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

Commentary: Fans Bear Responsibility

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

  • #16
    Re: Commentary: Fans Bear Responsibility

    Okay well most everyone seems to be in agreement.

    The intent of my original post was to highlight the current problem of Tinsley's contract, and why the team is in the position of owing 7mil/year to a player who does not and will not play. Is it a response to the pressure from the fan base to do so? Then is it our responsibility that he's still under contract with us instead of playing for another team by now?

    Considering the fact that attendance hasn't shown a major improvement over last year's numbers, the question becomes what if anything was gained by sending Tins into exile? Was that infact the right thing to do? It hasn't helped the numbers. Would we have been better off keeping him on the active roster, showing he has value as a player (while being a PR risk, but hey some teams will still take that on, I mean Artest is still playing) until some kind of trade could be worked? I think if he had been playing for the last year, some team would have taken a flier on him this year.

    So was it a mistake to banish him from the team altogether? I mean, what's really been accomplished by this?

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Commentary: Fans Bear Responsibility

      Originally posted by ToasterBusVIP View Post
      So was it a mistake to banish him from the team altogether? I mean, what's really been accomplished by this?
      It was okay for training camp, but they really needed to either get a deal done or buy him out much quicker. The message itself is fine, but (as has been true for the Pacers for most of this decade), the execution was either clumsy or flawed.
      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


      • #18
        Re: Commentary: Fans Bear Responsibility

        I think that TPTB must have hedged their bets that Tins could get unloaded someday prior to this year's deadline. I really doubt, had they known he'd spent this much time in limbo, that they'd have wanted him to stay away from the team. They betted on being able to score PR points with the fans and still be able to unload him, probably the economy and the contractual fire-sale that went on this year caused that to become too difficult to pull off.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Commentary: Fans Bear Responsibility

          this is what i see from far from indy... i live on the east coast and love the pacers... i dont know what it is really like to live in indy,, i admit... but if i lived there i would have season tix..and would be going bananas the whole time. when i tune in to a pacers game the crowd no matter how many are there...is dead... is it that the demographic for the team is older people?? i dont know... but look at golden state ( with our old thugs ) drawing packed houses to watch the 20 win warriors. it must be the economy in indy as compared to the wealthy bay area, but there is no excuse why the pacers fans are not louder, lively,... if i am wrong let me know. like i said i have never been to a game there. sound is different on the broadcasts. but i can see a clear difference between a GSW crowd and Pacers crowd and thats sad..maybe with exception to Granger our team is easy to like but not fun to cheer for.

          i have even thought about transferring schools to indy to get season tickets.. to me this is the cheapest they can get. go pacers.....

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Commentary: Fans Bear Responsibility

            Focused, how long have you been a fan of the Pacers for? Are you from Indy originally? I'm really happy to hear you're a fan and at the same time it makes me a little sad because I remember, in Reggie's days, hearing about the real strong international following the Pacers had, Reggie was something of a legend to a lot of people. I wish this could be that kind of team again.

            No it hasn't always been that way, my thought would be that a lot of the fans still don't have a real personal interest in this team, not yet. We went from having one of the all-time greats in #31, a player who was synonomous with the rebirth of this franchise, and for whom tears were shed at his final game, to a team that has alienated people. Now we have, what, one active player who was on this team four years ago? Something like 7 or 8 new faces this season alone? Even if people are no longer angry at the team and the players, maybe it's more a sense of apathy right now. I've noticed the same thing but maybe that's a positive in some ways...what does it mean for a fan base to go wild over a bunch of new players they barely know? Is that being a good fan? Maybe it just takes a lot more for these guys to win over our hearts?

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Commentary: Fans Bear Responsibility

              Regarding Tinsley, what difference does it really make? The Pacers were going to have difficulty finding a trade partner to deal him either way. And he has no fault here? I mean if he could have, you know, kept a lower profile and steered clear of bad situations then he would not be in this position.

              I really have a hard time believing that paying Tinsley to stay home this season is some huge albatross around the Pacers collective neck. We were able to acquire 2 point guards to help fill his spot on the court and even if we did trade him, we have to take on equal salary anyways so it is only a matter of spending $7 million on a guy who isn't playing or spending $7 million on a barely useful end of the bench type player (which IMO is about all you are going to get for Tins at this point).

