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

Rumors coming from Seattle that the Maloofs have sold the Kings

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

  • #76
    Re: Rumors coming from Seattle that the Maloofs have sold the Kings

    It still needs approved by the Board Of Governors and Stern's apparently told Kevin Johnson (Sacto's mayor) he'll have the chance to match, and allegedly KJ has buyers lined up.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Rumors coming from Seattle that the Maloofs have sold the Kings

      Happy for the Sonics fans that they get a team again, but it sucks to have it happen this way, and I'm sure most of them agree with me about that. They know the pain they felt and now Sacramento fans are going to feel the same pain. Obviously a heart aching moment for the loyal Kings fans.

      If VF21 does decide to join the Blue and Gold family, we just got a terrific addition to our ranks.

      Is there any other franchise that might move in the next 1-5 years? Charlotte? New Orleans? I guess not Memphis now that they just got a new ownership group, right? I know nobody wants to have a team via removing it from another fanbase, but I think the last thing this league needs is a 31st franchise...

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Rumors coming from Seattle that the Maloofs have sold the Kings

        Having Indy lose the Pacers is one of my nightmares, so I can only imagine what Kings fans have gone through over the past few seasons. I hope they're able to find another team some day because they had one of the most loyal fanbases for a long period of time.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Rumors coming from Seattle that the Maloofs have sold the Kings

          Here's what Aaron Bruski has to say:

          http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.c...medium=twitter

          The Board of Governors would have the final say. It's not over yet, although I have to admit my joy about the 49ers this afternoon has been dulled a bit by the timing of this.
          NBA basketball - taking my breath away since 1963.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Rumors coming from Seattle that the Maloofs have sold the Kings

            Originally posted by Roaming Gnome View Post
            VF... I'm almost ashamed to admit that a few of us PD'ers were at the Kings/Pacers game back early December without seeking out some of the Kings Fans forumites. We all loved how good Sacramento and their fans were to us on our visit. I know that Sac needs a new barn just to quash the talk of the Kings leaving town, but my goodness Seth and myself couldn't get over how unique that building was for an NBA game (wooden floors in the lower bowl, FTW). It felt like it was happening on a night where the building was only half full. I couldn't imagine what that place was like when you had "The Team" running the court.

            I know I'm defiantly pulling for K.J. and Sacramento to get it done and rid the league of those stooges that own YOUR team.
            I would have loved to meet you guys in person. I'm glad you got to see Arco (aka Sleep Train). If you think this one is a barn, you should have seen the first arena. The term ARCO THUNDER came to be because of how loud it could and would get when you have 17,317 pairs of feet stomping in unison.

            The Maloofs are a cancer not only to Sacramento but to the entire NBA world. They should be sued by Virginia Beach for negotiating in bad faith and they should be forced to pay VB for the some $1 million in exploratory costs that were paid when they had no more intention of moving the Kings there than they had in going forward with the arena deal. They backed out for one reason and one reason only - they were already in preliminary negotiations with Hansen and part of the new arena deal would have tied the Kings to Sacramento for 30 years, something they could not agree to.

            I'm not giving up hope and the folks spearheading the drive along with Kevin Johnson to get the local buyers organized with a competitive bid for the team are not going to give up either. I don't believe in fairy tales but I do believe in justice, and moving the Sacramento Kings to Seattle would not be just or right or fair.

            Thanks to all for the kind words. I've always felt a kinship here, partially because my dad was an Indiana farm boy who grew up outside of Lynn and partially because as some of you have said there's a certain familiarity between us. If nothing else, we both survived Artest.
            NBA basketball - taking my breath away since 1963.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Rumors coming from Seattle that the Maloofs have sold the Kings

              Marc Stein ‏@ESPNSteinLine
              Sources say deal calls for Maloofs to receive non-refundable $30 million from the Hansen group by Feb. 1 whether or not sale is approved

              I'd love to hear how George Maloof swings that. He's basically trying to squeeze out other potential buyers by having Seattle pay for an exclusive right to bid. I'm not even sure that's legal...

              I didn't know I could feel this much hatred for other human beings.
              NBA basketball - taking my breath away since 1963.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Rumors coming from Seattle that the Maloofs have sold the Kings

                This is sickening.

                Let's hope for a miracle.


                Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                Comment


                • #83
                  The Maloofs should never be able to enter an NBA arena without getting booed!

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Rumors coming from Seattle that the Maloofs have sold the Kings

                    Originally posted by Peck View Post
                    This is sickening.

                    Let's hope for a miracle.
                    I'm not sure who I'm supposed to root against here.

                    The Sacramento fans are losing a team, but the Seattle fans already lost one five years ago, and this may be their only shot to get one back for a long time.

                    Sure the Maloofs come off as jackasses, but they're pretty much irrelevant in all of this. You're not rooting for/against an owner, you're rooting for the end result.

