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

Article on NBA attendance - some Pacers attendance discussion

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

  • Article on NBA attendance - some Pacers attendance discussion

    http://www.nola.com/printer/printer....l=1&thispage=2


    N.O. isn't only struggling NBA market
    Losing teams seeing fans' interest wane

    Thursday, February 14, 2008

    By John Reid


    As the national media turns its attention to New Orleans for All-Star Weekend, the spotlight has been focused on the Hornets' attendance problems.

    Although the Hornets have struggled to fill the New Orleans Arena in their first full season back from a two-year Hurricane Katrina-forced exile to Oklahoma City, they aren't the only NBA team with attendance issues.

    New Orleans, Philadelphia and Indiana are among the eight teams that are averaging fewer than 15,000 fans per game as the league enters its All-Star break. The other teams are Charlotte (14,577), Minnesota (14,400), Sacramento (13,898), Seattle (13,375), and Memphis (12,758). But the Hornets are the only team with a winning record.

    However, with the Hornets pushing near the top of the Western Conference standings and having Chris Paul and David West participating in Sunday's All-Star Game and Hornets Coach Byron Scott coaching the West team, the team has experienced a slight attendance spike.

    Hornets spokesman Harold Kaufman said the team has averaged 15,150 in the past five home games, which includes a sellout against the low-wattage Memphis Grizzlies last Saturday.

    The team's attendance has attracted more scrutiny lately because of the amended lease agreement the franchise signed with the state last month that calls for the team to average 14,735 fans through next season to prevent an opt-out clause from kicking in.

    "We are focusing in on what we're trying to achieve here and our level of success," Hornets President Hugh Weber said this week. "Even before our agreement with the state came out, we've been very consistent that getting attendance and fans engaged with our team was important."

    Hornets owner George Shinn has stressed that if the Hornets don't meet that criteria, he would push to renegotiate with the state, not move the franchise. If Shinn was to exercise the opt-out option, he would have to buy out minority partner Gary Chouest's 25 percent and pay back inducements he's received from the state and other penalties. The total cost of leaving New Orleans could be near $100 million.

    Overall the Hornets rank 29th in attendance with a 12,645 per game average at the Arena. That's a significant drop from the 17,830 they averaged last season in Oklahoma City.

    Last month Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban spoke out about the Hornets' attendance woes. Cuban said he did not think Shinn was making a concerted effort to get 16,000 to 17,000 to the Arena on a regular basis. When Cuban was asked in an e-mail to respond about some of the other franchises having attendance problems, he declined comment but said he wants stability across the league.

    "It's so annoying and frustrating because we have people busting their tails, and there are people who haven't spent any time here and do not understand this market or the circumstances that start telling us how to run our franchise or how to rebuild our city," Shinn said last week. "A lot of us have to look beyond all that stuff and quit letting other people pull us down."

    The Pacers, traditionally one of the league's top teams, rank last among the league's 30 teams with a 12,260 per-game average. They are drawing 3,099 fewer fans than they did last season when they averaged 15,359 per game and ranked 28th.

    "We feel our numbers will come up, we have a rich basketball history, and we think the style we're playing, up-tempo, will help bring people back," said Larry Mago, the Pacers' senior vice president of marketing. "It's not just our record, these are not great economic times right now in north-central Indiana. But we view this as a slight bump rather than a long-term problem."

    With the best record in the league at 40-9, the Boston Celtics have regularly played before near-capacity crowds. One of the exceptions, though, came when Boston went to Indianapolis in November. Instead of a sellout, they played before just 12,143 fans in the 18,345-seat Canseco Fieldhouse.

    Since that game, crowds in Indianapolis have not increased even when Los Angeles Lakers star Kobe Bryant or the Cleveland Cavaliers' LeBron James have come to town. In Bryant's only visit to Indiana on Nov. 20, the announced crowd was 11,577. Five days later when James arrived, only 11,603 showed.

    "No. 1 the Pacers are not winning, and No. 2 it's their personnel, some of their players have been in trouble with the law off and on, doing stupid things and they should know better," said Frank Ricks, a Pacers fan who works at the Benjamin Harrison YMCA in Indianapolis. "We used to be a winning franchise, and we're not winning any more, and that has turned some people away."


