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

IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

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

  • #31
    Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

    Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
    They don't care about precedence...they care about image and where every dollar they spend goes. Believe me...EVERY dollar. THey are the big fish in the pond and they know it.
    We can agree to disagree.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

      Originally posted by Twes View Post
      You know I didn’t grow up here. I have the luxury of neutrality in the IU verses Purdue rivalry in this state. I have just as many friends from one as the other.

      But I wonder if Bill Benner had been in his current role during the Bob Knight years would he have written about how the state should rally around him as he is an asset to the University and community. Come on people you have no clue what it takes to win at the division one basketball university level. Oh no wait, he was trying to make a name for himself as a newsman back then so he spoke his mind.

      I'm sorry I call their bluff on this.

      If they honestly think the fans here are the problem I think they are in for a rude awakening.

      If they think they can find a better place to run an NBA team then let them do it.

      And of course it has to be racially motivated. That’s all we are here in central Indianala - a bunch of redneck racists. If you have any dissatisfaction with the team it’s the fact your racist roots are showing.

      I'm sorry but that's out of line.

      I was holding onto the Bob Knight thing...you got in the first punch with that.
      Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

        Originally posted by dcpacersfan View Post
        We can agree to disagree.

        agreed



        but I'm right
        Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

          Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
          agreed



          but I'm right
          You can keep thinking that

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

            As someone said: Job loss state wide has a huge effect on where entertainment dollars are spent. I recently heard a well known economist admit that unemployment could be 20% or higher within a year. People are scared to spend their money right now.
            I can watch on TV and save $50 and not get home at midnight. The Pacers would make a nice profit if they only had to pay players who actually played.
            "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


            • #36
              Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

              Originally posted by aceace View Post
              As someone said: Job loss state wide has a huge effect on where entertainment dollars are spent. I recently heard a well known economist admit that unemployment could be 20% or higher within a year. People are scared to spend their money right now.
              I can watch on TV and save $50 and not get home at midnight. The Pacers would make a nice profit if they only had to pay players who actually played.
              20% - no way - it won't get anywhere near that universe. If an economist actually believes that then that tells me he is not a good economist. (but then don't get me started on how the media reports on the economy).

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

                So it's the fans fault, and were all a bunch of racists? Benner can KMA.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

                  There are times when an article like this would have some merit, but for the Indiana Pacers as of right now, I think this article is way off base. If this were an instance like Peck describes, where fans are staying away just because the Pacers are losing, then this article would have some validity. In realtiy though, the dissonance between the Pacers and its fanbase, is so much greater.

                  This reeks purely of spin, IMO, for no other reason then the fact the article is so unbalanced. He glosses over the off-court issues non-chalantly in a few sentences. There have been several instances, with quite a few players...if you throw in Artest and Jackson...in total 5 players with significant issues. It goes beyond the events themselves. The behavior has been repeated, and so far, managment has offered nothing but words. Words only go so far. Especially when the cycle repeats itself with seemingly no end in sight. He way understates this stuff in my opinion.

                  The franchise gets ran into the ground, and it's the fan's fault? I am sorry...I am not buying it. There is a gargantuan difference between supporting a team through its ups and downs and enduring what fans of this franchis have been through the last few years. The only possible fair comparison would be Portland...since that is a small market team that has endured similar circumstances. I endured those crappy Colts teams, and supported those crappy teams proudly, but even though they were losing, there wasn't this constant PR nightmare going on.

                  Then to take a shot that Indy isn't a great sports town. It is like trying to rub the fan's noses in it, for a pile they didn't make. I don't think that is fair.

                  I don't see Indy as a bad sports town. The reality is that it is a small market sports town, and because of that, it is going to be more susceptible to swings regarding poor PR or the local economy. You have both of those going on right now. There is alot that people have to think about. If you have limited income...do you pay for the Colts or the Pacers? What if you can't afford both? Who would you rather take your kid to see?

                  I debated whether to type this, but the other thing I don't like that he slid in there was the race related comment. The Pacer players that are currently vilified by the fan base are viewed this way because of their actions. There unfortunately are always going to be some racist individuals who are going to incorporate their skewed views when appraising a person. I think, and hope that contingency makes up a small portion of the fans who are currenlty disenfranchised with this team. BTW...I am being totally serious here...is thug really a racist code word...or is the connotation of using that word to describe a few Pacer players the racism that Benner is alluding to? I am assuming it is the latter...but maybe I am getting old and language refrences have changed.
                  When you're playing against a stacked deck, compete even harder. Show the world how much you'll fight for the winners circle. If you do, someday the cellophane will crackle off a fresh pack, one that belongs to you, and the cards will be stacked in your favor.
                  -Pat Riley

