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

CBS discussing potentially major changes to NFL pregame show

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

  • CBS discussing potentially major changes to NFL pregame show

    http://thebiglead.com/2014/01/15/cbs...-pregame-show/

    CBS, disappointed that its NFL pregame show fell further behind rival Fox in the ratings this season, is internally discussing major changes to the show, multiple sources tell The Big Lead. FOX NFL Sunday had its best season ever, averaging 4.8 million viewers in 2013, while The NFL Today on CBS was a distant 2nd at 3.3 million viewers. A CBS spokesperson had no comment this week when asked about the following changes that the network is considering. It’s unclear which – if any – of these will actually happen, but sources say the following is being discussed:

    • Bringing in recently-retired tight end Tony Gonzalez to replace Shannon Sharpe. Gonzalez and CBS have been in talks about joining the show, but he’s West Coast-based, and the show is out of New York. Gonzalez is wrestling with the idea of weekly travel during the season. FOX’s show is based in LA and appears to be an ideal fit, but it can’t offer him a spot because it isn’t going to tinker with the show’s chemistry. Given the option of Fox Sports 1 or NFL Today on CBS, what would you do? The other issue is that Gonzalez and Sharpe or apparently close friends. Another option: Simply adding Gonzalez. But is six people on the set too many?

    • Replacing Dan Marino. There was plenty of scuttlebutt last year that Marino would be replaced after the “love child” stories hit the press. CBS, the most conservative of the networks, didn’t make a move. The problem with replacing Marino this year? There aren’t any star QBs retiring to take his spot. Unless …

    * The other name to watch is Peyton Manning. While there are no indications that Manning will retire if he wins a second Super Bowl, CBS privately has discussed the idea of pitching Manning a dual role: a spot on the new CBS College Football Saturday set and a spot on The NFL Today. Manning will be immensely coveted by all the networks whenever he retires, and his background in the SEC playing for Tennessee, plus the fact he spent his entire career in the AFC, are no-brainers for CBS.

    * One source said that CBS had been hoping to land Rex Ryan if the Jets had fired their coach. He was a perfect fit for CBS – proximity to New York, knowledge of the AFC, and his blustery nature. But the Jets retained Ryan, reportedly on a 1-year deal. There’s a chance both Ryan and Manning would be available after the 2014 season. Or neither could be. Then is CBS stuck with the same group for two more years?

  • #2
    Re: CBS discussing potentially major changes to NFL pregame show

    IMO, the ratings discrepancy between FOX and CBS is because the NFC has most of the big market teams, therefore FOX benefits in the ratings. Personally, I just flip it on early to whatever channel the Colts are on. So 14 times a year that is CBS, and twice a year it is FOX. If I were say a Niners fan, it would be the opposite. I have a feeling that most people are like that.

    NFC big markets: The most popular NY team, Philadelphia, Dallas (huge national following too), Washington, Chicago, San Francisco (large national presence too), Green Bay (huge national following).

    AFC big markets: Stepchild NY team, Boston (decent national following), Miami (how many people there care though?), Pittsburgh (huge national following), Houston (franchise has no history though), and I guess you could say that Denver is big since they are the only big city in the region, plus that team has a bit of a national following.

    It's not even close. The NFC encompasses virtually all of the major US markets. They also have virtually all of the teams with the huge national followings aside from Pitt. FOX will always have an advantage because they carry the Conference with the mega markets. Trading Shannon Sharpe for Tony Gonzalez isn't going to fix anything. FOX securing the NFC package in the mid 90's was absolutely brilliant.
    Last edited by Sollozzo; 01-16-2014, 12:56 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: CBS discussing potentially major changes to NFL pregame show

      Honestly, I just watch ESPN Sunday NFL countdown. ESPN does a lot of stupid things and I can't stand them, but their NFL coverage and team I think is the best of the 4 networks.
      Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: CBS discussing potentially major changes to NFL pregame show

        Originally posted by Suaveness View Post
        Honestly, I just watch ESPN Sunday NFL countdown. ESPN does a lot of stupid things and I can't stand them, but their NFL coverage and team I think is the best of the 4 networks.
        I always turn ESPN on at 10 and like their program, but I'm usually ready for a change by noon. Noon is when I change the channel and get into Colts mode.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: CBS discussing potentially major changes to NFL pregame show

          If it's a 1:05 kickoff, I turn the TV on at 1:04.

          I don't care for any of those pregame shows - or the people on them. And how does anyone understand what Sharpe is saying anyway ??

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: CBS discussing potentially major changes to NFL pregame show

            Its kinda like ESPN vs TNT for basketball. Fox is just more entertaining.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: CBS discussing potentially major changes to NFL pregame show

              Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
              If it's a 1:05 kickoff, I turn the TV on at 1:04.

