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

3rd Worst Sports City in America

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

  • #16
    Re: 3rd Worst Sports City in America

    Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
    When the Heart of basketball country doesn't support the basketball team, these things happen.

    I wouldn't blame the fans or city for this. The team has been so unwatchable that a football team that was largely ignored by the city for its first 15 years is now substantially more popular. Ah, the irony.

    Again, a reflection of just how bad the Pacers have been - from a business perspective (e.g., an unlikeable team that has been getting worse each year).
    Do you attribute the Colts popularity to the failings of the Pacers? Do you think the Colts would be less popular if the Pacers fielded a better product?

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: 3rd Worst Sports City in America

      I think this city is only capable of supporting one successful franchise at a time both financially and mentally.


      Comment


      • #18
        Re: 3rd Worst Sports City in America

        Originally posted by Indy View Post
        I think this city is only capable of supporting one successful franchise at a time both financially and mentally.
        Unless they are both doing well....

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: 3rd Worst Sports City in America

          Which hasn't really ever happened?

          The best of the Jim Harbaugh years were the years between the Larry Brown ECF teams and the Larry Bird ECF teams.

          I started to wonder the same thing. I mean, in December of 1995 I was able to walk up to the Hoosier Dome ticket window with some coworkers on gameday and buy a good seat to a non-sellout game against the Chargers - a team the Colts played in the playoffs just one month later.

          The fans that jumped on the Captain Comeback bandwagon of 1995-1997 made thier way back to MSA for the Larry-Bird-era Pacers.

          MSA, especially during Larry Brown's last season (also known as The Season we do NOT discuss), was not full.
          Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
          Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
          Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
          Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
          And life itself, rushing over me
          Life itself, the wind in black elms,
          Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: 3rd Worst Sports City in America

            One thing I don't understand, is that it just bases this information on professional franchises. Not to include the Indianapolis 500 and Brickyard 400.

            This survey is just a bunch of crap. I wonder why it doesn't include these things.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: 3rd Worst Sports City in America

              Because they aren't the same thing as the Pacers and Colts. They happen once a year.


              Comment


              • #22
                Re: 3rd Worst Sports City in America

                Originally posted by mildlysane View Post
                Unless they are both doing well....
                Even then financially it would be a huge strain on most people to support a good Pacers team and a good Colts team.
                The morale might be better, but one of those two teams would still be lacking in attendance.


                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: 3rd Worst Sports City in America

                  Originally posted by Indy View Post
                  I think this city is only capable of supporting one successful franchise at a time both financially and mentally.
                  I don't believe that's true. In fact, any time in the past when Indy franchises were successful, they have been wildly popular. Perhaps this perception is due to the fact Reggie Miller and Peyton Manning's careers barely intersected. However, in the mid 90's, both the Colts (with Harbaugh who was like a rock star back then) and Pacers were very popular. In 1999 and 2000, both teams were wildly popular. Basically, if the teams are good, they get very good support here.

                  As for Indy being a poor sports town, obviously someone is screwing up their calculus instead of using common sense. Admittedly I didn't even read the article...maybe I should do that before a post this....nah.... In any event, Indy is probably one of the strongest sports towns if you consider the size of the city. Motor racing in Indy is huge. Probably the biggest in the nation. NCAA is huge and we have the headquarters. We have a beautiful baseball field downtown....although it is admittedly minor league. BTW, we are probably not big enough to support a major league baseball team. ....But we do have a brand spanking new, very modern NFL football stadium (in fact 2 of them at the moment) and one of the best NBA stadiums in the country. We have a long history of basketball in this state and even a movie to document that fact. Yes, Indy is a small market with a low cost of living, but not a bad sports town.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: 3rd Worst Sports City in America

                    Colts still never sold out consistently in the Harbaugh years. We had blackouts locally all the time. Even if they were supported in the community, people still didn't buy tickets consistently.


                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: 3rd Worst Sports City in America

                      I live an hour away and still like going to sporting events in INDY when I can. I think there is a great selection of sporting events to choose from for the size of the city. We are fortunate really.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: 3rd Worst Sports City in America

                        Originally posted by Indy View Post
                        Colts still never sold out consistently in the Harbaugh years. We had blackouts locally all the time. Even if they were supported in the community, people still didn't buy tickets consistently.
                        The Colts did not have a good reputation and that does not change overnight. Mentally, the city was there. Financially they didn't show it because this city never was a football town and had never experienced success. That has all changed now.

