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

Are The Pacers Setting Lance Stephenson Up To Fail?

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

  • Are The Pacers Setting Lance Stephenson Up To Fail?

    http://www.indycornrows.com/2012/7/8...son-up-to-fail

    Indiana Pacers guard Lance Stephenson has been a high-maintenance young player in his two years with the Indiana Pacers. After struggling through his rookie season without playing much but still managing to drive a few teammates nuts, Stephenson stayed around Indianapolis and went to work.

    He kept working on his game throughout the lockout and last season when after being afforded some minutes in the early part of the season, he found himself back on the bench when the games started to become meaningful. Stehpenson remains in Indy to keep working at the Knox Pro Am games and the Fieldhouse.

    Honestly, since starting off no the wrong foot his rookie season, Stephenson has done just what you would hope as far as putting in the work and keeping his mind on the game and his career. But his contract heading into the upcoming season is not guaranteed and his guardian angel at the Fieldhouse, Larry Bird is not going to be around.

    So when I hear coach Dan Burke talking about Stephenson playing in the Orlando Summer League and the expectations they have for him to lead the team and show some growth in areas not directly related to on-court basketball skills it makes me wonder if, by setting up this challenge for Stephenson this summer they aren't instead setting him up to fail which would support letting him go before the next NBA season starts.

    Summer league play is not a direct correlation to play in the NBA and I certainly wouldn't want my future hinging on how things go down in Orlando. There are players scrapping for jobs both on the Pacers summer roster and on other teams. They aren't looking to develop great chemistry and become a cohesive unit. Players looking for NBA roster spots are primarily concerned with impressing scouts and coaches on hand, hoping for a call to go to camp in October.

    Expecting Stephenson to lead a team that doesn't necessarily want to be led is tough. Stephenson is a bit of a lightening rod because of the flashes of talent and his name, but he could put it all together and be an impact player for the Pacers which would make anything he does in Orlando from a leadership standpoint moot. Keeping him on the roster is almost easier to justify since his salary ($870,000) makes barely a mark on the cap. But looking at things from a different angle, the team may simply be ready to move on from the Stephenson experiment and using Orlando to give him a chance to perform in front of the rest of the league.

    That would be much more fair than forcing him to earn his spot by trying to lead a summer league team.
    I didnt see this posted yet , and I know how much you guys want another Lance thread, so my gift to you
    Sittin on top of the world!

  • #2
    Re: Are The Pacers Setting Lance Stephenson Up To Fail?

    Yes, they are setting him up! Like someone said on another thread; Pacer front office is a bunch of vindictive 14 year old girls!

    Now if Lance would get a Justin Beaver hair cut, he might fair better.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Are The Pacers Setting Lance Stephenson Up To Fail?

      I swear I thought this was a bump from either of the last two summers.

      It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

      Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
      Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
      NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Are The Pacers Setting Lance Stephenson Up To Fail?

        uhh ... hwut?

        So basically the Pacers are so keen to have an excuse to let Lance go at the end of this coming season that they'll play him SPECIFICALLY SO HE CAN FAIL?

        Wow. Just wow.
        BillS

        A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
        Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Are The Pacers Setting Lance Stephenson Up To Fail?

          ..what was their excuse for letting AJ Price go?

          It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

          Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
          Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
          NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Are The Pacers Setting Lance Stephenson Up To Fail?

            Originally posted by Kstat View Post
            ..what was their excuse for letting AJ Price go?
            My guess would be that AJ privately requested it because he wants a chance to be a point guard somewhere that respects passing and creating for others out of the 1, as opposed to being expected to be a scorer and create his own shot as a primary function.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Are The Pacers Setting Lance Stephenson Up To Fail?

              Sorry, forgot to include the green font.

              You don't need an excuse to let a 2nd rounder go. Teams cut them every day. Many of them just aren't that good.

              AJ Price is an NBA player, but it seems like he was cut on a whim. Whether it was his whim or Donnie's, who knows.

              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Are The Pacers Setting Lance Stephenson Up To Fail?

                Asking somebody to produce now, or else is not setting him up to fail. It's asking for fair return on your investment. He's been babied along, pampered even. If he is not ready to show he belongs in the league by now, then I see no reason to expect another year of easing him in would get him any closer to that point.
                The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Are The Pacers Setting Lance Stephenson Up To Fail?

                  ok, honest question: if Lance Stephenson was cut before the start of the season, would anybody here be shocked?

                  It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                  Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                  Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                  NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Are The Pacers Setting Lance Stephenson Up To Fail?

                    While I don't think they are setting him up to fail, I do think they are giving him a rather short leash. Hans hasn't really earned anything, but he keeps getting chance after chance. I'd just like to see Lance be giving the same types of chances. Give him more than 10min a game.
                    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


                    • #11
                      Re: Are The Pacers Setting Lance Stephenson Up To Fail?

                      Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                      ok, honest question: if Lance Stephenson was cut before the start of the season, would anybody here be shocked?
                      I would be, but not as much as if Larry were here.
                      Senior at the University of Louisville.
                      Greenfield ---> The Ville

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Are The Pacers Setting Lance Stephenson Up To Fail?

                        Originally posted by Steagles View Post
                        I would be, but not as much as if Larry were here.
                        I thought of that when i asked the question.

                        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Are The Pacers Setting Lance Stephenson Up To Fail?

                          Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                          ok, honest question: if Lance Stephenson was cut before the start of the season, would anybody here be shocked?
                          Shocked, no.

                          Disappointed, yes.

                          I don't see why you cut him anyway. You got a guy with loads of talent working hard to become better. He is still crazy young too. I just don't believe you cut a player like that.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Are The Pacers Setting Lance Stephenson Up To Fail?

                            Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                            ok, honest question: if Lance Stephenson was cut before the start of the season, would anybody here be shocked?


                            Not in the least.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Are The Pacers Setting Lance Stephenson Up To Fail?

                              A couple of points.

                              I would be shocked if Lance was cut because he makes the league minimum and the cost is a bargain for his upside.

                              AJ Price got cut because his price tag went up from a minimum second round player to asking for more than his QO which was over $1M. I think this is more of an indication that we aren't going to trade Collison if anything. I like Price and I like his game. He is kind of cut from the same cloth as McRoberts and Rush. The what if he didn't get drafted under JOB thread (I apply the same for Hibbert, but he quickly became a focal point for the offense after JOB left). Price has the least talent of the four of them. Price isn't looking for much more money than the QO, I doubt, but I think he wants a situation where he is higher than fourth string PG.

                              I think the team is looking for Stephenson to prove his maturity. They are putting him out there in a position to succeed, not a position to fail. I think it shows your distinct disbelief in Stephenson to succeed.

                              Stephenson and Pendergraph I think are going to dominate SL. I think Stephenson will get more minutes this year as long as he can promote ball movement and take advantage of his skills within the team concept, which he showed flashes of last year. Up to this point, he has been way too deliberate with either going to the rim or passing the ball as if he made his mind up before he even gets the ball. Read and react. Know the offense and react to opportunities in the defense. That is the key to him taking the next step. The team wants to make sure that he is a player with the head and will power to continue to grow. He will succeed if he is capable.
                              "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X