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

Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

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

  • Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

    It's a Full-Court Press To Lure Fans to Fieldhouse

    May 10, 2008




    The Star's position: Pacers’ leadership team working hard to turn around troubled franchise.

    Herb Simon and Jim Morris want to deliver a message to Pacers fans: They get it.

    In a meeting this week with The Star's Editorial Board, Simon, the Pacers' co-owner and new CEO, and Morris, in charge of the franchise's business operations, acknowledged how far out of favor the team has fallen with the community.

    How bad is it? In a city and state filled with dedicated and knowledgeable basketball fans, the Pacers recorded the worst attendance in the NBA this season.

    Morris, who not long ago was fighting the effects of famine and natural disasters as director of the United Nations' World Food Program, is now battling to restore the tarnished image of a team that he considers an important part of Central Indiana's social and business fabric.

    The franchise's troubles began with the infamous Detroit brawl but have deepened in subsequent years as players became embroiled in several off-the-court scandals.

    It's not surprising then that Morris calls character a paramount consideration in rebuilding the team's roster, including through this year's draft. He noted that when focus groups have been asked to pick between a player with great skills but questionable behavior and one with lesser talent but sound character, the fans chose character.

    Not that winning isn't important in reconnecting with the community. After all, much of the good will the team built up with the city in seasons past grew out of the excitement generated by playoff battles with the Knicks, Bulls and Lakers.

    But fans want a team they can be proud of for excellence on and off the court. To reach that goal, Morris promises to increase the team's involvement in the community and to improve the franchise's support services for young players who must learn to cope with wealth, fame and a multitude of readily available temptations.

    As the team's co-owner, Simon has a personal and financial stake in turning around the franchise, which a few years ago was considered among the NBA's best. He hopes to see improvement on the court next season, but acknowledges that salary-cap constraints could require a three-year rebuilding process.

    Simon also wants fans to understand that another community institution -- the WNBA's Fever -- is entering a period critical to its future. The organization has assembled a championship-caliber roster. Ticket prices are low. Yet attendance must grow if the franchise is to finally break even. Simon's ability to continue writing off the Fever's financial losses is no doubt constrained by the Pacers' problems.

    Two teams. Two sets of challenges. And not much time for either to begin packing fans into the Fieldhouse.

    http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...plate=printart
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I didn't want this to slip between the cracks since this article showed up in the opinion section of Saturday's front page section.
    ...Still "flying casual"
    @roaminggnome74

  • #2
    Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

    Three years later . . . Herb gets it.

    Pretty exciting news.
    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

      I'm pleased. This makes robertmto's question in the other current thread unnecessary. We don't need to choose between character and talent. We're going to get a team with both.

      We just need to reset the clock on our expectations and impatience. We need to forget that it is "three years later." This is Day One.
      And I won't be here to see the day
      It all dries up and blows away
      I'd hang around just to see
      But they never had much use for me
      In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

        umm, WRONG! the fans want a team who wins and has some semblance of a future. tinsley, shawne, and daniels are really the only three players on the team with "character issues", which is pretty good for one nba team. tinsley played in 39 games. so they're telling me that nobody showed up to the games because of shawne williams and marquis daniels? i find that VERY hard to believe. the real reason nobody showed up is because there is zero direction for this team and the ineptness of management...

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

          If Herb wants Fever attendance to grow, maybe he shouldn't have let Dunn become the head coach.
          Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

            Perhaps the Fever should go away and then the team can concentrate on the Pacers.
            Go Pacers!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

              Speaking of "resetting the clock"...

              The last negative headline involving the Indiana Pacers was:
              74 Days ago
              ...Still "flying casual"
              @roaminggnome74

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

                Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                tinsley, shawne, and daniels are really the only three players on the team with "character issues"
                David Harrison.


