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

Random rant - What would it take to get the Pacers back on Broadcast TV?

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

  • #16
    Re: Random rant - What would it take to get the Pacers back on Broadcast TV?

    Originally posted by BillS View Post
    Per this report (updated June 2012) total wired and unwired cable penetration nationally is 90% (can't find a statistic for Indianapolis SMSA).

    I understand that the 10% probably consists of inner-city or deep rural, but some of the kids growing up there will be the ones that become football fans when they get out because they could watch it as opposed to basketball or baseball which they could not.
    Advertisers typically don't care about reaching people that watch TV but don't have cable. It's a sign they may not have the disposable income to buy their products. Sure, teams may gain some extra fans who would attend games in the future but the ad revenue is much more important.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Random rant - What would it take to get the Pacers back on Broadcast TV?

      Lakers are going to all cable.

      http://articles.latimes.com/2011/feb...arner-20110215

      Time Warner Cable, Lakers strike 20-year TV deal


      The agreement, a huge blow to current rights-holders Fox Sports West and KCAL-TV, calls for the creation of two new regional sports channels and will start with the 2012-13 season.


      February 14, 2011|By Joe Flint





      Time Warner Cable has struck a game-changing TV deal with the Lakers to create two new regional sports channels — one in English and one in Spanish — that will use the world champions as their backbone.

      The 20-year agreement, which kicks off with the 2012-13 season, covers all preseason, regular-season and postseason games that are not nationally telecast.


      The agreement, a huge blow to current rights-holders Fox Sports West and KCAL-TV, calls for the creation of two new regional sports channels and will start with the 2012-13 season.


      February 14, 2011|By Joe Flint





      Time Warner Cable has struck a game-changing TV deal with the Lakers to create two new regional sports channels — one in English and one in Spanish — that will use the world champions as their backbone.

      The 20-year agreement, which kicks off with the 2012-13 season, covers all preseason, regular-season and postseason games that are not nationally telecast.


      The marriage of the Lakers and Time Warner Cable is a major blow to Fox Sports West and KCAL-TV, the current rights holders. It is also bad news for Lakers fans who don't subscribe to a pay-TV service, because no games will be available for free on over-the-air television once the Time Warner Cable deal takes effect. About 620,000 homes do not have a subscription to a pay-TV provider.

      There had been rumblings that the Lakers were looking to start their own channel or find a new partner when Time Warner Cable came calling soon after the exclusive negotiating window Fox Sports had with the Lakers expired at the end of last year.

      "The courtship happened quickly," said Tim Harris, senior vice president and chief marketing officer for the Lakers, who acknowledged the team did consider going solo on its own network.

      Terms of the deal were not disclosed. Under its deal with Fox Sports West, the Lakers were getting about $30 million a year in rights fees, people familiar with the situation said. Some industry observers pegged the new 20-year pact at a value of $3 billion, although Time Warner Cable dismissed that figure.

      In a statement, Fox Sports said it had made the Lakers an offer that "would have paid them one of the highest local TV rights fees in professional sports. We did not believe that going higher was in the best interest of our business or pay-TV customers in Los Angeles, who will bear the cost of this deal for years to come."


      A spokesman for KCAL said the loss of the Lakers will not stop the channel from making "local sports a big part of the station's identity."

      Broadcasters Joel Meyers and Stu Lantz, who handle all of the televised Lakers games, are employed by the team.

      Time Warner Cable, which has about 2 million subscribers in Southern California, isn't looking to stop with the Lakers. Melinda Witmer, executive vice president and chief programming officer of Time Warner Cable, said the company would be "looking at all available sports in the marketplace."

      Next on their wish list could be the Dodgers. The team's pact with Fox's Prime Ticket expires in 2013. The Angels also have a contract with Fox Sports West, but that arrangement has many years to run. Fox Sports also broadcasts the Kings and Ducks.
      According to court documents, Frank McCourt had intended to launch cable channels dubbed "DTV: Dodger Television" in English and Spanish. Dodgers spokesman Josh Rawitch declined to comment on how Monday's news might affect those plans.

      "It opens up a heck of a lot more what-ifs," said sports industry consultant Andy Dolich, a former top executive with the Oakland Athletics and Memphis Grizzlies.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Random rant - What would it take to get the Pacers back on Broadcast TV?

        Biggest reason why MNF went to ESPN is because ESPN has an additional revenue stream that ABC does not. ESPN gets a ton of money from cable campanies, and sattelitte campaines that carry ESPN. They charge per customer. ABC only gets money from advertising.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Random rant - What would it take to get the Pacers back on Broadcast TV?

