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

Report: NBA looking into buying Hornets

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

  • #31
    Re: Report: NBA looking into buying Hornets

    the hornets need to get out of new orleans and fast

    any smart marketer or owner knows that they cant nleave that team there because there is no support from fans or the city

    theres nothing wrong with putting the hornets in st. louis that stupid silna can has nothing to do with it and wont be the owner if he doesnt want to have anything to do with it he doesnt own st. louis or the nba besides that was many years ago

    st. louis has a good sports fan base i dont know why other people see otherwise just so puzzling 0.o

    lets see the attendances in st. louis

    rams 30th (they suck though and have sucked for years)
    cardinals 4th
    blues 7th

    the hornets are pretty good and will have pretty big crowds
    Last edited by Scot Pollard; 12-05-2010, 12:32 PM.
    In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Report: NBA looking into buying Hornets

      This angle would surely look good in CBA negotiations though. 'We had to buy out a team because it was struggling financially and noone wanted to buy it, even though it had a superstar on its roster'.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Report: NBA looking into buying Hornets

        Move them to Seattle and move them to the Northwest Division. OKC moves to the Southwest Division. Give the Hornets name back to Charlotte where it belongs.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Report: NBA looking into buying Hornets

          Over/under 50% chance of a Hornets fire sale?

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Report: NBA looking into buying Hornets

            http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201....ap/index.html

            Source: NBA agrees to buy Hornets


            NEW ORLEANS (AP) -- New Orleans Hornets owner George Shinn has agreed to sell the club to the NBA and the transaction could be completed within a couple days, according to a person familiar with the decision.

            The league has lined up New Orleans-born sports attorney Jac Sperling, vice chairman of the NHL's Minnesota Wild, to be the NBA's administrator of the team and oversee its sale to a more permanent owner, the person told The Associated Press Sunday on condition of anonymity because the move has not been publicly announced.

            Current Hornets President Hugh Weber will continue overseeing day-to-day operations of what will be the first NBA team to be owned by the league, the person said.

            NBA spokesman Tim Frank declined Sunday to comment on the sale.

            Shinn has been in negotiations to sell the team to minority owner and Louisiana native Gary Chouest since last spring, but talks have been stalled for months.

            Chouest, who owns 35 percent of the team, runs a business that supplies vessels to the gulf oil industry. Recently, he has become concerned about his ability to run his family business while taking over the Hornets, said the person who confirmed the NBA's planned purchase of the club.

            It remained unclear on Sunday night if Chouest would keep his stake in the club if the NBA took over, or if he could be lured back to the table once the team is in the NBA's hands.

            Chouest has not responded to repeated calls to his office and e-mails requesting comment on the matter since he first entered negotiations to buy Shinn's majority shares of the team.

            Attendance for Hornets games has been lower than the club hoped, despite a 13-6 record heading into Sunday night's game at San Antonio. Through 10 home games, average attendance has been 13,865.

            If it doesn't pick up, the Hornets could have the right to break their lease at the New Orleans Arena after this season. The lease runs through 2014, but the team is allowed to break it if average attendance falls below 14,735 during a two-year period.

            The club would have to notify the state of any intent to end the lease by March 31, 2011. However, the person who spoke to The AP about the sale said the league wants the Hornets to remain in New Orleans.

            The Hornets have been based in the Big Easy since Shinn, the club's founder, moved them from Charlotte in 2002. However, the team played most of its home games in Oklahoma City for two seasons from 2005-07 because of Hurricane Katrina.

            Shinn, 69, was diagnosed last year with prostate cancer, which he said has been treated successfully. He decided after that experience that he wanted to move on from NBA ownership and instead focus on his faith and on charitable efforts to promote the fight against cancer.
            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Report: NBA looking into buying Hornets

              Anyone else nervous about the precedent this sets if true?

              It seems that if an owner decides they have had enough for whatever reason, health in this case with financial difficulties for the proposed minority owner buyout appearing to stop the private purchase, that the league might step in and take control by buying out the current owner.

              Despite assurances to the contrary here, Herb is not young, and nobody else in his family appears to want to take the franchise over at this point. Hopefully he has the endurance to hold on for a while longer during the continuation of the rebuild.

              We have no actual superstar on the roster like New Orleans has, but we have young talent. Hopefully that would make the difference in finding a new ownership group that would be interested in trying to wait out the improvement process with the opportunity to get more talent after the potential lockout period if it comes to the Pacers being put up for sale.

              I am probably overreacting here, but it can't be easy for Herb to keep absorbing the financial hits in a difficult retail economy.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Report: NBA looking into buying Hornets

                Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
                Anyone else nervous about the precedent this sets if true?

                It seems that if an owner decides they have had enough for whatever reason, health in this case with financial difficulties for the proposed minority owner buyout appearing to stop the private purchase, that the league might step in and take control by buying out the current owner.

                Despite assurances to the contrary here, Herb is not young, and nobody else in his family appears to want to take the franchise over at this point. Hopefully he has the endurance to hold on for a while longer during the continuation of the rebuild.

