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

Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

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

  • #31
    Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    Originally posted by burnzone View Post
    I am also ok with the board idea, and I agree that any changes should wait until next offseason to allow team owners to better prepare, that also would give more time for the changes to be discussed and decided upon.
    We say that every year, though, and nothing ever changes. I understand waiting an additional year on draft changes, but if we're gonna change anything else, I think it's best to act while the iron is hot.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

      This thread reminds me of The Peoples Front of Judia from Life of Brian.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

        Originally posted by LG33 View Post
        We say that every year, though, and nothing ever changes. I understand waiting an additional year on draft changes, but if we're gonna change anything else, I think it's best to act while the iron is hot.
        I guess I should have been more specific that I mean for this upcoming season, draft changes should wait another year. I see no reason to devalue anyone's current draft picks that came from trades, not knowing of any changes at that time.

        Maybe a first a foremost focus should be on how many team owners do we legitimately have for next season? Is there a full 20 teams, is there 12-16, where do things stand?

        Because while a board of whomever is a good idea on paper, making multiple changes for this season won't change much if everything continues to operate as-is with the current concerns. I get that since it's playoff time, maybe this isn't the best time to look at recent team owner activity. But is it worth the effort on changes, if next season there's about 10-12 active owners in a 20 team league?

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

          I am opposed to the Board idea. Any changes should be up to a majority of the owners that vote. And there should be a quorum of at least, let's say, 10. And no changes should go into effect next season.

          I just don't see the need to make wholesale changes when things are going relatively well.

          We can contract by an couple of owners if we want. Otherwise people have been relatively active. Hell, I count ten people posting on this thread alone.
          2010 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champion Baltimore Bulldogs

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

            I proposed the board of governors idea so I am for it, but am with Bulldog that any major changes should be made with a majority vote. I think that for a board to be effective we would need something around 12 members, with ten for a quorum. Votes could be held on the trash talk board. The other thing I think should be adjusted is that the commissioners powers should rotate hands on a regular basis (say one month at a time) so that everybody has a chance to use those options.
            PACER FAN ON STRIKE!!!-The moment the Pacers fire Larry Bird I will cheer for them again.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

              The Board would simply come up with the changes. The approval of a majority of the league's GMs would still be needed for those proposed changes to be enacted.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

                The board can be interesting only if they create a list of possible changes and then the league votes on what should and should not be implemented.

                I agree that only the draft order and the picks for this year should be untouched - everything else is fair game.

                I dont like the idea of having the rotating role of the commish.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

                  As a point of disclosure I have already informed Dr Badd and Frostwolf that I will not be returning to either league next season.

                  My 2 cents

                  On the board of governors idea:

                  Isn't that what we've always had? A group that brings up ideas to be voted on by the entire league. Its called "active team ownership". When position votes routinely get 11 or 12 owners voting on them, the league has a participation issue.

                  That is the largest single problem both leagues face.

                  Getting someone to restart the regular ABA to find quality owners is the first best step to solve this problem. There should be enough new talent on PD to warrant a yearly league.

                  Cut the league size down to however many active owners you can find and then begin the process of rebuilding the size of the league with proven talent from the IKL or the restarted ABA.

                  Changing the leagues so they are different enough from each other to create interest in playing in both would help as well. They're too similar, so why play in both?

                  You might also wish to find a better way to deal with team owners not logging in for weeks at a time. Replacing them is a far better solution than addressing the problem after the season.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

                    Those are good points, and I agree, to be honest while the board sounded good on paper when brought up, you are correct in that the league is supposed to function like that already.

                    I also agree that the lack of participation, and commitment to the league is killing all of it. Things are at the point of owners dropping out, roughly only half of all team owners in the KL even participating in this thread, it has to be addressed immediately before any other changes are even thought about.


                    Can we please take a simple vote, yes or no, who in the KL plans to continue in the league, and understanding the commitment and participation are crucial to the league having any chance to succeed?

                    I will start things off with myself, I vote yes that I would like to continue the KL, and definitely understand the importance of logging in regularly, and responding to trade requests in a timely manner even with just a rejection.

                    (16/20) 2 team owners out of 20 commited, 1 on the fence, 1 definitely out (will edit the # as people post), who's next to commit to the KL going forward?


