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

NBA going under?

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

  • NBA going under?

    Obviously the greed of the players will cause the league to go under. Is JO really worth 20 million this year? Is any player ever worth that much?

    Shouldn't the player be happy with a few million a year? I mean a great surgeon who busts his *** saving lives working 12 hour shifts doesn't even make a million a year. When did we decide a basketball player is worth 5-20 million a year? Isn't it just ridiculous?

    Let the NBA fail I say. No basketball player is worth that much. I think the maximum salary should be set at like 7 million and the league wouldn't be looking for bailouts from the cities who are struggling to house and feed the poor.

    I say no more of this, it's gone too far. The model is broke and the players are making way too much.

    Any thoughts?

  • #2
    Re: NBA going under?

    wha?

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: NBA going under?

      Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
      Any thoughts?
      None that I can post.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: NBA going under?

        There's really no need to say, "Let the NBA fail." Things will sort out.

        The current economic crisis is not simply a recession. There will be a lot of devaluation, and pro sports players' salaries will be devalued along with real estate, returns on venture capital, and many other things.

        Most pro athletes will be earning less 5 years from now than they do today. They will mostly be OK with it, because they'll realize that they are still making more playing their game than they could make doing anything else. (Seriously, what else is LeBron James good at? Can he cut hair? Operate a forklift? Write articles about Risk Management?) Probably not. But he's a very good basketball player, and there are people who are willing to pay to watch him play. If that's what he's best at, then it is cool that he can make a living doing that.

        The process of setting the price of anything is very complex. None of us can just say, "LeBron is worth his salary," or "JO isn't." That is silly and naive. You can't even say how much revenue a star player generates, since you don't know how much of the ticket sales (or commercial endorsement) would have happened without him. People bought shoes even before Jordan endorsed Nike.

        NBA players ought to be paid well to play. But if two-thirds of the teams in the the league are in trouble, the players might find it in their self-interest to play for less.
        Last edited by Putnam; 03-15-2009, 07:28 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


        • #5
          Re: NBA going under?

          I suppose you dont watch baseball?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: NBA going under?

            Originally posted by Putnam View Post

            Most pro athletes will be earning less 5 years from now than they do today. They will mostly be OK with it, because they'll realize that they are still making more playing their game than they could make doing anything else. (Seriously, what else is LeBron James good at? Can he cut hair? Operate a forklift? Write articles about Risk Management?)

            This will all sort out.
            Lebron can play for the Browns... or continue to pursue that legal career. Haven't you been watching his commercials?
            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

            ------

            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

            -John Wooden

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: NBA going under?

              Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
              Obviously the greed of the players will cause the league to go under. Is JO really worth 20 million this year? Is any player ever worth that much?

              Shouldn't the player be happy with a few million a year? I mean a great surgeon who busts his *** saving lives working 12 hour shifts doesn't even make a million a year. When did we decide a basketball player is worth 5-20 million a year? Isn't it just ridiculous?

              Let the NBA fail I say. No basketball player is worth that much. I think the maximum salary should be set at like 7 million and the league wouldn't be looking for bailouts from the cities who are struggling to house and feed the poor.

              I say no more of this, it's gone too far. The model is broke and the players are making way too much.

              Any thoughts?

              I TOTALLY AGREE

              It's ridiculous really .. I also think a players contract should have incentives worked into it where they can actually make more depending on their play during the season.. and if they get to playoffs, win playoffs , and etc..
              In turn you will see more competitiveness and EARNING of that contract by each player

              No more of these multi million dollar contracts just given out freely ..

              Like I said, I wholeheartedly agree.. and it needs to extend to all pro sports that are paying these players outrageous amounts of money ..

              I could live off of one year of Granger's salary for the rest of my life !!
              Something is wrong with this picture ..lol
              Last edited by Kemo; 03-15-2009, 07:51 PM.
              "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: NBA going under?

                Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                Obviously the greed of the players will cause the league to go under. Is JO really worth 20 million this year? Is any player ever worth that much?
                No.

                Personally I think that athletes are over glorified in the media. But their salaries have little do to with the greed of the players.

                Read Putnam's post.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: NBA going under?

                  Originally posted by Kemo View Post
                  I TOTALLY AGREE

                  It's ridiculous really .. I also think a players contract should have incentives worked into it where they can actually make more depending on their play during the season.. and if they get to playoffs, win playoffs , and etc..
                  In turn you will see more competitiveness and EARNING of that contract by each player

                  No more of these multi million dollar contracts just given out freely ..

                  Like I said, I wholeheartedly agree.. and it needs to extend to all pro sports that are paying these players outrageous amounts of money ..

                  I could live off of one year of Granger's salary for the rest of my life !!
                  Something is wrong with this picture ..lol
                  A lot of players have incentives in their contract. It's a bad move unless it's based on team performance (i.e., standings), because you never want a player worrying about getting another point or rebound when he should be focusing on the right decision to help his team win.

                  Generally speaking, I have no problem with a profession athlete making millions of dollars. They are doing something that only a small percent can do and are getting people to pay a lot of money to see them. Obviously the CBA needs to be adjusted, but pro athletes should still be paid well.

                  We are a capitalist society. You have the same opportunity to make millions as anyone else, so don't hate on someone once they get the money, especially if they earned it -- and guys like Danny Granger have earned it.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: NBA going under?

                    Originally posted by YoSoyIndy View Post
                    A lot of players have incentives in their contract. It's a bad move unless it's based on team performance (i.e., standings), because you never want a player worrying about getting another point or rebound when he should be focusing on the right decision to help his team win.