              I don't care for any of those pregame shows - or the people on them. And how does anyone understand what Sharpe is saying anyway ??
              Most of it is background noise for me to be honest I mean it kills time till kickoff it goes by fast.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: CBS discussing potentially major changes to NFL pregame show

                Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
                If it's a 1:05 kickoff, I turn the TV on at 1:04.

                I don't care for any of those pregame shows - or the people on them. And how does anyone understand what Sharpe is saying anyway ??
                This is what I do. I cannot stand any of the pregame shows and I just check my fantasy team about a half hour before kickoff.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: CBS discussing potentially major changes to NFL pregame show

                  Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
                  If it's a 1:05 kickoff, I turn the TV on at 1:04.

                  I don't care for any of those pregame shows - or the people on them. And how does anyone understand what Sharpe is saying anyway ??
                  Me too, although I don't cut it that close, I like to get settled in before the game actually starts. Usually the only time I will tune into pregame stuff is when I have nothing to do that I can finish before the game starts, which is never for the NFL (church), and rare for the Pacers (maybe once every ten games or so).

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: CBS discussing potentially major changes to NFL pregame show

                    Whoa I've heard rumors but I didn't think they were actually going to do it.

                    http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2014...tony-gonzalez/


                    CBS Dumps Dan Marino and Shannon Sharpe, Adds Tony Gonzalez

                    CBS Sports has finally overhauled its NFL pregame show.

                    CBS announced Tuesday that Tony Gonzalez has joined “The NFL Today” as an analyst, working alongside James Brown, Bill Cowher, and Boomer Esiason. The Big Lead first reported CBS’ flirtation with Gonzalez.

                    CBS also announced the departures of Dan Marino and Shannon Sharpe, wishing them “the best” as “they pursue other professional opportunities” (CBS, 2/18). Marino and Sharpe both had long tenures at CBS, the former joining the network in 2002 and the latter in 2004.

                    Gonzalez is the first addition to the CBS pregame show since Cowher joined the cast in 2007. Meanwhile, Marino and Sharpe are the first departures since Greg Gumbel was replaced by Brown in 2006.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: CBS discussing potentially major changes to NFL pregame show

                      Good riddance to Sharpe, that marble mouth sucked. Marino was OK usually though. Jeff Saturday's not on any of ESPN's pregame stuff is he? Somebody's gonna poach him if he isn't soon, he's been really good in the Sportscenter stuff I've seen him on.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: CBS discussing potentially major changes to NFL pregame show

                        So they're getting rid of two and only adding one, yet they expect it to help their ratings? I get dumping Sharpe for Gonzalez, but the move to get rid of Marino is a bit perplexing. He's not the greatest analyst ever, but he is decent at it and has a lot of clout since he is one of the greatest quarterbacks ever. I just don't get how trading Sharpe and Marino for Tony Gonzalez, someone who has never done this before, is going to fix anything. Maybe they will be adding someone else who hasn't been announced yet?

                        Regardless, I don't think this will change anything. Like I said earlier in the thread, FOX has the NFC, which contains most of the large market and popular teams. FOX will always hold a ratings advantage over CBS because of this. I'm guessing that a huge percentage of people are like myself and simply turn on the TV to whatever channel their favorite team is on. I like the FOX pregame show, but the Colts are usually on CBS so I turn it on CBS early by default since they are the ones who will be talking about the Colts upcoming game.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: CBS discussing potentially major changes to NFL pregame show

                          I'm curious why they fired Marino though I mean who are they going to replace him with?

                          If it was over the love child scandal they would've fired him last year why wait till now?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: CBS discussing potentially major changes to NFL pregame show

                            Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
                            I'm curious why they fired Marino though I mean who are they going to replace him with?

                            If it was over the love child scandal they would've fired him last year why wait till now?
                            You have to think that they have their eye on someone else. I don't see how anyone could think that trading Sharpe and Marino for Gonzalez is going to be some magical ratings cure all. It just makes no sense.

                            It would really be funny if Gonzo decided to play again and they lost two people for nothing.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: CBS discussing potentially major changes to NFL pregame show

                              Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                              Fox is just more entertaining.

                              A few things I don't like about CBS
                              1) Their jokes are way too corny and mostly unfunny
                              2) I get sick of regardless how awful the Steelers are, Cowher still picks them to win, and tries desperately to convince everyone WHY they will win.
                              3) Shannon Sharpe acting like certain things would/wouldn't happen if he were in that lockerroom and just his overall condenscending upon others.

                              A few reasons why I like FOX
                              1) Both FOX and CBS analysts are knowledgable....but FOX knows their stuff, and they have fun with it.
                              2) Unlike Cowher, these guys aren't bias about picking against their old teams.
                              3) I was never a big, big fan of Frank Caliendo, but some of his old pick segments were funny...and Riggle's had some hilarious pick segments that's had me rolling.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X