                We have no actual superstar on the roster like New Orleans has, but we have young talent. Hopefully that would make the difference in finding a new ownership group that would be interested in trying to wait out the improvement process with the opportunity to get more talent after the potential lockout period if it comes to the Pacers being put up for sale.

                I am probably overreacting here, but it can't be easy for Herb to keep absorbing the financial hits in a difficult retail economy.
                I didn't enjoy reading your post. I'm not worried, but this will probably be stuck in the back of my mind today.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Report: NBA looking into buying Hornets

                  New Orleans doesn't have much of a history as a pro basketball city. The Jazz were only there five years and the Hornets have been there seven. Twelve total years in over three and a half decades doesn't count for much, especially when they struggle to sell any tickets. Pack em up and move the team to a city who cares.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Report: NBA looking into buying Hornets

                    Seems like a perfect team for contraction. IMHO the NBA could use a couple less teams for it's own long term good. Also, all this moving around of teams recently isn't good.
                    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


                    • #40
                      Re: Report: NBA looking into buying Hornets

                      Who would have thought OKC could be an NBA town?

                      The West Coast and California, in particular, are funny about public support of stadiums/arenas. With Sacramento's real estate collapse, one wonders if people's minds there are somewhere else besides the Kings.

                      St. Louis's Scottrade Center is ok. It is VERY vertical, but feels alot like DC's Verizon Center. It's very hockey friendly. As for my opinion on St. Louis, it's a city whose population has been declining for the last 100 years and it doesn't have the feel of a big city. And I doubt they could support 4 pro teams. And outside of the beer stuff, it doesn't seem to have much corporate presence.

                      As for George Shinn, the NBA should have seen this years ago. He was the owner of the Lexington Thoroughblades, a minor league hockey team in KY, which was doing well but apparently, he was losing money and he moved the team to Cleveland, where it died a quick death. My thoughts are that the move to NO was a temporary buoying from the financial incentives and the initial boost/bonus has worn down.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Report: NBA looking into buying Hornets

                        Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
                        Anyone else nervous about the precedent this sets if true?

                        It seems that if an owner decides they have had enough for whatever reason, health in this case with financial difficulties for the proposed minority owner buyout appearing to stop the private purchase, that the league might step in and take control by buying out the current owner.

                        Despite assurances to the contrary here, Herb is not young, and nobody else in his family appears to want to take the franchise over at this point. Hopefully he has the endurance to hold on for a while longer during the continuation of the rebuild.

                        We have no actual superstar on the roster like New Orleans has, but we have young talent. Hopefully that would make the difference in finding a new ownership group that would be interested in trying to wait out the improvement process with the opportunity to get more talent after the potential lockout period if it comes to the Pacers being put up for sale.

                        I am probably overreacting here, but it can't be easy for Herb to keep absorbing the financial hits in a difficult retail economy.

                        I've said this numerous times that I believe Herb is going to sell the Pacers soon... as in the next 2 years.

                        If the Pacers keep playing 500 ball this year and would happen to make the playoffs, it would really put this team in a good position with the expirings contracts at the end of the season. It makes the team far more marketable than the past 4-6 years. It gives Herb the opportunity to sell and still leave the City of Indianapolis in good shape keeping the Pacers.

                        With the lockout coming next season no salaries are paid until it is over, and a new CBA owner friendly contract, would make the Pacers even look better. With Bird and Jimmy's contracts are up at the end of the season, a new owner can bring in his own FO if it would be sold this off season. If not, with the lockout, I could see Bird and Jimmy signed for the 011-012 season, so new ownership wouldn't be stuck with a FO & HC if bought in the 011-012 off season. JMOAA

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Report: NBA looking into buying Hornets

                          I believe the NBA and the Simons have already looked and conferred with potential buyers, should the Pacers become available, that would keep the team in Indy. I've heard the same was down with the Colts a few years back when rumors surfaced and concern was expressed about Jim Irsay's drug use.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Report: NBA looking into buying Hornets

                            Indy is a good market with a lot of support from the city and fans and draws a lot of interest when its teams are good.

                            We're finally a good team again and it's drawing interest.

                            We don't have any problems either way and if Herb is ready to sell the team whenever that may be, it will be to someone in Indy because the city won't allow them to leave and there's a lot of support.

                            EDIT: It's a question mark whether or not the Fever will remain once Herb is ready to sell the team, but it's pretty much a guarantee that the Pacers will be fine.
                            Last edited by Trophy; 12-06-2010, 10:49 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Report: NBA looking into buying Hornets

                              Indianapolis fans are fairweather fans. I'm not worried about the Pacers leaving because if they keep on getting better their popularity will rise.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Report: NBA looking into buying Hornets

                                Originally posted by BringJackBack View Post
                                Over/under 50% chance of a Hornets fire sale?
                                During the league's temporary ownership? Well under 50%, I don't see them doing any kind of major move without settling the ownership issue.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X