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

04-01-2004

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

  • 04-01-2004

    Minor league plans already in the works

    By Chad Ford
    Thursday, April 1

    NEW YORK -- The NBA held a media event Wednesday to announce the expansion of its international Basketball Without Borders camps to Brazil and South Africa this summer.

    After the event I talked one-on-one with NBA commissioner David Stern about the state of international basketball, the growing tide of teenagers (from the U.S. and abroad) flooding the league and the steps the league was taking to address the issues.

    Stern, in a very candid interview, wavered a little on the league's push for an age limit and said the league intends to collectively bargain with the union to expand the NBDL in an effort to create a true NBA minor league system.

    Here's an edited transcript of what turned into a pretty ground-breaking discussion with the commissioner about the future of the league both here and abroad.

    FORD: This is the first year I can think of that the league will be officially in just about every place in the world. You'll be in Europe, Latin America and Africa doing Basketball Without Borders camps. The league will have exhibition games in China and Russia this year. When are you heading to India?

    STERN: Well, we're talking about India as well. We've begun discussions with some television folks in India about the best way to develop it.

    FORD: Is it safe to say that the league, its general managers and scouts, have caught international fever? There seems to be a growing obsession with all things international.

    STERN: No, I think there's a heavy emphasis on ... I think it's great. You've got GMs going to the McDonald's NBA Classic, the WNBA Final Four, the NBA Final Four, the European Final Four. We have them working in every single direction. They're scouting international players, high school players, women's players, college players.

    FORD: Do you think it's great that they're going to the McDonald's Game?

    STERN: No, I don't think it's great. I think it's life. Everyone knows how I feel about that. If I were a GM and I was being judged on whether I was drafting the best talent available, I'd be scouting the McDonald's game or in Chicago the week before [the EA Roundball Classic]. I wouldn't have a choice.

    FORD: With the influx of international players, some of them rising to a superstar level like Peja Stojakovic, how do they affect the NBA?

    STERN: Well, my own view is that it makes our league more competitive, it makes greater talent available to us, it makes, to many of our fans, the game more interesting, and it opens up markets to us all at the same time.

    FORD: The flood of high school teenagers into the league has been well documented. Now, the international kids are coming younger and younger, too. Darko Milicic turned 18 just a week before the draft. Is that an area of concern?

    STERN: If you were looking at that, so what's the point. The bottom line is whether they can play and whether they can help the team. It's a wonderful meritocracy here. Do you have game? If you do, come on in. If you don't, better watch out.

    FORD: Does it concern you less with the international players, because they are already playing professionally overseas and aren't giving up college or an education?

    STERN: No, I think it would be a good thing to delay it a bit. I don't think there's a difference really between the international players and the domestic players. I suppose speaking directly to the issue, to the extent that you are living an NBA style lifestyle younger, you may be more equipped to handle life. But I don't think it makes that much of a difference.

    FORD: You talk about kids giving up an education ...

    STERN: You never hear me talking about kids giving up their education. Fifty percent of our country doesn't go to college. And of the 50 percent [that do], half of them drop out. I'm not here preaching about the need for a college education.

    FORD: You've been saying for some time that you want a 20-year-old age limit. Is the age limit legal?

    STERN: I know the age limit is legal.

    FORD: What specifically makes you think it's legal?

    STERN: Because it's my area of law, and I know it's legal.

    FORD: I graduated from law school. You can't get specific?

    STERN: We've litigated it. Wood vs. NBA. Brown vs. NFL. I could give you a brief that you can go and study. There is no question that an age limit negotiated as part of a collective bargaining agreement is legal.

    FORD: The Maurice Clarett decision doesn't affect that at all?

    STERN: No. It's a lower court decision. It's wrong.

    FORD: Isn't there other ways, besides an age limit, to address the problem of kids coming into the league too young? Have you thought about a real minor league? About allowing teams to send young players to the D league to speed up their development?

    STERN: Yes. Very much. That's a subject for collective bargaining. We can't do that unilaterally.

    FORD: That's something you want to happen?

    STERN: Yes, and I think it's something that the union may want to happen. The issue is, in pure monetary terms, how do you get a payoff on your investment? To the extent that you have development of players, it's good.

    A lot of people, I see it beginning to percolate. They say, 'You know what I think? I think we should have 15 teams, not six. I think that two NBA teams should share a NBDL team to focus on developing youngsters who would otherwise be sitting on the bench and being unhappy.'

    FORD: And you're for that?

    STERN: I think it should be driven by basketball considerations. I'm for it if the coaches and general managers are for it. To the extent that we can develop and ultimately provide an environment on a national basis where the kind of coaching, training, nutrition and life skills can be taught to youngsters, I think that has something to contribute to the game. I have a feeling that the union leadership will feel the same way.

    FORD: From a marketing standpoint, that also seems like a coup for the league. Fan interest isn't very high in the D league. For the fans to be able to watch young draft picks like Darko Milicic actually get a chance to play would actually turn into more revenue (in the form of ticket sales and TV viewership) for the league.

    STERN: I would tell you that we've demonstrated over the first three years that it's not about the money. It's about the development. Our (developmental) league has been picked clean of executives, of referees, of players by our league and the teams. That's the good news. We're going to make the investment, because developing PR folks, referees, marketing folks, coaches, I think that's great. I suppose we'd sell a few more tickets, but this is the mother lode, the D league is about development.

    FORD: Is it feasible to get to 15 NBDL league teams?

    STERN: I think it's very feasible. I think you'll see us in the course of the next several years go from the south. You will see eventually a Northeastern pod, a Midwestern pod and a Pacific pod. And possibly a Southwestern pod as we fine tune it. We are just getting it right now. We'll be expanding it, over the years, dramatically beyond the Southeast. We actually picked the most difficult area of the country to start, without a minor league basketball tradition, but a good college tradition. We've obviously learned a lot. I think the next phase would be the Midwest or the Northeast.

