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

The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

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

  • #16
    Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

    Originally posted by Mad-Mad-Mario View Post
    But the thing is that the fanbases are different. Football is king. People watch MNF regardless of what teams are playing to a certain extent. People don't watch a basketball game just because its the only one on.
    If the teams playing are playing based on merit instead of market size maybe more people would? This isn't about comparing fan sizes, it is about maximizing your potential.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

      Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
      They may not have a lot of supporters against the NY metropolitan area but they make excellent villains. Several people like to root against New York teams and that's enough to draw decent ratings.
      People certainly like to root against the Yankees, but I don't know how much the "root against NY" thing extends beyond them. I would say that most of the country was easily rooting for the Giants in both of their Super Bowls against the Patriots.

      The 90's Knicks with their intensity certainly made for good villains, but these current Knicks do not.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

        Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
        If the teams playing are playing based on merit instead of market size maybe more people would? This isn't about comparing fan sizes, it is about maximizing your potential.
        I don't think it would though. So many factors contribute to MNFs success.

        A) They do try to feature all teams but better teams are given more games
        B) People do watch because of fantasy football
        C) Because how important every game is because of the # of games, if either team is in your teams division/conference you have a vested interest in the result
        D) No College football, how often will NBA games have that advantage?
        E) ETC

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

          Wasn't it Lance that kicked the Knicks down the stairwell in the playoffs?

          WHAT?!?!

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

            Nothing like arguing for why one of the leagues top 4 teams shouldn't be on national tv....

            I wonder what marketing programs tell their students not to advertise one of their best products, and instead focus on some mediocre ones. I bet not many.
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
              Nothing like arguing for why one of the leagues top 4 teams shouldn't be on national tv....

              I wonder what marketing programs tell their students not to advertise one of their best products, and instead focus on some mediocre ones. I bet not many.
              Your assuming that ratings and quality of team have a direct correlation.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

                Originally posted by Mad-Mad-Mario View Post
                I don't think it would though. So many factors contribute to MNFs success.

                A) They do try to feature all teams but better teams are given more games
                B) People do watch because of fantasy football
                C) Because how important every game is because of the # of games, if either team is in your teams division/conference you have a vested interest in the result
                D) No College football, how often will NBA games have that advantage?
                E) ETC
                There are many reasons why a regular season NBA game will never get equal ratings of a regular season NFL game. Most namely 16 vs 82. Also because it happens once a week on the same day at the same time, while NBA games are kind of random. But none of that matters. It is about trying to replicate NFL ratings, it is just about trying to maximize your potential. The NBAs potential may be less than the NFL, but many think it could be much higher if they did a better job of marketing the game and teams. Part of that is to have your best teams and the biggest match-ups. Just putting in your biggest markets and throwing a bone to some of the better teams in small markets isn't the best way to build the brand of the NBA outside of New Yokr, Chicago, Miami, and LA.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

                  Originally posted by Mad-Mad-Mario View Post
                  Your assuming that ratings and quality of team have a direct correlation.
                  You are assuming the best ratings nationally is what is best for the league as a whole. Could be showing off your best will build up fan bases in areas not names New York and LA allowing for teams like the Pacers to actually make money. What is better 7 teams making profit or 14? Maybe that extra exposure makes it so that superstars don't feel a need to play in big markets. This could bring about more parity, a more competitive league, and more interesting league. Which would lead to higher ratings overall and more merchandising sales, and more profit.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

                    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                    Nothing like arguing for why one of the leagues top 4 teams shouldn't be on national tv....

                    I wonder what marketing programs tell their students not to advertise one of their best products, and instead focus on some mediocre ones. I bet not many.

                    Can you imagine making it to the AFC or NFC Title game and not getting a single Sunday Night Football game the next season? It wouldn't happen. These ABC games are basically the Sunday Night Football of the NBA.

                    Heck, the Spurs made the freaking Finals, yet only have one ABC game.

                    There are 15 ABC games that involve just 8 franchises: Oklahoma City, New York, Miami, LAL, San Antonio, Chicago, LAC, Houston.

                    San Antonio and Houston each only have one. The Clipps have two. The rest the games pretty much revolve around the same five teams: OKC, NY, Miami, LAL, and Chicago.

                    http://www.nba.com/schedules/national_tv_schedule/ABC/

                    There's such a sickening bias to the same few teams. It's all so boring and predictable. You take the Heat to Game 7 of the Eastern Conference Finals, but you can't even get an ABC game, while a team you bulldozed in the semis gets 6. No stat epitomizes the joke of how the NBA markets its teams more than the Knicks 6 ABC Games/Pacers 0 one. It's just pathetic.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

                      Roy pretty much sums it up



                      "It is what it is"

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

                        Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                        Maybe, but the NBA never really tries anything different, so we really don't know.

                        I wouldn't be whining if for example, the Knicks had 5 ABC games to our 3. But the 6 to 0 ratio after we completely dismantled the Knicks in the playoffs is just a joke.

                        I get it to an extent. I understand giving a ton of games to the 90's Bulls, Lakers over the years, and Heat right now. All of those teams feature marquee stars and have been very successful. But the Knicks don't feature a marquee star and they haven't been very successful. They're only getting all of these games because of the size of the market they play in.
                        Since those Marquee teams have to have an opponent you'd think a team like the Pacers should find their way onto ABC by default... as the opponent of one of the big market/marquee teams....
                        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, that’s teamwork."

                        -John Wooden

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

                          Originally posted by Bball View Post
                          Since those Marquee teams have to have an opponent you'd think a team like the Pacers should find their way onto ABC by default... as the opponent of one of the big market/marquee teams....
                          And show the marquee team getting beat? Bite your tongue!
                          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


                          • #28
                            Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

                            This egregious slight cannot go unanswered. The Pacers organization must take their revenge by spending most of the next decade killing the national ratings for the finals. With a little luck maybe a match-up or two with the Grizzlies.

                            A Silver reign will be short-lived. The dude is from Duke. It is what he deserves.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

                              I'm grateful we don't have a Christmas game so I don't have to see the Pacers wear those horrendous Christmas day jerseys that look like toddler NBA shirts.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

                                i used to get upset by the lack of coverage but frankly, i prefer it. i would rather see the pacers as spoilers and the team the 'experts' ignore while they play and win and the 'experts' make excuses for why things aren't going as planned.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X