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

Montieths got some ideas to share with us....

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

  • #46
    Re: Montieths got some ideas to share with us....

    I like your idea, Bball.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Montieths got some ideas to share with us....

      First off I think that the canned noise sucks to true basketball fans who post on these message boards but I don't know what the average Joe might think...maybe average Joe likes canned noise when he's payin' 20 or so dollars for a game?

      Next, the 24 second clock is long enough..how many Shot-Clock violations happen in a game? Maybe 2?..35 seconds is in Mens NCAA basketball and its so long it gets boring, 30 seconds is in WOMENS NCAA and I guess no one complains about that ..right, let's align the NBA with Women's NCAA basketball, good call on that! If anything it should be 35 seconds, and then I feel like I could go to the pisser, get some nachos, and saunter back to my seat before SJax goes one-on-one and misses a layin.

      I completely agree w/ the defense issues, that is long overdue.

      A 60 game schedule isn't needed, especially since the NBA is in large markets all over the country for the most part. Las Vegas is going to get a franchise and they'll probably want 100 games in a season. I see what your'e saying, but why not just make it 80 games? or 70 even..why is 60 the magic number? In fact, the 60 game schedule could even lower attendance because it means fewer weekend games for each team!!

      Yah, it might be cool in retrospect that they used that kinda ball in the ABA..but wait, what happened to the ABA again? Casual audiences might like it, me..I'd be pissed.

      Just my couple'a'cents!

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Montieths got some ideas to share with us....

        If you're down w/ Capitalism you're ok w/ whatever players make. Side with management until you're blue in the face, but the MARKET dictates what those players are worth!

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Montieths got some ideas to share with us....

          Yeah, that's exactly what I want: a team full of players that stat-pad for all they're worth because if they don't their team will cut them. Team play would fly right out the window. It's dispicable.

          Again, it's more or less petty jealously of what athletes make. It doesn't help the game, it only hurts the players. It's a way of making people feel better about themselves because they're upset that athletes don't have the same rules at their jobs as the average joe. Well wake up and smell the coffee.

          BTW, a great actor can make as much moeny in one movie as an athlete makes in 6 years. No real difference.

          I'll say it again: it's incredibly unfair that two parties sign a contract and only one party is required to honor it. It creates people like Terrell Owens. Heck, the entire NBA would by teaming with Owens-clones. Half the freaking league wold hold out during training camp to re-negotiate their contracts every summer.

          God forbid we actually allow people to earn as much money as they can in a captialist society. Even David Stern is a HUGE advocate of guarenteed contracts, and he's the OWNERS' representative.

          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


          • #50
            Re: Montieths got some ideas to share with us....

            Originally posted by Kstat
            Yeah, that's exactly what I want: a team full of players that stat-pad for all they're worth because if they don't their team will cut them. Team play would fly right out the window. It's dispicable.

            Again, it's more or less petty jealously of what athletes make. It doesn't help the game, it only hurts the players. It's a way of making people feel better about themselves because they're upset that athletes don't have the same rules at their jobs as the average joe. Well wake up and smell the coffee.

            BTW, a great actor can make as much moeny in one movie as an athlete makes in 6 years. No real difference.

            I'll say it again: it's incredibly unfair that two parties sign a contract and only one party is required to honor it. It creates people like Terrell Owens.

            God forbid we actually allow people to earn as much money as they can in a captialist society. Even David Stern is a HUGE advocate of guarenteed contracts, and he's the OWNERS' representative.

            Yet the NFL thrives with just such a system.

            As for the actor analogy- How much money does that movie bring in (in those 6 years counting box office internationally, DVD's, Television (PPV, HBO, broadcast, etc) compared to an NBA game or season? I don't know the answer... I'm asking.

            And I'm pretty it is a pretty short list of actors making anything near what some NBA players make in 6 years. And some actors get their high $$$ by getting a bite of the gross, or net.

            -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


            • #51
              Re: Montieths got some ideas to share with us....

              The NFL thrives because it is the NFL, NOT because of the salary system.

              when the players CBA runs out, there will be hell to pay.

              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


              • #52
                Re: Montieths got some ideas to share with us....

                Originally posted by vapacersfan
                Ignorance..