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

                    For me, the issue isn't the Colts (bless their success, all the same) nor is it about the kind of town Indy is or isn't. Anyone can write a blog that says Indy is out-of-line. It's a cheap shot. Look, a pair of seats in the lower bowl -- Section 5 -- cost about $12,000. I'm tired of spending that kind of money for below average entertainment. I'm also ticked that Circle City is selling the seats on either side of me for less than half what I've paid. I've given up hope because management has promised improvements for several years but hasn't delivered. Why should I believe them any longer? For me, the issue is the product. I don't enjoy watching players that wouldn't start on any playoff bound team chuck 3's and then after no rebound, run back to watch the other team score. I'm tired of depending upon players who miss huge numbers of games, not just one season but year-after-year. I'm also tired of people like Brenner telling me that I'm a 'bad fan' because I'm unhappy. The bottom line is this. The 'product' is not entertaining and it's not fun to watch. It's really that simple. Until it is, Indy nor any other community is going to spend real money to go to the games. Go Butler! Go IU! Go Purdue!

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

                      I am a diehard, thick and thin Pacers fan, who loved them before the good times. It pains me to see what's going on, and I still tune in every opportunity I can. I root for the team, more than the players. But I don't fault those who stay away due to the poor product on the floor. It's your money; do with it what you will. The fact of the matter is that there are fair weather fans in every sports city, not just Indianapolis. The thing I hate is that we have a tendency to color the whole by the actions of a few parts. Dunleavy, Granger, Diener, Murphy, JO, Graham, Rush, Foster, Owens, Flip, these guys have done nothing wrong, and yet they're the ones being punished. They have to play in a half-dead arena, and listen to the "thug" talk every day. You think it's hard for them to perform? In any event, there are some fans who will be there until the end, who are willing to see this through. So, it's not fair to label everyone fairweather.

                      Benner makes some valid points, but overall his article conveniently leaves out the legal aspects. When you look at teams like the Packers, where that's the only game in town, you're more likely to have the loyalty, no matter what. But when you have other alternatives competing for your entertainment value, people aren't going to just show up. The fan reaction has more to do with offcourt mayhem, rather than oncourt issues. Murderers? Rapists? Strippers? Car chases, complete with shootouts? Is this Lethal Weapon 5? Where are Riggs and Murtaugh?
                      Last edited by NapTonius Monk; 03-11-2008, 02:49 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

                        I usually hate whenever anyone uses the race card - but if you don't think race is an issue in the way people feel about the NBA in this city - then you haven't lived here very long. Indianapolis has never been an NBA city, sure they were a pacers city for a few years, but this city has never "bought into" the NBA - and yes race is an issue in that.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

                          Originally posted by Speed View Post
                          If the Simons do sell after such a short down tick, that would trouble me anyway.
                          I suspect (and remember, I'm one of the prime Team Sale Chicken Littles here) that the need to sell the team would have little to do with the down tick and more to do with the combination of losses, age, and health. If the Simons weren't willing to stick with the team just due to attendance and money issues, they'd have sold it long before '94. After 25 years, though, they might be figuring it's time to move on. Unfortunately, that's coinciding with more and more bad ****.
                          BillS

                          A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                          Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

                            Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
                            Putnam. This is not meant to disparage, I would sincerly like to see the data if available. It would geive me a lot of hope for the future if I could see this for myself. I know Rolls is going ganbusters but who else? We can discuss this in PM if you so wish.

                            I understand why you would paint the picture that part of the issue is financial...but I don't think that is it.

                            Think about this: Michigan has the highest unemployment rate in the country but the Pistons are still the leaders in NBA attendance.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                              I usually hate whenever anyone uses the race card - but if you don't think race is an issue in the way people feel about the NBA in this city - then you haven't lived here very long. Indianapolis has never been an NBA city, sure they were a pacers city for a few years, but this city has never "bought into" the NBA - and yes race is an issue in that.
                              I couldn't disagree with you more.

                              I agree a lot of people are sick to death of the NBA. But it has more to do with one on one basketball and players that make too much money to be coached than race.

                              It has to do with NBA players getting spanked in world competition.

                              This whole image of players can do no wrong is garbage.

                              I couldn't care less what race or hairstyle or how many tattoo’s a guy has. It's insulting to me to paint everyone with that brush.

                              If ratings were based on race the NFL would be in the tank and we all know that isn't true.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: IBJ: A "real" sports town wouldn't abandon the Pacers

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                                I usually hate whenever anyone uses the race card - but if you don't think race is an issue in the way people feel about the NBA in this city - then you haven't lived here very long. Indianapolis has never been an NBA city, sure they were a pacers city for a few years, but this city has never "bought into" the NBA - and yes race is an issue in that.
                                There is an element of race in many things, but I think the main thing is that pro basketball arrived on the scene much later in Indiana than its storied college and high school programs.

                                Charlotte, which plays in a college basketball rich state, has pretty much the same issues regarding the NBA and the league has really struggled to establish itself there. In the grand scheme of things, the Pacers have done a good job entrenching themselves in a market for that that's inherently hard to crack.
                                Last edited by d_c; 03-11-2008, 03:06 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X