    In Memphis, the Grizzlies are struggling to attract a fan base after having two consecutive losing seasons. They are drawing less than the University of Memphis men's basketball team, which is averaging 17,404 through 14 home games.

    In Seattle, owner Clay Bennett has already filed relocation papers for Oklahoma City. When the Hornets played in Seattle, one of the lone ticket-takers at KeyArena was reading a book in the booth because of the inactivity. The next day, only 11,968 attended the game.

    "I think the biggest failure is continuing to believe in the thinking that's what happened in the past will continue to make them successful," said Lee Igel, an assistant professor in sports management at New York University. "The NBA has not transcended its marketing plans since Michael Jordan. It's very much a team sport, but they continue to market mostly their individual stars."

    From the Eastern Conference to the Western Conference, a number of franchises are attempting to get their fan base engaged, but are struggling to make it happen. When the Hornets played the Philadelphia 76ers on Nov. 11 at the Wachovia Center in Philadelphia, there were entire sections of empty seats in the upper level. The announced crowd that night was 10,014, the smallest crowd the Hornets have played before on the road this season.

    In 2003-04, Philadelphia ranked fourth in the league in attendance, averaging 19,222 per game. During that season, the fans would get so loud that former Hornets coach Tim Floyd would have to shout during every timeout so his players could hear him. It was the same way the previous season, when Philadelphia ranked fourth and eliminated the Hornets in the first round of the playoffs.

    Now the 76ers players are lucky to hear anything. The franchise -- which traded longtime star Allen Iverson last season -- is averaging 13,178 per game. On an average, the Wachovia Center is being filled to 64 percent capacity, which ranks last in the league.

    "Teams that are not winning are going through the life cycle of events that all franchises have, that they get bad and their payrolls go down, their season-ticket base falls off and their attendance drops, but as the draft comes it replenishes them," NBA Commissioner David Stern said Wednesday. "We'll see, it does takes a few years."

    Former coach and star player Doug Collins, an analyst for TNT, said Philadelphia is among the three teams that are vital in ensuring the league's success. The Celtics and New York Knicks are the other two, he said. The Knicks have the second-worst record in the Eastern Conference at 15-36, but they are averaging 18,978, the 11th best in the league.

    "These are the most storied franchises and the greatest players ever to play," said Collins, who played for the 76ers. "When no one talks about them, that hurts the NBA because we need those teams to be good. We need those cities, those feel-good teams, because of what they've done in the history of the NBA."

    Similar to Philadelphia, Sacramento was once the model of consistency for sellout crowds. From Nov. 26, 1999 to Nov. 7, 2007, they had 354 consecutive sellouts at Arco Arena. The streak ended at this season's opener in November when 14,908 showed up to see the Kings play the defending champion San Antonio Spurs at the 17,317-seat Arena.

    "If I lived in Sacramento and the (Kings) were playing the way they are playing (now), I would drive down to Golden State and go see (the Warriors play)," TNT studio analyst Kenny Smith said Tuesday.

    "If I lived in Indiana and (the Pacers) were playing the way they are playing, I would drive over to Indiana U and see Eric Gordon play. If I'm a basketball fan, I'll go find good basketball. I'm not going to pay my money and see guys who aren't playing well. When you're a good team, you don't have to worry about people coming to see you."

  • #2
    Re: Article on NBA attendance - some Pacers attendance discussion

    11,603 for Lebron is an ****ing joke.

    What's wrong with yall?
    Read my Pacers blog:
    8points9seconds.com

    Follow my twitter:

    @8pts9secs

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Article on NBA attendance - some Pacers attendance discussion

      This will be the trend in sports I feel for a long time. The economy is just so horrible.

