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

Local NBA TV ratings

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

  • Local NBA TV ratings

    We often talk about attendance, but I also think local TV ratings are worth looking at. This is for this past regular season through February

    http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/...l-nba-ratings/


    February 24th, 2009 Posted in Media And Entertainment, Nielsen News, Sports | Discuss
    The Cleveland Cavaliers were the top-rated local NBA market in the first half of the season, according to an analysis released today by The Nielsen Company.

    Cleveland led all NBA markets in the U.S. with an 8.1 local household rating. It’s a significant 119% jump for LeBron James and the Cavs, which ranked 9th through the first half of last season with a 3.7 rating.

    The San Antonio Spurs, who boasted the NBA’s top-rated local market last season through as recently as the first month of this season, still showed an 18% year-to-year increase in its local ratings. On average, 7.9% of TV households in the San Antonio market have tuned in to see Tim Duncan & Co. each game, compared to 6.7% over the same time period last year.

    The Portland Trailblazers’ first full season with Greg Oden is generating plenty of renewed interest among its fans. The Portland market ranked third through the All-Star break with a 5.6 household rating, 27% higher than the first half of last year.

    TOP-10 LOCAL NBA MARKETS, BY HOUSEHOLD RATINGS

    RANK TEAM/MARKET 2008-09 HH RATING 2007-08 HH RATING % CHANGE
    1 Cleveland 8.1 - 3.7 - 119%
    2 San Antonio 7.9 - 6.8 - 16%
    3 Portland 5.6 - 4.4 - 27%
    4 Utah 5.6 - 6.3 -11%
    5 L.A. Lakers 4.7 - 4.2 - 12%
    6 Boston 4.0 - 3.6 - 11%
    7 Detroit 3.8 - 5.6 - 32%
    8 Phoenix 3.8 - 5.0 - 24%
    9 Houston 2.6 - 2.5 - 4%
    10 Chicago 2.6 - 2.5 - 4%
    source: The Nielsen Company 2009


    Other local market highlights in the NBA this year:

    The Indiana Pacers showed the most year-to-year ratings increase through the All-Star break. The Pacers have tripled their ratings from 0.6 last year to 1.8 this year. New Orleans - led by superstar Chris Paul - saw its ratings climb 160%.
    The NBA’s two largest markets - New York and Los Angeles - have maintained the growth trend that was started earlier this year. The Knicks are up 18%, while the Lakers are up 12% and the Clippers are up 43%.



    http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/...local-numbers/
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 05-26-2009, 09:27 AM.

  • #2
    Re: Local NBA TV ratings

    Is this good in any sense? It might seen likely that more people watching NBA on TV today will lead to devout, ticket-buying fans in the future. But I don't think that is proven. More people are watching House than ever before, too, but they aren't also getting medical degrees or becoming wiser about their health.

    Buck gives clear evidence that TV ratings are up. I just don't know what it means.
    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


    • #3
      Re: Local NBA TV ratings

      while some can say that it could lead to devout, ticket-buying fans...one could also make a case that most of the "regular" devout fans are no longer buying tickets and are just watching the games on TV instead of actually going to a game...

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Local NBA TV ratings

        Originally posted by bellisimo View Post
        while some can say that it could lead to devout, ticket-buying fans...one could also make a case that most of the "regular" devout fans are no longer buying tickets and are just watching the games on TV instead of actually going to a game...
        That's what I immediately thought as well. With the economy in the condition it's in, is it any surprise that TV ratings are up?

        People reason that if they're already paying for cable and the games are on cable, why pay additional money for tickets when they can just stay at home and watch the game?

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Local NBA TV ratings

          Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
          That's what I immediately thought as well. With the economy in the condition it's in, is it any surprise that TV ratings are up?

          People reason that if they're already paying for cable and the games are on cable, why pay additional money for tickets when they can just stay at home and watch the game?
          Comparing the number of ticket buyers vs TV watchers isn't a fair comparison. A 2 thousand increase in attendance is a good increase, a 2,000 increase in the number of people watching your games on TV even in a small market such as Indy isn't statistically significant. So I don't agree with the idea that a poor economy means lower attendance therefore those people who might normally go to the games - are instead watching on TV (I mean that is likely happening) but that possible increase isn't significant to ompact TV ratings

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Local NBA TV ratings

            I've always wondered if NBA teams reap any rewards from NBA TV proceedes based upon ratings or something else, or does the major TV providers, DirecTV, TWC, Comcast, etc., get all the money. Does anyone know?
            Last edited by Noodle; 05-26-2009, 11:10 AM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Local NBA TV ratings

              Originally posted by EmCeE View Post
              I've always wondered if NBA teams reap any rewards from NBA TV proceedes based upon ratings or something else, or does the major TV providers, DirecTV, TWC, Comcast, etc., get all the money. Does anyone know?
              I don't have a ton of information on this. I do know that the larger markets get a more local TV and local radio revenue than do the smaller markets.

              If you just look at the list. 7.8 rating in San Antonio sounds good. But 7.8% of lets just use 1 Million people is not nearly as good as 4.7% of 10M people - like LA. So the Lakers probably get 10X more local money from TV and radion than so the Spurs.

              Someone posted a year ago or so that the pacers basically don't get any money for local TV - they pay to have the games on and I suppose the pacers get the ad revenue (which is offset to some degree by the fees the pacers pay to have the games on).

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Local NBA TV ratings

                Well, the pessimist in me might say that people stayed home and watched the Pacers on TV because they couldn't afford to go out and do anything else.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Local NBA TV ratings

                  Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                  Is this good in any sense? It might seen likely that more people watching NBA on TV today will lead to devout, ticket-buying fans in the future. But I don't think that is proven. More people are watching House than ever before, too, but they aren't also getting medical degrees or becoming wiser about their health.