                Maybe, just maybe it could be fans tired of seeing teams get screwed with players who have one good year then suck for the next 6......

                But no one can disagree with the great Kstat............

                Oh, and I dont buy the argument that every player would pad his stats. As long as the team is winning, good GM's will realize you are a important pience of the puzzle and would keep you around..

                No, ignorance is is assuming that if the players were worried about their jobs every year that they would play better.

                Ignorance is assuming that they players wouldnt have a complete revolt over the owners because only the owners were held to the contracts.

                And yeah, since NFL contacts are so highly incentive-layden as a byproduct of them being non-guarenteed, every player in the league would be stat-padding every night.

                Again, David Stern is the guy mainly RESPONSIBLE for guarenteed contracts. You know, the guy in charge of making thowners happy?

                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


                • #53
                  Re: Montieths got some ideas to share with us....

                  Oh yeah, and if you're sick of signing bad players to long term contracts, DONT SIGN THEM TO LONG TERM CONTRACTS. Nobody held a gun to donnie's head and made him offer bender a long-term deal.

                  Don't hold your GM accountable, or anything....

                  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


                  • #54
                    Re: Montieths got some ideas to share with us....

                    Originally posted by vapacersfan
                    Wow, so now you are putting words into my mouth.

                    SHOW ME WHERE I SHOULD ANYTHING ABOUT ME BEING SICK OF SUCH A THING.

                    Maybe, just maybe it could be fans tired of seeing teams get screwed with players who have one good year then suck for the next 6......
                    Gosh, that didn't take long.....

                    Oh yeah that's right, it wasn't you, it was "fans"

                    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


                    • #55
                      Re: Montieths got some ideas to share with us....

                      http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...87/1004/SPORTS

                      I heistate reviving this thread since it turned into a Kstat-athon but it really is fitting.

                      Stern: NBA may turn off canned music

                      Bloomberg News Service
                      Crowd noise may soon be the only sound at some NBA games.
                      Commissioner David Stern, responding to a question posed during an ESPN online chat, said he's no fan of teams blaring music or sound effects while the game is being played.

                      "We're trying to find a few games to experiment with for teams to give us a 'silent night' so to speak," Stern wrote to the questioner, identified only as JC from Boston.
                      Stern declined to elaborate on the noise-free plan, saying in an e-mail after the chat that he isn't ready to "give up the details yet."
                      During the chat, conducted Thursday, the questioner wrote, "If home fans can't get pumped up and make noise on their own, then there is something really wrong with your league. The game should be the entertainment and able to stand up alone without canned music."
                      Stern responded, "I agree with you. Unfortunately, most of our teams don't and think that the fans like the entertainment."
                      Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban said his team has tried it both ways, and that fans enjoy the noise.
                      "Customers come to have fun. We make sure that is what they get," Cuban said in an e-mail. "We don't sell basketball. We sell sore throats and big smiles on the faces of parents when their kids have a great time at the games."
                      My original comment on the issue was that I could take it or leave it. But realizing that this would mean the end of the Big Ben Gong moves me to the side of being against it. I am surprised that Geezer stopped going to Pacer games because of the race car noises (and don't they still use those? I swear I hear them on telecasts).

                      Also, it doesn't seem hard to believe that next PA announcers will be restricted. Again, I like the Pistons use of things like the Big Ben Gong and while I know rival fans HATE Mason, his routine is loved by many home town fans.

                      Do the Pacers have any/many sound bytes for moments when individual players score? The Big Ben Gong is not the only thing I would miss if this happens.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Montieths got some ideas to share with us....

                        Originally posted by Fool

                        Do the Pacers have any/many sound bytes for moments when individual players score? The Big Ben Gong is not the only thing I would miss if this happens.

                        JAY-OOOHH, JAAYAYA-OOOHH.................
                        Life without water is tough, life without air is hard,life with one leg only is wobbly, Life without Reggie Miller, is impossible.

                        Do Not Trade Austin

                        Originally posted by Conrad Brunner
                        Veteran Austin Croshere, the longest-tenured Pacers player on the roster, has proven reliable when called upon, invariably ready to step in regardless of the circumstance.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X