                    I feel at this point, with the direction and tone this thread alone is going, things honestly are not looking good going forward. 10-12 teams isn't going to do it, and I'd rather see CPU bot teams instead of any that average logging on once every 2 weeks all season long, we seem to have at least 6-7 teams that do just that. And that's damn sad considering as long as this league has been around.
                    Last edited by burnzone; 03-12-2015, 04:14 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

                      I'm committed to it. (Young Turks)

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

                        I'm honestly on the fence. Jose put it best;

                        "Its called "active team ownership". When position votes routinely get 11 or 12 owners voting on them, the league has a participation issue.

                        That is the largest single problem both leagues face."

                        When I was commish, I actually went to other leagues, checked for their competition levels and emailed league commishes to recruit players. I seem to remember us getting one team owner that way. I know I sound like a broken record about this, but if people don't at least check in, it puts a halt to everything else;postion votes, trades, etc. Hell, we had MAJOR holdups on draft day, the day you would think owners would be chomping at the bit.

                        Even when something was said to a couple of owners about being MIA, they'd check in for about a week, then disappear again.

                        I know the arguement has been made that life is more important and I absolutely agree, but given all the smartsphones, tablets, PCs laptops, free wi-fi...etc, I just don't buy it when people say they got too busy to take 10 minutes to check inm, respond to an offer and set a roster.

                        For me, it's like playing 5 on 5, but one of your teammates keeps walking off the court during the game to get a drink, talk to some friends, read a book. It's not life and death, but you made a committment to the other guys to be there during the game, not leave them hanging. I'm getting past tired of being left hanging.


                        Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

                          Skaut_Ech, that is one the best reasonings I have seen posted, along with what jose slaughter said. I've seen all of you guys that have been commissioner run into this problem, and I can definitely understand the frustration with severe lack of participation.

                          I wonder if maybe a few team managers are maybe used to the yahoo fantasy style of play that's been around for so long now, where they set their team at the beginning of the season, then only sporadically check in. I know it's been mentioned numerous times over the years how important it is to check in daily to help trade requests move one way or the other, and make sure lineups are set correctly so position minutes aren't lost.

                          I'm only hoping to see where we all stand, and what the numbers look like going forward. I know there are quite a few duplicate owners between KL, ABA, and IKL, but it's really looking like consolidation may be the best option right now. I really hope this can work out, because in the past when it has, it was really fun.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

                            One thing that I think isn't being taken into consideration in this debate is that not everybody in our league has a Pacers Digest account. For example, Zallen has been trying to get Grimm an account on PD for sometime and can't. Reaper (Lansing in the Keeper league) mentioned in the trash talk that he couldn't get an account on PD. I agree that some just aren't involved in this conversation, but right now this conversation is only open to those with accounts on Pacers Digest.
                            PACER FAN ON STRIKE!!!-The moment the Pacers fire Larry Bird I will cheer for them again.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

                              I understand that it is a crapshoot with new owners, and that is a hassle. Is it really worth destroying our rosters to take a chance on only 5 new owners instead of 8? I know I'm biased because both of my teams finished first in the regular season, but I'm sure that lots of other owners have been planning for the future and wouldn't want their teams burnt to the ground. During our discussions on this same topic I posted this on our trash talk:

                              If there are absentee owners then that's an individual problem that we shouldn't punish active owners for. Instead of discussing a total shutdown (which the actual conversation could be counterproductive - owners might have less faith in a "failing" league), we should show our strength by creating a rule to protect ourselves from this toxic problem.

                              I would propose the following rule: An owner who doesn't log on for a week will be sent a warning message from the commissioner, then if they don't respond in 7 days their team will be "on probation" for the rest of the season. During this probationary period, if the owner goes another week without logging on then another message will be sent. If that one isn't responded to in 7 days then they will be removed from ownership and replaced as soon as possible. Exceptions could be made for extenuating circumstances with the commissioner's prior consent.

                              If these rules were clearly outlined at the beginning of a season, and consistently enforced, then I think we could weed out owners who will never be able to keep up with their teams, groom passive owners into active owners, and ensure a healthy league moving forward.
                              I think making a rule that kicks out inactive owners is the best way to keep everyone happy. It doesn't have to look exactly like my proposed rule, but I think it needs to be a quantitative benchmark that leaves nothing to interpretation and all new owners need to agree to.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

                                I agree about definitely not wanting the league to shut down, your post from the trash does board does have some good points. Let's keep throwing ideas around, and discussing things, and try to get this thing in a better position going forward.

                                Also, I did not know so many did not have accounts here, is there any way that could be remedied in any fashion?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X