                Originally posted by croz24
                tinsley played in 39 games. so they're telling me that nobody showed up to the games because of shawne williams and marquis daniels? i find that VERY hard to believe.
                You don't have to believe it. The people who aren't coming to the games any more also aren't following how many minutes Tinsley or any other player is playing. It doesn't matter how many minutes he plays: he (and the other bad citizens) are still on the team.
                Last edited by Putnam; 05-11-2008, 04:11 PM.
                And I won't be here to see the day
                It all dries up and blows away
                I'd hang around just to see
                But they never had much use for me
                In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

                  Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                  umm, WRONG! the fans want a team who wins and has some semblance of a future. tinsley, shawne, and daniels are really the only three players on the team with "character issues", which is pretty good for one nba team. tinsley played in 39 games. so they're telling me that nobody showed up to the games because of shawne williams and marquis daniels? i find that VERY hard to believe. the real reason nobody showed up is because there is zero direction for this team and the ineptness of management...
                  If the team started at "0" on the scale of "problems or lack thereof", then this roster, while nothing to love, isn't really a problem. The problem with this roster, however, is that it exists at a time when the past 4 years have us somewhere on the negative side of the scale. If right now was as bad as it's recently been, there wouldn't be such an issue over it. But they're relics of a recent bigger problem, and until they're out it's like that era hasn't really ended.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

                    Took them long enough to figure out we had a problem.

                    This rebuilding process is going to take a while, so some fans might have to brace themselves in.

                    I expect this fall to be about the same as last year, just hopefully no Pacers in police reports.

                    Maybe we'll get another lame slogan this fall:

                    "One Goal: United: No Police Reports!"
                    Last edited by Lord Helmet; 05-11-2008, 04:27 PM.
                    Super Bowl XLI Champions
                    2000 Eastern Conference Champions




                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

                      With all due respect to Mr. Simon, are we sure he 'gets it'? Bird's still in charge of the franchise and he cannot judge talent nor can he make intelligent trades. Rebuilding is not seen by this fan, at least, as a likely outcome now or three years from now. If Mr. Simon wants me to shell out another $12K for season tickets the next three years while he waits for the bad contracts to expire, then Mr. Simon will have to make me some kind of concession. He might wish to start by asking his customer service rep to call me because I haven't renewed for next season. Maybe TPTB aren't too worried about putting fans in the seats next year, after all. 'Getting it' must mean something different to billionaires.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

                        Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                        umm, WRONG! the fans want a team who wins and has some semblance of a future. tinsley, shawne, and daniels are really the only three players on the team with "character issues", which is pretty good for one nba team. tinsley played in 39 games. so they're telling me that nobody showed up to the games because of shawne williams and marquis daniels? i find that VERY hard to believe. the real reason nobody showed up is because there is zero direction for this team and the ineptness of management...
                        forget about Harrison?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

                          no, didn't forget about harrison...he's just that worthless...doesn't deserve a mention...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

                            My question is, what exactly does Simon want the Star's editorial board to do?

                            Reel in Kravitz?

                            Not report when something negative happens?

                            Not be critical of the Pacer's inaction for not making necessary changes?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

                              Originally posted by Roaming Gnome View Post
                              Speaking of "resetting the clock"...

                              The last negative headline involving the Indiana Pacers was:
                              74 Days ago
                              The article/thread title makes me wonder if Herb didn't also "suggest" that the Star get their act together regarding the intentional negative spin. Things have happened certainly, but as the Harrison story shows there are a lot of ways things can be handled. Still waiting on Daniels to be brought in for that alleged rape in his house.

                              And even there it's not that it wasn't true, it's that one version takes the angle that Quis himself is part victim, that some criminal took action against one of his guests in his own home. And the other angle is "probably Quis friend attacking some lady". Honestly, does anyone at PD know if Quis was closer to the woman than the man? Did anyone even see that story having the angle that a friend of his was the victim?

                              That's what I'm talking about. It was the same with Williams. It wasn't that his friend let this guy hang around or that some old buddy with a high intimidation factor (being a potential murder tends to bring that out) forced his way back into Shawne's life, it was that Williams himself was going out of his way to support violent criminals because he 100% supports that behavior.

                              Same story, DRASTICALLY different skews. And I'm certain that ratings, readership and sensationalism never played into it. The Star has way too much integrity to allow that to go on.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X