions heading into training camp

            JOB would be a fool if he does not run more pick and roll. With athletic young guys like Hansbrough and McRoberts, it makes no sense to not have them rolling to basket and throwing down a monster dunk from DC. And with DC being a good 3pt shooter, the defense is going to have to honor that PnR and not cheat underneath. Who do you think in this league is going to out and challenge Hans when he rolls to the basket full speed and catches that pass for a dunk. Get out of the way.

            JOB needs to watch how Spurs do it. They are best in the league at PnR. This year Tony Parker and Splitter are going to eat teams alive with it.
            Last edited by graphic-er; 09-27-2010, 04:25 PM.
            You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Mike Wells: 5 questions heading into training camp

              Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
              JOB would be a fool if he does not run more pick and roll. With athletic young guys like Hansbrough and McRoberts, it makes no sense to not have them rolling to basket and throwing down a monster dunk from DC. And with DC being a good 3pt shooter, the defense is going to have to honor that PnR and not cheat underneath.

              JOB needs to watch how Spurs do it. They are best in the league at PnR. This year Tony Parker and Splitter are going to eat teams alive with it.
              yes PnR will Tyler & Magnum PnR all day.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Mike Wells: 5 questions heading into training camp

                Is this the best Mike Wells can come up with? How about some quotes? What the heck about the DG-sulking comment?

                Granger got a big piece of humble pie when he only played 9.7 minutes -- third fewest -- a game with Team USA because of his inability to defend well enough for coach Mike Krzyzewski.
                Did he ever act like he was mad about it? How does a lack of minutes cause him to sulk, when he hasn't complained. In fact, he's humbled over the whole experience (Let's just hope he, Kevin Durant, and Derrick Rose don't all decide to go to another team).

                The two will have to meet in the middle to avoid another bad point guard-coach affair.
                What? That doesn't make sense. They don't even know each other yet, and Darren sounds happy to have JOB. I understand he's refering to TJ and JT, but come on. Whats the chances of that happening again. The TJ affair had to do with gameplay, and JT had to do with off the court affairs, and that PHX game.

                Comment

                Working...
                X