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

Should the NBA go away from "star" advertising

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

  • Should the NBA go away from "star" advertising

    We're getitng a very good idea of what america thinks of "team-based" marketing right now.....

    Two very good teams, they work hard, play together, and nobody wants to see it.

    Stars sell. The NHL is on death row because they refused to recognize that fact.

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

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

  • #2
    Re: Should the NBA go away from "star" advertising

    pro sports are entertainment. Marketing is EVERYTHING.

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

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

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Should the NBA go away from "star" advertising

      You have to go for the stars I believe.

      What saved the NBA in the 1980's? It was Larry Bird and Magic Johnson. They were 2 easily marketable stars that attracted the masses. And of course, in the 90's you had the great Michael Jordan, who brought the league ratings.

      The ratings for this years finals are awful. Nothing against the Spurs or Pistons, but that's just the way it is. Only true basketball fans care about watching this series. It takes flashy stars, something both of these teams lack, to draw large ratings from "casual" watchers. The ratings for this series should tell you that the NBA should not try to market teams. Just think of how much better they'd be with a Miami-Phoenix matchup. The top 2 MVP vote getters in Nash and Shaquille. 2 of the best young players in the game in Wade in Amare.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Should the NBA go away from "star" advertising

        Look at the superbowl. The NFL doesn't advertise football. They advertise HYPE. And guess what? It works.

        The lasting images of the superbowl for so many people are the budwieser frogs, mean Joe Greene, "I'm going to Disneyworld," and Jordan vs. Bird for some fries.

        Nobody watches it because they want to see good football. They watch it because the NFL did a great job of making it a marketing bonanza.

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

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

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Should the NBA go away from "star" advertising

          Originally posted by vapacersfan
          Larry Bird and Magic made their rivalry, it wasnt forced down our throat like other have been recently (Kobe v Shaq)

          Also, the reason why basketball is so bad now is because there is less focus on fundementals and more focus on flash, IMO
          Let me spell it out for you:

          Without the LA Lakers, the NBA would not be able to survive. Period. It sucks, but its the truth. Once in a while, a star-less team can jump up and snag a few crumbs, but the NBA is, was, and will ALWAYS be geared towards big names and big stars, because THATS what the average fan wants to see.

          The average fan doesn't want to see great picks, nice position defense, or a quality box-out, the average fan wants to see a guy go for 45 points, throw a pass behind his back, or dunk from the free throw line.

          The LA Lakers are the epitome of style over substance. And guess what? Whenever they make the finals, ratings go through the roof.

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

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

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Should the NBA go away from "star" advertising

            It should go away from star advertising if it can't pick the right stars, i.e. not bringing attention the ones who deserve it, like Reggie Miller. If they chose the correct type of players, mostly meaning that they look at their character and not only their talent level, I'd be happy. But the NBA doesn't care if I'm happy... I'm just tired of the thugs and criminals being hyped up and being portrayed as role models. It's sickening.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Should the NBA go away from "star" advertising

              Originally posted by vapacersfan
              Let me spell it out for you:

              Apparently its not good enough, as the NBA as it is now, as you correctly stated, is in a bit of a funk.

              And I dont have a problem with advertising stars, I just get tired of seeing nothing but stars and no teams.....
              The NBA's ratings are up this year.

              If its the finals you're referring to, NO non-lakers finals will get as good ratings as a finals including the lakers.

              Its like the world series without the yankees.

              The only way around it is for star-studded teams like phoenix and Miami meet.

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

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

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Should the NBA go away from "star" advertising

                Originally posted by vapacersfan
                Yeah, thats my mistake. I meant the Finals.

                and while i love the NBA and basketball in general, we (NBA basketball) have a lot more problems then just the Lakers not being in the finals.
                Their ratings are going up over the last 2 years, which leads me to believe they are doign a good job of fixing them.

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

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

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Should the NBA go away from "star" advertising

                  Originally posted by vapacersfan
                  I can think of a million others, but two blow-out games, late starts, and annoying as hell pre-game shows that seem to last a century are all I can think of off the top of my head.
                  THe late starts are to pander to the west coast.

                  And as far as blow-outs go, do you want the NBA to start fixing scores?

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

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

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Should the NBA go away from "star" advertising

                    Originally posted by vapacersfan
                    Going from smelly crap to crap that doesnt smell as bad doesnt really impress me all that much. And I am speaking from a business P.O.V.
                    No, the NHL is crap. The NBA isn't crap. The NBA gets ratings. The NBA markets itself well. The NBA gets prime time TV deals. NBA players are the most recognizable athletes in the United States.