          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
          Biggest reason why MNF went to ESPN is because ESPN has an additional revenue stream that ABC does not. ESPN gets a ton of money from cable campanies, and satellite campaines that carry ESPN. They charge per customer. ABC only gets money from advertising.
          Disney would get the ESPN subscriber money from the cable and satellite companies if ESPN had MNF or not. Local affiliates also have deals with cable and satellite companies which is why Dish Network subscribers just lost WTHR for a month or so (but subscriber revenue is minimal compared to advertising revenue).

          The reason is because Disney nearly doubles their total reach by broadcasting MNF on ESPN.

          For example, this last Monday's MNF had 14 million viewers and Dancing with the Stars on ABC had 13.5 million viewers. If MNF was on ABC they'd be lucky to get 1 million viewers on ESPN. By using both channels Disney had the 2 most popular shows on Monday.

          Disney makes A LOT more in ad revenue with reaching 27.5 million people than they would reaching 14.5 million.

          Edit:
          ESPN customer revenue from cable/satellite companies: $513 Million
          ESPN advertising revenue: $2 Billion

          http://www.businessweek.com/articles...profit-network

          http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/201...d-down/152108/

          http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/201...ograms/152352/
          Last edited by RandyWrinkles; 10-10-2012, 01:11 PM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Random rant - What would it take to get the Pacers back on Broadcast TV?

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            http://articles.latimes.com/2011/feb...arner-20110215

            Some industry observers pegged the new 20-year pact at a value of $3 billion, although Time Warner Cable dismissed that figure.
            Holy ****. If true, that means the local TV revenue for the Lakers would be twice the salary cap ALL BY ITSELF.
            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


            • #21
              Re: Random rant - What would it take to get the Pacers back on Broadcast TV?

              Originally posted by BillS View Post
              Not like it wouldn't be possible to have 100% of the people see 25% and 90% see the other 75%.

              Since FSI usually doesn't air every non-national game (it remains to be seen if this year is a bonus or the future trend), why not make arrangements to have a few of the non-FSI games aired on a local broadcast station if available?
              That's a fair point.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Random rant - What would it take to get the Pacers back on Broadcast TV?

                Originally posted by RandyWrinkles View Post
                Advertisers typically don't care about reaching people that watch TV but don't have cable. It's a sign they may not have the disposable income to buy their products. Sure, teams may gain some extra fans who would attend games in the future but the ad revenue is much more important.
                I get the logic here, but maybe I'm just that far off from the norm. I have a good job and would spend money on my team. I just get NOTHING from cable that I can't get from the internet. I already pay a ton to Comcast for my internet connection. Whether I can afford it or not, it irks me to pay $100 a month more for cable service as well when the only thing I gain from it is the Pacers coverage. Given the option I'd rather drop cable and pay the money direct to the Pacers to be able to get a couple nice seats at a game once a month.

                I know a ton of people that I work with that have dropped cable and now rely solely on their internet connection. And they're not just nerds like me. Just sayin...

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Random rant - What would it take to get the Pacers back on Broadcast TV?

                  Didn't Portland ownership, when trying to clean up their JailBlazers image, pledge a certain number of games to broadcast TV? Not sure if that still happens or not but obviously there is the possibility of a compromise. It's not like it has to be all or nothing for cable/satellite.
                  Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                  ------

                  "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

                  -John Wooden

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Random rant - What would it take to get the Pacers back on Broadcast TV?

                    Originally posted by MnvrChvy View Post
                    I get the logic here, but maybe I'm just that far off from the norm. I have a good job and would spend money on my team. I just get NOTHING from cable that I can't get from the internet. I already pay a ton to Comcast for my internet connection. Whether I can afford it or not, it irks me to pay $100 a month more for cable service as well when the only thing I gain from it is the Pacers coverage. Given the option I'd rather drop cable and pay the money direct to the Pacers to be able to get a couple nice seats at a game once a month.

                    I know a ton of people that I work with that have dropped cable and now rely solely on their internet connection. And they're not just nerds like me. Just sayin...
                    I'm with you. If the Pacers were on a local station I would be completely content without having cable. I also know many people who have dropped cable and opted for a media center type setup. It's definitely a growing trend with more alternative services and media center options getting better.

                    My point is that advertisers aren't going to argue to Disney that they are missing out on the non-subscriber segment because they show MNF on ESPN.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Random rant - What would it take to get the Pacers back on Broadcast TV?

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      Lakers are going to all cable.

                      http://articles.latimes.com/2011/feb...arner-20110215

                      Time Warner Cable, Lakers strike 20-year TV deal

                      Lots of Lakers fans can't get the games because their cable provider hasn't struck a deal with TWC to get the channel. Hell, Staples Center can't even get the channel because they run DirecTV.
                      PSN: bhm184

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X