                    Generally speaking, I have no problem with a profession athlete making millions of dollars. They are doing something that only a small percent can do and are getting people to pay a lot of money to see them. Obviously the CBA needs to be adjusted, but pro athletes should still be paid well.

                    We are a capitalist society. You have the same opportunity to make millions as anyone else, so don't hate on someone once they get the money, especially if they earned it -- and guys like Danny Granger have earned it.
                    You make some great points. Professional athletes are the top .0001% of their profession. They truly deserve to be paid whatever their fans will pay. That does not include unwilling tax payers though. Again, great points but I must say I truly doubt the bolded part.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: NBA going under?

                      No wonder the brawl happened in Detroit fans really are bitter about how much athletes make.

                      And while I do understand that professional sports are big business. Considering how much owners make off of these players and the fans I say I'm not bothered by how much they make. Although at the same time JO isn't worth his salary and its not just because he's an NBA player but because he's inconsistent as an NBA player and often injured.

                      Putting that aside Putnam said it better than I could.

                      I'm not going to fault an NBA player for trying to make as much money as they can while they can if I am given that option I'd take it too saying otherwise would be hypocritical.

                      Besides what about the teachers who are far more underpaid than doctors are.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: NBA going under?

                        Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
                        No wonder the brawl happened in Detroit fans really are bitter about how much athletes make.

                        And while I do understand that professional sports are big business. Considering how much owners make off of these players and the fans I say I'm not bothered by how much they make. Although at the same time JO isn't worth his salary and its not just because he's an NBA player but because he's inconsistent as an NBA player and often injured.

                        Putting that aside Putnam said it better than I could.

                        I'm not going to fault an NBA player for trying to make as much money as they can while they can if I am given that option I'd take it too saying otherwise would be hypocritical.

                        Besides what about the teachers who are far more underpaid than doctors are.
                        The biggest problem is, and i would say that it is the same in every league, NFL included, a large number of them are not making money. I think the leagues will contract before completely folding.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: NBA going under?

                          As it has been stated. Professional players in these leagues are the best at what they do. The best doctor gets paid more, the best lawyer gets the big cases (more money), and the best coach gets the best job (more money). Throughout any profession, whoever works his tail off and is the best, gets the most. I don't see what's wrong with NBA players getting that much money.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: NBA going under?

                            In a perfect world a potential team owner would buy the rights to a new team, research cities where he thinks they could be successful and where he doesn't step on another team's franchise rights, buy some land in that city, build an arena based on his business model and projections, and then start selling tickets.

                            Notice what is missing? No, not bidding a concessions contract with a vendor...I mean bigger than that- No taxpayer subsidies involved in the team thus skewing the bottom line. The business will sink or swim based on the owner and his management team's savvy and the business model of the NBA. Player salaries will be tied to market forces.

                            Truthfully, that is how the NBA should mandate it be handled but they won't do that because it puts a premium on their own business model.

                            In an almost perfect world a city would build the arena, pay all utilities...etc..., retain naming rights for the arena, retain all profit/risk on the events, and rent the facility to NBA teams during their season and preseason and times of need. And this wouldn't be 1.00, it would be at a reasonable MARKET rate. Once again, meaning the team would need to sink or swim financially based on its own business model and that of the NBA.

                            Anything other than that is basically a burden that should not be allowed because it's an intermingling of public funds and private interests that has an endgame that isn't pretty for the taxpayers. Even the 2nd scenario has pitfalls because a team can then hold a city/state hostage when they want a new arena and that desire for a new arena need not be tied to economic realities because it isn't the team owner's money being spent (or is only a minor part of it).

                            If pro sport teams had to build their own stadiums and local governments were banned from putting public monies into the equation do you think we'd see the palaces we are seeing? Would LOS still have a retractable roof if Irsay had to foot the bill 100%? Would teams playing in 15-20 year old stadiums be on the demolition block if their replacement was 100% the responsibility of the owners and not taxpayers?

                            These questions (I believe) are rhetorical questions and we all know the answer. And when you boil it down to that, it becomes clear that taxpayer dollars are being used in ways that are wrong. These stadiums aren't being built based on realistic designs and schedules because it is people spending other people's money that are making the decisions... and they are being made under duress of veiled threat of the team moving if the owner's wishes aren't catered to.

                            --
                            On the subject of salaries-
                            If it was based on ticket sales and TV contracts then whatever it works out to be makes sense. They are based on a TV contract that was overbid and likely won't be raising again and a business model propped up by taxpayer dollars. And even then, they are still too high and too restrictive and teams are hurting from them.
                            Last edited by Bball; 03-15-2009, 10:55 PM.
                            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                            ------

                            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                            -John Wooden

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: NBA going under?

                              I am not saying these players don't earn it ..
                              But when the organizations these same players play for are about to lose their collective a$$es, there is a problem..

                              It's just like Guide here in Anderson , they were paying out large hourly wages to plant workers, and the workers got spoiled on making the good money , then when the plant starts cutting jobs (because low sales and the money starts drying up) , and putting pressure on the workers... The union then wonders how this happened? lol... Because when when Guide isn't able to continue operating... they shut down... just as they did in Anderson..

                              Same with the different teams and the nba , if they can't keep paying these outrageous millions and still stay in business as normal, then something has to give...

                              I'll give you a hint.... It won't be the nba or the teams ..lol

                              So ultimately something is gonna have to be addressed with the players union and untill our economy picks up , there are gonna have to be some major concessions for the nba to be able to stay afloat, thus keeping these same players in a job..

                              Regardless these players would still be living better than 90% of us ever could imagine..


                              We may see a time come, where the players will have to save the nba with the economy as bad as it's becoming .
                              Last edited by Kemo; 03-15-2009, 11:24 PM.
                              "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X