                    I'll refrain from calling the NBA crap.

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

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

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Should the NBA go away from "star" advertising

                      Originally posted by vapacersfan
                      I understand the whole west coast thing, its still annoying as hell (and yes, Im bitter since I just started working full time )

                      As for your second question, no. I would just like to see the teams get up for the game a little more. When was the last time one of MJ/Wilts teams got blown out two games in a row in the finals?.............................
                      Wilts teams got their asses kicked all the time, first of all.

                      Secondly, Jordan's Bulls got ****hammered in games 4 and 5 of the 1996 finals at Seattle.

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

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

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Should the NBA go away from "star" advertising

                        The use of star advertising isn't the problem, it's the overuse and overreliance on it. Watching a game between two crappy teams is just as bad as watching a game that has injured or poor playing stars. The NBA now has to make everything into a star vs star battle when it just isn't there or people don't care.
                        Originally posted by Natston;n3510291
                        I want the people to know that they still have 2 out of the 3 T.J.s working for them, and that ain't bad...

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Should the NBA go away from "star" advertising

                          Originally posted by vapacersfan
                          Yeah, thats my mistake. I meant the Finals.

                          and while i love the NBA and basketball in general, we (NBA basketball) have a lot more problems then just the Lakers not being in the finals.

                          The Lakers not being in the finals is def. one cause of poor ratings, but its not the only.

                          I can think of a million others, but two blow-out games, late starts, and annoying as hell pre-game shows that seem to last a century are all I can think of off the top of my head.
                          it seems ur basing ur marketing standpoints based on ur personal opinions and im assuming ur a basketball purist and not really the fan the nba is struggling with....u will watch, as uve basically said, no matter what....ur watching this finals and have readily said u dont like the teams, etc....

                          so ur not the nbas problem....its the other guys....its the ones that probably arent on these message boards....

                          thats why u see the kid rocks etc. before games....trying to get someone other than the hard core fan to watch....

                          people want a specatacle....they want an event....they want a reason to watch....and good basketball-except to the purist, the diehard fan-aint it....

                          they want to be entertained....they want a reason to watch....why do u think people watch kobe and shaq? its sensationalized...its controversy...its a reason to watch....

                          why will millions watch artests next game at the palace?....cause they wanna see what happens....

                          the nba needs much more than the hardcore basketball fan....most 14 year old kids arent hardcore basketball fans....but u know what? the hardore generation now was probably drawn to the game by jordan, bird, magic, etc...

                          you have to begin to watch before u can become a hardcore fan....u have to want to understand more...the stars are too often what brings people in initially....once the nba has their attention, then hopefully some will begin to appreciate the finer things....

                          this is just business in general....you have to get peoples attention....to try ur product....you have to give them a reason to try your product over the other product the consumer has a choice of.....

                          and u dont do this by emphasizing team principles and quality basketball....

                          it has to be much more tantalizing than that...as most wouldnt understand what that is anyway....not the target market anyway....

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Should the NBA go away from "star" advertising

                            Originally posted by Kstat
                            We're getitng a very good idea of what america thinks of "team-based" marketing right now.....

                            Two very good teams, they work hard, play together, and nobody wants to see it.
                            Perhaps it's because they don't know what they're looking at? Just to tie it into the "Cuban Blog" thread, perhaps if the broadcasts did a bit more educating about what the teams do, or should do, then viewers would be more interested in watching it?


                            Kstat: I quoted your post but wasn't aiming that at you. Just a general observation.
                            You're caught up in the Internet / you think it's such a great asset / but you're wrong, wrong, wrong
                            All that fiber optic gear / still cannot take away the fear / like an island song

                            - Jimmy Buffett

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Should the NBA go away from "star" advertising

                              A couple of quick thoughts.... if you are going to market stars then they need to live up to the hype. It wouldn't hurt if they actually raise themselves up to that level rather than being 'annointed'.

                              Secondarily, 'marketing' is a keyword in all of this. Market the teams 'properly'. Educate fans about the game. Get back to fundamental basketball and show it working and why it works.

                              And just because a team has a flashy player it doesn't mean that player can't be fundamentally sound.

                              And let's consider whether the 'star' marketing (as well as 'star' rules... IE: Cutting them slack in the games) have possibly had an effect on the casual fans as well).

                              And as a last thought for this go 'round... Could it be the Pistons and their fans actually did have their image hurt by 11/19 even tho the league went out of their way to minimize damage to Detroit and put the focus on Indiana?

                              -Bball
                              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

                              Working...
                              X