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

BIG NEWS OF THE DAY...NBA games on google.com for $3.95

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

  • #16
    Re: BIG NEWS OF THE DAY...NBA games on google.com for $3.95

    WAY TOO MUCH MONEY!!!

    A basketball game is worth $1 tops.

    That way, you could get an entire season (including playoffs) for about $100 for 1 team. That's a price that many would pay. More popular historic games would bring in greater profits simply from increased sales.

    Four bucks is a major rip-off.
    “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

    “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: BIG NEWS OF THE DAY...NBA games on google.com for $3.95

      When you download an album illegally you're stealing their work without them getting the money they would have got if you bought the CD. Saying it's not stealing is splitting hairs.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: BIG NEWS OF THE DAY...NBA games on google.com for $3.95

        Originally posted by unstandable
        When you download an album illegally you're stealing their work without them getting the money they would have got if you bought the CD. Saying it's not stealing is splitting hairs.
        Two major differences. If you go into a store and steal a CD, they actually aren't able to sell that copy. So the store (and the label) actually lost something. If you get caught, it's a misdemeanor and a small fine.

        If you download a single 15-track CD off the internet, nobody has lost anything. The store can still sell the CD. But you're liable for $3,000,000 in damages ($200,000 per track) plus jail time.

        Does that seem odd to you?
        This space for rent.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: BIG NEWS OF THE DAY...NBA games on google.com for $3.95

          I think the idea with the large fine is that it's much harder to catch online downloaders than it is to catch shoplifters, so they want to hit the ones they do catch really hard in order to scare off others (and to compensate for all the money they lose on those who download albums and aren't caught).

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: BIG NEWS OF THE DAY...NBA games on google.com for $3.95

            Copyrights are getting out of hand, big business is too paranoid about losing a buck. It just keeps getting worse. It started along time ago, big business tried to stop the VCR from being released because they feared people would just copy stuff and never buy. They were wrong then and they are wrong in the new digital age. Every new law that comes out is for big business, period, the consumers keep getting screwed and technology gets stifled.

            Now the TV stations want to digitally flag certain shows making it impossible to record, once again screwing the consumer. The new flag was stuck down for now. Just you wait though, big business will win, they'll pay off enough politicians till they get it passed. I pay over 100 bucks a month for satellite and over 60 for cable, so I can get every possible station. As long as I'm not making money off of it I should be able to do what I want, especially commercial TV. Music company's don't even want people to use 30 second clips of songs for ring tones on your cell phone without paying. Bars can get in trouble for using songs on a freaking karaoke machine if they don't follow the proper rules.

            It's illegal to copy a DVD that you own, not to sell or make money in anyway, just to copy for your own personal use. The download services for songs and albums make way to many stupid rules about what you can and can't do with what you have already payed for.

            I've never stole anything from a person or store in my life. As kids we'd ride our bikes to the local convenient store to buy candy and stuff. I had several friends that would take a candy bar or something small like that, not me I've never stole anything.

            Yes I do download stuff like movies and songs on occasions, call it stealing if you want I really don't give a flying ****. I own over 300+ CD's, 250+ DVD's and I still buy the ones I really like even though I could DL them all for free. I've downloaded plenty of stuff that I've later bought. The stuff I've DLed and did not buy, I would not have bought to begin with.

            "They" have actually made more money from me because of downloading.
            "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: BIG NEWS OF THE DAY...NBA games on google.com for $3.95

              Originally posted by vapacersfan™
              I cant see the point of this service.

              I just dont see the point of watching a game after the completion of the game if I know the score.
              REALLY???

              I don't know, I love analysing game play, even if it's a 20 year old game.
              “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

              “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: BIG NEWS OF THE DAY...NBA games on google.com for $3.95

                Originally posted by rabidpacersfan
                No one has said that copyright infringement is right.

                They're just saying that it is different from stealing.

                And it is.

                The difference (restating here):

                When you "steal" something from somebody, the original owner doesn't have that thing anymore. For example, if I steal your car, you no longer have your car. That's obvious enough.

                When you infringe a copyright, you are not necessarily stealing anything from anyone. If I illegally download an mp3, for example, the original copyright holder(s) of the song still have their song, and they still have just as many copies of it as they did before I downloaded it.

                Is copyright infringement illegal? Yes. Is it wrong? Possibly. But is it "STEALING?"

                NO. BY DEFINITION, IT IS NOT STEALING. IT'S DIFFERENT.

                Whether or not stealing is morally equivalent to copyright infringement is another story, and there should be a genuine debate there, but I can certainly sympathize with people who are sick of hearing somebody equate the two automatically whenever a discussion about copyright infringment/downloading comes up. BECAUSE THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.

                So, by your analogy, if I take your call while you're at work, drive it around all day, but fill up the tank and put it back in its spot by 5pm, it isn't stealing.

                Remember, it isn't just big companies that lose money when you use technology to rob them, it's also composers, authors, musicians, and other artists. I am a member of ASCAP, and substantial chunk of my income comes from royalties. That includes royalties from recordings. It may not seem like it when you download a copy of something, but you are literally taking money out of my pocket.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: BIG NEWS OF THE DAY...NBA games on google.com for $3.95

                  Originally posted by 3Ball
                  So, by your analogy, if I take your call while you're at work, drive it around all day, but fill up the tank and put it back in its spot by 5pm, it isn't stealing.