                        I just cannot buy the idea that 8 NFL football games are going to drain a city of this size, particularly if the teams are successful. It's just not that many people and not that much more money as compared to other forms of entertainment. It all comes down to winning.

                        Now, if they jack up the rates because of the new stadium, you could be right. There are limits.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: 3rd Worst Sports City in America

                          Crap of a poll here. They don't account for all of the other events around here.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: 3rd Worst Sports City in America

                            BNG, I respectfully disagree.

                            The Colts didn't sell out during the Harbuagh years, but the Pacers didn't sell out during the Harbaugh years either. There was definitely a shift away from the Pacers after the Atlanta series loss that didn't come back until Larry Bird's team achieved some on-court success.

                            One could also argue that neither the Pacers nor Colts achieved much popularity until the Open-Wheel Wars were underway.

                            I think this is a legit position - that Indianapolis doesn't support both simultaneously. It picks one team to support.

                            This is part of why I predict that the new stadium will sit only 75% full within two years after Manning has a career ending injury.

                            Really, in 2000, who would have predicted the Pacers were THIS close to being last in the league in attendance during the same decade? CFH is still widely considered the #1 sporting venue in North America. And it is still, first and foremost, a basketball town. One that is jaded and cynical, but a basketball town nonetheless.
                            Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                            Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                            Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                            Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                            And life itself, rushing over me
                            Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                            Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: 3rd Worst Sports City in America

                              In this whole state, there are only 2 institutions that will have solid fan support no matter what their record is...

                              IU Basketball & Notre Dame Football

                              Everything else will get support when they are winning, and nothing when they are not. I just hope in the end that BOTH professional franchises can survive this fact when they are not doing so well.
                              Last edited by Roaming Gnome; 08-26-2008, 12:41 AM.
                              ...Still "flying casual"
                              @roaminggnome74

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: 3rd Worst Sports City in America

                                It's pretty easy to figure out why Indianapolis has trouble supporting both teams simeoultaneously: It is a TINY metropolitan area in terms of professional sport cities.

                                Indianapolis is the 33rd largest metro area in the US. There are only 3 areas smaller than Indy that have multiple sports teams (Milwaukee, Charlotte, and New Orleans). And New Orleans would be larger than Indy if it weren't for the devastating Hurricane.

                                The Pacers have an arena that seats just a thousand people less than MSG, yet they have about 17 million less people to pull from. I'm sure that demand for Knicks tickets has plummeted over the past 6 years, but you wouldn't know because it's easy to always find 19,000 people to go to a game when you have an area of 20 million people. The demand could fall by thousands and you wouldn't know it.

                                Conseco represents about 1.1% of the population of metro Indy. If New York had a stadium that mirrored that percentage, it would require oh, about 206,000 seats. Call me skeptical, but I don't think the Knicks could sell that out.

                                Does anyone really think the Pacers would have trouble selling tickets if Indy had 10 or 15 million people?

                                I don't think Indy is any different than any other city. I bet Indy has close to the same % of diehards Pacer fans as say Chicago or New York do. But a tiny percentage of Indy's pop is tens of thousands less than that same percentage of Chicago's pop. And given the fact that all NBA arenas are relatively the same size, you notice a drop in Indy's attendance when the team is bad, but never do when the Bulls are.

                                It's not that places like New York and Chicago have better fans, its that they have millions of more people to pull from to fill an arena the same size as the Pacers.

                                In 04-05, the Celtics averaged less than the Pacers, despite having a bigger arena.

                                http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/attendance?year=2005

                                That's pretty sad isn't it? I mean, Boston's metro is about 3 or 4 times bigger than Indy's, yet they couldn't beat the Pacers in attendance that year with a LARGER arena? Hmm, maybe the Celtics fans are just as fickle as any other fan base. Don't be fooled just because they were feverishly supporting the team this year.

                                Population is the most important factor in fan support. Don't hold Indy to the same standards as areas that are 2 or 3 times its size.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X