    FORD: How far along is that?

    STERN: We've already begun discussions about the next area [to expand to].

    FORD: Would that take away your objections to younger players leaving for the NBA? Does the league really need an age limit if a system like you described was in place and giving players the development that they needed both on and off the court?

    STERN: It might. It might. We'd just have to see. It depends upon the union. It's one of a number of moving pieces that has to be worked on to get the right picture. Because frankly, a main concern is the notion of kids, young kids, that the NBA is where they're going to end up. To the extent that they focus on the fact that they could end up in the D league as their career end -- I'm not sure that's what they want. They want to go to the big league, and they just don't have enough opportunity for them to go to the big league. So I don't necessarily like that much.

    FORD: You can't blame the kids that want to come out, especially the kids with real financial concerns and troubles?

    STERN: Correct. I agree. ... You're wearing me out.

    Mutombo still saving the world, one country at a time

    It was no surprise to see our friend, and the NBA's top humanitarian, Dikembe Mutombo at the Basketball Without Borders event. Mutombo has been the leading force in the league for years when it comes to providing aid and basketball clinics to underprivileged kids in Africa and around the world.

    Last year Mutombo began construction of a hospital in his home country of the Congo. He also donated $100,000 to the Ithuteng Trust as part of the NBA's Africa 100 camp.

    The league announced that in addition to returning to South Africa for the second consecutive year, they'll also go to Brazil this year to hold the first ever Basketball Without Borders camp in South America. Mutombo told Insider he'll be there.

    "It was an invitation from Nene to help him expand Basketball Without Borders to his homeland," Mutombo told Insider. "It's a great opportunity."

    Mutombo has never traveled to Brazil, but does speak fluent Portuguese.

    "I love to be out helping in the summer," Mutombo said. "I think we're making a big difference. A lot relates to my own life and the people that reached out to me when I was young and tried to make sure I succeeded in basketball and in my life. Every night when I go to sleep I always feel an obligation to those who didn't make it and for those who have a chance to make it. I came from poverty, I know what poverty is like so I can explain that to them."

    While Mutombo is ecstatic about what the league is doing overseas, he's concerned about the flood of young players coming into the league.

    "It's been bothering me a lot. I understand why they are leaving. I understand their financial responsibilities. The big concern I have is that there is life after basketball. What if they get injured and can't perform at that level anymore. What is the package you have left that guarantees you success in life? Do you have an understanding of outside life? Georgetown gave me all the tools to succeed in the NBA and in life."

    ___

    How would a minor league work?

    There's been a movement among GMs for some time to see the league turn the NBDL into something that looks more like a real minor league. Insider first wrote about the issue in January, and since then it's been gaining steam.

    Back in January, we talked to several prominent GMs about what they'd like to see Stern do in the next few years. The collective bargaining agreement is being renegotiated as we speak, and many GMs were against a straight 20-year-old age limit. Instead, they felt that a minor league system would address most, if not all, of the issues teams were currently facing.

    Every GM Insider polled was in favor of some system that allows teams to send young players to a farm team to gain experience. While most agreed that a 29-team minor league system modeled after Major League Baseball wasn't financially feasible, a reworking of the NBDL would help solve the problem. Currently, players under NBA contract are not allowed to play in the NBDL. Many GMs support a system in which each NBDL team serves as a farm team for NBA teams.

    What the GMs are looking for:

    Each NBA team would send young players to a designated NBDL team, along with an assistant coach to monitor the players' development. If the league expands to 15 teams, two NBA teams would share each NBDL team.

    If the player was a first-round pick, he'd continue to be paid at the rookie wage scale. If the player was a second-round pick or free agent, he would have a split contract that paid him different amounts depending on whether he was in the NBA or NBDL.

    Teams retain the rights to all of their players and could recall them at any time.

    The move likely would coincide with the expansion of the NBA draft to more than the current two rounds. If teams have a place to put players for whom they don't have roster spots, they could theoretically own the rights to more players. Some GMs believe such a system actually would curb the flow of young players into the league. If a teenager knew there was a chance he could be stuck in the D league for a few years, college or international play may be more appealing.

    Someone is going to have to pay for such a league, and you can bet Stern won't foot the bill for 15 D league teams on his own. Don't be shocked if teams were charged a yearly "participation fee" (in the millions) for the right to call up or send down players to their designated D league team.

    What are the likely objections from the union? Historically, the fear has been the coaches could use the league as some sort of punishment for veterans. The players union definitely wants to limit the types of players who could be sent to the D league.

    One idea would be that players with more than three years' experience under the NBA umbrella couldn't be assigned to the NBDL against their will. However a veteran coming off an injury or in a slump could ask to spend time in the D league at their choosing.

    Another idea the union could push for is that teams could never send first-round picks down without the player's consent.

    The union also probably would limit the amount of time a team can keep lower picks down in the NBDL without calling them up to the pros. The union is obviously in favor of increasing player movement and giving players opportunities to make the NBA with other teams, even if they can't crack the top 12 on the team that drafted them. They likely would insist a team call up a player after two or three years or lose their rights to him.
    Mickael Pietrus Le site officiel

  • #2
    Re: 04-01-2004

    Ford wouldn't think what Stern said was so "ground-breaking" if only he'd read my report from last week. ed: :P
    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 04-01-2004

      hehe.

      There was a good interview with Stern in SLAM a few months back. Part of it was online for a while, but I'm not sure it's still on their site.
      Mickael Pietrus Le site officiel

      Comment

      Working...
      X