                  Remember, it isn't just big companies that lose money when you use technology to rob them, it's also composers, authors, musicians, and other artists. I am a member of ASCAP, and substantial chunk of my income comes from royalties. That includes royalties from recordings. It may not seem like it when you download a copy of something, but you are literally taking money out of my pocket.
                  Your analogy goes even more limp then the one you are reacting to, because what you are proposing is defined by law as "joy-riding" and is not the same as stealing.

                  First let me address the "service": ridiculously priced, think for two seconds, and if you're slow, take 10 minutes; Everyone in the USA with coverage can buy NBA League pass for $ 165 a year, see what? most games every day.
                  That is roughly 1200 games a year, so the price for the commodity is set at $ 0.15 per game.
                  Now because it is delivered over the internet, we add the bandwidth cost, let's say a game is streaming in real time, that would be approx 24kbps adn now let's make it a crappy system (unlikely, this is google we're talking about) and it uses 128 kbps, the game lasts 3 hours, so you have used ? 2.1 Gb. 1 Mbps in the USA costs between $ 65 and $ 165 p/m which gives you approx 333 Gb, so let's say $ 150 for 300 Gb which makes for $ 1 at most on "cost bandwidth" (in actual fact, it will be closer to $ 0.05) so we have a cost price at most, excluding "rights" of $ 1.15 and most likely of $ 0.30
                  ........Nice profit, where do I sign up?
                  The upload you say? desktop computer from any venue at the same speed as above to the servers of google, uhh adsl will more then do the job.
                  Daylight robbery for "archived" games as my example deals with "live" games.
                  Let's face it, watching only the P's games would cost me $ 320 a season, EXCLUDING the playoffs.

                  That brings me to the agreement with the point that "copyright" (more specifically Intellectual Property rights) is totally out of control, they control US government (don't bother arguing they don't, that's a total waste of time) They, through that, control the courts.

                  You are btw fully entitled to make a copy of a CD you buy, for your own use.
                  You are fully entitled to lend your property to 3rd parties, though they would like to change the laws in that aspect as well.
                  You are fully entitled to record TV programs, be it movies, shows or whatever and watch it at your convenience, you are entitled to watch your telly with your friends, (though they would like to change the law on that as well) all as long as you do not charge money or do it for "profit".

                  Now since you are claiming that your income is based on royalties and henceforth you are being robbed by illegal copies of your work, first see what I wrote above about legal copies, before you start arguing.
                  Then next tell me what he percentage is you get of the CD or Book or Movie that is sold on your behalf, beacuse there are "numbers" available for that in the music industry and I wont bother you with the *******ly theft of the recording industry of artists and their "back catalogues" but just he current ones.

                  I do not know what you pay for a CD, but in the UK they are about $ 17 a pop.
                  Of that money the costprice of the cd itself is $ 0.0002 printing it, packaging etc $ 0.15
                  margin for shopkeeper about $ 4 and transport, advertising (if any because only the "main" releases are done that way) etc will come to a maximum of $ 0.75 per cd, which very roughly including margin bring the price of a cd to $ 5
                  that leaves $ 12 for the recording company and the artist.
                  The artists usually get around 10 % of that, more for "top" and less for "starters"

                  What is told to us is that sales went down dramatically after the illegal copying took of on the internet, what they fail to tell is that the 10% lower sales numbers do not account for the fact that they released 70% less titles.

                  What they do not mention is the income from blank tapes, for which part of the price is made up of royalties for whatever is going to be on it, even if it is your own work.
                  What they do not mention is that they get money for "airplay"; every radio station, dj, store, elevator and whatever entitiy that plays music so other people can hear it, has to pay a royalties fee.
                  What they fail to mention is that the resurgence of their back catalogues, which sales they usually forget to mention to the artists, or claim that is was already paid and is "old stock", has fattened their bank accounts to obnoxious hights. which only came to live when people started downloading music.
                  What they fail to mention is the number of people who download a track and buy the album, something I'm sure everyone here has done at one time or another.
                  What they fail to mention is that most artists nowadays charge us through the roof for the live performances, seeing as that is the only part of their business making money.
                  Consider the amount of cd's sold by U2, the amount of royalties coming in from airplay and yet most of their income comes from live performances, can you still defend that industry that is so clearly robbing everyone involved?

                  I am simply amazed that not far more artists follow Eno's and Prince's example and sell their own tunes via the net, $ 2.95 for a full Prince album is a great deal imo.



                  Way to go Robin Hood!
                  So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                  If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                  Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: BIG NEWS OF THE DAY...NBA games on google.com for $3.95

                    Very good post able!
                    I'll add that to get an original cd or dvd legaly we must pay 18% tax (plus 3$ - 9$ shipment). So, I must pay ~20% more than americans with my salary of 350$ (i am working at university). And to get a production from inside costs even more (not to mention that there is very little original production - mostly a production with a quality ripped out because of the localisation). This is how we are encouraged to buy the legal production.
                    And, btw we pay 7% authorship tax for hdd (as we will make copies there - legal and illegal ones)
                    I'm really sorry because of my english (which is my 3-4 language) and I really appreciate Your patience. I hope this board will make me better

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: BIG NEWS OF THE DAY...NBA games on google.com for $3.95

                      Originally posted by Los Angeles
                      WAY TOO MUCH MONEY!!!

                      A basketball game is worth $1 tops.

                      That way, you could get an entire season (including playoffs) for about $100 for 1 team. That's a price that many would pay. More popular historic games would bring in greater profits simply from increased sales.

                      Four bucks is a major rip-off.

                      That is a great point. If that was the case, I'd load up with games too.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X