      The problem is the Pacers have lost the younger crowd. That is why they have went to the theatrics. There are no likeable players. Granger is good, but how has he been marketed. And if you market a decent player what happens if that person goes all Tinsley on us.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Article on NBA attendance - some Pacers attendance discussion

        Perhaps this is a discussion for another thread and another forum, but the economy is not horrible. certain aspects of the economy are not great right now, but that will change and overall the economy isn't bad

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Article on NBA attendance - some Pacers attendance discussion

          I go to like one Pacer game a year (sometimes two if they're offering free tickets) to see a team I really want to see. I used to hold off because ticket prices were a little out of my range. But since the Brawl I have to say it's not hard to go to a Pacer game at all. The gas to get there from Richmond costs more than the seats themselves. I was at the Boston game the other night and had the best seats I've ever had (section 11, row 16) and it cost less than nose bleed seats for a Colts game.

          I understand why people don't go. The team isn't winning and people are tired of the player's antics, but it really is a golden age for cheap *** basketball fans. It's pretty sad when they practically give away tickets and people still don't go. There really isn't a bad seat in the house.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Article on NBA attendance - some Pacers attendance discussion

            Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
            11,603 for Lebron is an ****ing joke.

            What's wrong with yall?
            Because the fans that attend Pacer games are Pacer fans not LeBron fans.

            I can only go to a couple games a year, who they are playing matters not to me. I want to see the P's dominate.
            "He wanted to get to that money time. Time when the hardware was on the table. That's when Roger was going to show up. So all we needed to do was stay close"
            Darnell Hillman (Speaking of former teammate Roger Brown)

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Article on NBA attendance - some Pacers attendance discussion

              Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
              11,603 for Lebron is an ****ing joke.

              What's wrong with yall?
              Were busy teaching our children proper English.
              Bambam

              Follow me on Twitter @http://twitter.com/brockhubble

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Article on NBA attendance - some Pacers attendance discussion

                Originally posted by aceace View Post
                Because the fans that attend Pacer games are Pacer fans not LeBron fans.
                I see the wink. But really...

                What happened to Indiana being the Mecca of basketball? If yall can't pony up $25 to go see the best player in the world (or at least co-best) than you forfeit that title.
                Read my Pacers blog:
                8points9seconds.com

                Follow my twitter:

                @8pts9secs

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Article on NBA attendance - some Pacers attendance discussion

                  Originally posted by bambam View Post
                  Were busy teaching our children proper English.
                  I suggest focusing on contractions.
                  Read my Pacers blog:
                  8points9seconds.com

                  Follow my twitter:

                  @8pts9secs

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Article on NBA attendance - some Pacers attendance discussion

                    So does that shoot a hole in the theory that people will come out to see Vince Carter when (if) we trade for him?
                    Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Article on NBA attendance - some Pacers attendance discussion

                      Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                      I suggest focusing on contractions.

                      No, just breath through the contractions...

                      puff puff ahhh
                      puff puff ahhh
                      Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Article on NBA attendance - some Pacers attendance discussion

                        Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                        11,603 for Lebron is an ****ing joke.

                        What's wrong with yall?
                        We care more about the game than individual players...?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Article on NBA attendance - some Pacers attendance discussion

                          Originally posted by Shade View Post
                          We care more about the game than individual players...?
                          Okay.

                          Why not come see the Celtics and Spurs then?

                          Our attendance is lower than New Orleans and Seattle, one which recently lost half its population and has an economy in shambles, and the other whose owner is trying to move the team.
                          Last edited by JayRedd; 02-14-2008, 02:07 PM.
                          Read my Pacers blog:
                          8points9seconds.com

                          Follow my twitter:

                          @8pts9secs

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Article on NBA attendance - some Pacers attendance discussion

                            Indianapolis is a terrible NBA city - There probably shouldn't be an NBA team here
                            Last edited by Unclebuck; 02-14-2008, 03:26 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Article on NBA attendance - some Pacers attendance discussion

                              Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                              I see the wink. But really...

                              What happened to Indiana being the Mecca of basketball? If yall can't pony up $25 to go see the best player in the world (or at least co-best) than you forfeit that title.
                              Considering that IU, Purdue, Butler, and Notre Dame are all ranked I'd say a lot of us would rather go watch them play. Heck, I'd rather go watch a bunch of 6th graders play than [insert argument about how much it costs to go to a professional basketball game].

                              And why should I pay $25 to go to a game I can sit at home and watch for the price of my DirecTv? If the game stinks I can just change the channel or go to bed.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X