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Commentary: Fans Bear Responsibility

                grew up in ny...fan since 92... i was 11 then.. i used to have to argue with all my friends ,who were knicks fans, my whole life.. now that ny rivalry seems dead as well. it appears to me that the fans need to snap the apathetic energy and embrace what we have. i think the attendance this season is more a reflection of the economic struggles. for example if we had gotten lucky in the lottery last draft and gotten rose (not that i want him)... the team would have a better record and attendance would have risen more as well. my point is that the pacers are one impact player away from being a decent team, and drawing good crowds. we just need a good draft.. we should just take the best athletes in available with our later picks.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Commentary: Fans Bear Responsibility

                  Besides who is say that the coaches and players didn't want Tinsley kept away too? Maybe they didn't want the distractions around them anymore.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Commentary: Fans Bear Responsibility

                    Originally posted by Big Smooth View Post

                    I really have a hard time believing that paying Tinsley to stay home this season is some huge albatross around the Pacers collective neck. We were able to acquire 2 point guards to help fill his spot on the court and even if we did trade him, we have to take on equal salary anyways so it is only a matter of spending $7 million on a guy who isn't playing or spending $7 million on a barely useful end of the bench type player (which IMO is about all you are going to get for Tins at this point).
                    Well that's just it isn't it. A barely useful benchwarmer (ie a player another team is actually trying to rid themselves of) is all we could get at this point.

                    At this point. Certainly. You don't think the Pacers were getting worse offers for Tins during the last few weeks, than what came their way in the fall of '07, when he was still playing, or Summer '08 when he'd only been inactive a few months?

                    And if he WAS traded last year, what could that 7mil of contracts turned into? Perhaps it was a 2 yr deal that would have expired this year? Or two smaller contracts which were easier to move? The point of trading him would have been to get something more useful than a 7 million dollar hole. You then take what that's turned into--maybe 5 mil expiring, Quis' 4 mil expiring, and Rasho's 8 mil expiring--and aha, you've got something people would want, eh?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Commentary: Fans Bear Responsibility

                      Originally posted by focused444 View Post
                      grew up in ny...fan since 92... i was 11 then.. i used to have to argue with all my friends ,who were knicks fans, my whole life.. now that ny rivalry seems dead as well. it appears to me that the fans need to snap the apathetic energy and embrace what we have. i think the attendance this season is more a reflection of the economic struggles. for example if we had gotten lucky in the lottery last draft and gotten rose (not that i want him)... the team would have a better record and attendance would have risen more as well. my point is that the pacers are one impact player away from being a decent team, and drawing good crowds. we just need a good draft.. we should just take the best athletes in available with our later picks.
                      Well, that's definitely part of it, the economics. But aside from that I'm just tired of the negativity and the "I don't really follow them anymore" apathy of the general population. Of course, I wasn't very old when the Pacers started their rise in the early 90s so I don't recall if it was the same way with most people in the 80s.

                      I looked up some statistics on the P's attendance after their Finals run, when they rebuilt, and I was actually pleasantly surprised to learn that attendance didn't take much of a hit. I beleive down to about 15K a game from 18-plus the year before. So maybe the team won't have to show itself as a contender before we start seeing attendance get back to those levels again. I really hope so, I'd hate to see the team lose money the next couple of years when they're got themselves a great group of guys who are really giving it their all.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Commentary: Fans Bear Responsibility

                        Tinsley was not a fan call, that was a "I'm ripping the head coach after I just went off the ranch and blew a game" deal. That and ripping on Granger in a non-productive way. You assume similar anti-team behavior to match those 2 situations.

                        In other words, if it's Reggie in those situations, Cloud 9, etc he stays. And I don't mean where you add those to a great rep, I mean where he gets Tinsley's public rep and not his own.

                        Why would he stay? Because he came to play, listened to the coach and busted his butt from early to late. A guy doing that earns a little buffer with TPTB getting an earful from the locals. In fact fans could have loved Tinsley and he still would have been benched.

                        Ironically Tins resented Rick and it was Rick's calmer and more give-and-take approach that kept him from getting swatted down sooner IMO.

                        Proof that a fan favorite could get dumped for team attitude - Al Harrington, packed with Jackson just 1 week after ripping on Rick at halftime so bad that he was benched to start the 2nd.


                        And bear in mind that I'm saying this as one of the loudest critics of the local fanbase. They don't walk the walk to back their talk at all. But in the case of Tinsley he took it out of their hands anyway simply by being a jerk to the coach and team.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X