                  Buck gives clear evidence that TV ratings are up. I just don't know what it means.
                  I think you can make some assumptions on second principle... people in Indiana are paying more attention to the Pacers than they did last year, and the more people that pay attention to the team, the more opportunities this creates to fill seats for live attendance.

                  If I were to guess, the typically supportive NBA community in Indiana is being reawakened, and they're watching on TV to see whether the team has really in fact turned around. I think it's a safe assumption to predict that attendance will be up next year.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Local NBA TV ratings

                    It makes sense that attendance is a lagging indicator. TV ratings will increase first. If you are a casual fan who decided 3 years ago to give up following the Pacers. If at some point you decide maybe I should give them another try - the first thing ypou will do is watch them on TV before buying a ticket to a game.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Local NBA TV ratings

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      It makes sense that attendance is a lagging indicator. TV ratings will increase first. If you are a casual fan who decided 3 years ago to give up following the Pacers. If at some point you decide maybe I should give them another try - the first thing ypou will do is watch them on TV before buying a ticket to a game.
                      Maybe these numbers suggest just that. You could be right. Last season was exciting despite the losing, for me. Towards the end we started winning and people started showing up to the games. I never made a game, but could tell on TV fans were into those games like I was. I haven't seen that in quite some time. Hopefully, these numbers suggest a good start next year, and we could get some fans back in the Fieldhouse.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Local NBA TV ratings

                        Originally posted by docpaul
                        I think it's a safe assumption to predict that attendance will be up next year.
                        Originally posted by UncleBuck
                        It makes sense that attendance is a lagging indicator.
                        Both these comments are reasonable. But I could also be convinced that once people have subscribed to premium cable channels that deliver the game to the comfort of their couch, with several camera angles, instant replay and Stacy Paetz, they might never want to trade that for a plastic seat with a view blocked by the backboard, silly promotional trike races duringt timeouts, and being loomed over by skuzzy cotton-candy guy.
                        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


                        • #13
                          Re: Local NBA TV ratings

                          You have to work awfully hard to not make this good news.

                          Both attendance and viewership was up. How much of the increased viewership translates into more attendance and how quickly that happens remains to be seen. However, I don't know how you can't see this as a sign of increased interest in the Pacers.

                          The style of basketball is more entertaining to the casual fan, and the players are more likable. However, in order to sustain the interest long term and significantly grow both attendance and viewership, the Pacers still have to do one thing.

                          Win.

                          All that being said, this is positive news.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Local NBA TV ratings

                            Viewership being up is the only positive sign here. Our attendance was up due primarily to the extremely deep discounts that were being offered to get people to come to the games. Even my ticket rep Dave Neff (probably former ticket rep, at this point) told me during my negotiations regarding the '09-'10 season that without those discounts, which he claims would not have happened without corporate sponsorship btw, nobody would have come.

                            My point to him during our negotiations was that the existing season ticket holders really got taken advantage of due to not receiving either outright rebates of the difference (which I never thought would happen) or credit toward future ticket purchases in an amount that would offset the unreceived discounts for the '08-'09 season. His only response to that was, "Didn't you enjoy the atmosphere more due to the better attendance?" I told him that, while I respect the need to increase attendance, the blatant disregard for the full price support that I as a season ticket holder have given the franchise for 10 years, including full price $96 club seats for the last three seasons when this year there frequently were non-season ticket holders in the row immediately behind me who paid between $10 and $30 for the same class of seat in the same section. He basically blew me off, saying the discount to $75 on those seats for next year should be sufficient to compensate for the discounts. In reality, that is not even close. I'm sure that I am not the only person who feels this way, and I am also willing to bet that corporately held tickets will decline for this next season as well, though not as much as they might have without on the court franchise improvements that are underway, and have been for the last year.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Local NBA TV ratings

                              Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
                              Viewership being up is the only positive sign here. Our attendance was up due primarily to the extremely deep discounts that were being offered to get people to come to the games. Even my ticket rep Dave Neff (probably former ticket rep, at this point) told me during my negotiations regarding the '09-'10 season that without those discounts, which he claims would not have happened without corporate sponsorship btw, nobody would have come.

                              My point to him during our negotiations was that the existing season ticket holders really got taken advantage of due to not receiving either outright rebates of the difference (which I never thought would happen) or credit toward future ticket purchases in an amount that would offset the unreceived discounts for the '08-'09 season. His only response to that was, "Didn't you enjoy the atmosphere more due to the better attendance?" I told him that, while I respect the need to increase attendance, the blatant disregard for the full price support that I as a season ticket holder have given the franchise for 10 years, including full price $96 club seats for the last three seasons when this year there frequently were non-season ticket holders in the row immediately behind me who paid between $10 and $30 for the same class of seat in the same section. He basically blew me off, saying the discount to $75 on those seats for next year should be sufficient to compensate for the discounts. In reality, that is not even close. I'm sure that I am not the only person who feels this way, and I am also willing to bet that corporately held tickets will decline for this next season as well, though not as much as they might have without on the court franchise improvements that are underway, and have been for the last year.


                              I don't disagree with you. But I do know that towards the end of this past season ticket reps were practically giving away tickets to season ticket holders - moving them down to the lower section - front rows.....I think the Pacers knew this would be a problem and probably a big reason why they hadn't discounted tickets like that in past years - but I think they felt like they had too.

                              If attenandance and or season ticket sales are down next season it will be more for economic reasons then for reasons you state (not that won't be a factor) but keep in mind the economy did tank until med Septemeber 2008 and by then probably 75-85% of season ticket sales are sold. So the eceonomy will have a greater impact on season ticket sales this year than last year

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X