                    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Rumors coming from Seattle that the Maloofs have sold the Kings

                      Originally posted by Coopdog23 View Post
                      I think it would be worse for Sacramento to lose the Kings than when Seattle lost the Sonics. Sacramento loves the Kings and it would be awful for their city to lose them
                      The only reason it's worse IMO is because the mayor and city has done everything and more that the Maloofs wanted. The Maloofs are just scums at least in Seattle the Public government didnt really to save the team like they should of. In this situation Sacramento has went above and beyond and the NBA and the Maloofs should be ashamed. If I was an owner no way I would approve a vote for this sell I would force the Kings to sell to a local owner. The two situations aren't even comparable IMO.

                      Both fan bases are good only difference is the local governments

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Rumors coming from Seattle that the Maloofs have sold the Kings

                        this doesn't make sense from a fan perspective.

                        It isn't the fault of the Sonics fans that their local reps dropped the ball.

                        If you're trying to vilify the maloofs, you don't need to do much to accomplish that, but I'm not sure spiting the maloofs is reason to deny Seattle a team.

                        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Rumors coming from Seattle that the Maloofs have sold the Kings

                          Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                          I'm not sure who I'm supposed to root against here.

                          The Sacramento fans are losing a team, but the Seattle fans already lost one five years ago, and this may be their only shot to get one back for a long time.

                          Sure the Maloofs come off as jackasses, but they're pretty much irrelevant in all of this. You're not rooting for/against an owner, you're rooting for the end result.
                          The major difference between Seattle and Sacramento is that Sacramento has done EVERYTHING asked of us. An arena deal was put together that was approved by the NBA against all odds. Construction would already be underway if the Maloofs hadn't, at the last minute, pulled out with the lame excuse that they were doing it for Sacramento's own good because the deal wasn't really that good for Sacramento and Northern California in the long run. (Yes, they used THAT as an actual excuse.) Then, while loudly proclaiming their loyalty to Sacramento and the fans, the Brothers Maloof were secretly negotiating behind the scenes to try and get a deal from Virginia Beach.

                          Bottom line is the Maloofs are broke and they're trying to get as much as they can on their way out the door. There is even reportedly a clause in the Seattle proposal that gives the Maloofs $30 million if the NBA doesn't allow the sale or if Chris Hansen changes his mind. (This was in exchange - also reportedly - for a binding agreement on the part of the Maloofs, meaning they cannot change their minds this time).

                          Seattle lost their team because they would not/could not agree to a new arena.

                          So you'd have no problem if we Sacramento fans lose the Kings and decide to come after the Pacers when our new arena gets built?

                          We have a loyal fanbase, even after years of bullcrap from the Maloofs, who got rid of our only decent coach - Rick Adelman - and followed him by the likes of Eric Musselman, Reggie Theus, Kenny Natt, Paul Westphal and now Keith Smart.

                          At least try to understand how we feel. We didn't take Seattle's team. We have, as I said before, done EVERYTHING that has been asked of us and more. Why should the Maloofs get to sell to someone who wants to take the team out of Sacramento when there are qualified buyers working with Kevin Johnson who would keep the team here AND get the new arena built.
                          NBA basketball - taking my breath away since 1963.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Rumors coming from Seattle that the Maloofs have sold the Kings

                            We do understand how you feel man, it sucks as much as anything NBA related could suck for you.

                            ...just like it sucked that bad for Seattle fans when their team left. The FANS didn't build arenas or not, it was never some guy in a Gary Payton jersey refusing to be complicit with the demands. That guy is just as deserving of a team as anyone in Sacramento. No matter what happens someone is getting screwed, and neither sides fans are anymore deserving than the other.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Rumors coming from Seattle that the Maloofs have sold the Kings

                              Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                              this doesn't make sense from a fan perspective.

                              It isn't the fault of the Sonics fans that their local reps dropped the ball.


                              If you're trying to vilify the maloofs, you don't need to do much to accomplish that, but I'm not sure spiting the maloofs is reason to deny Seattle a team.
                              Actually, if you want to pick nits, it is their fault. Sacramento fans came together and formed a cohesive group (first #FANS and now expanded to #CrownDowntown) that went to every single city council meeting and voiced their feelings, backed up by statistics and fact. They got three council members to change their minds because they became educated as to the real benefits of a new arena for the entire community, not just sports fans. They held community meetings and informed the public about what a news entertainment and sports complex could do for the city. They persevered and gained the respect of the NBA and Mayor Kevin Johnson.

                              CrownDowntown (you can check them out on Facebook and view their videos) is still alive and well and very active in promoting the new arena, something they will continue to do even if we lose the Kings. If Seattle fans had done even a part of this, they might not have lost their team.

                              We are not the villains. Seattle fans are not the villains. Taking our team to "right their wrong" makes no sense.

                              EDIT: I'm sorry if I come across as not feeling sympathy for the Seattle fans. It's not how I feel. They lost their team and we're fighting to keep ours. If people want to "side" with Seattle, that's up to them. I"m not going to continue to berate them when they didn't do anything wrong. My comments above show that we learned from Seattle that you have to stand up and do something. I cannot and will not get drawn into a comparative debate of the relative fandom of the two cities. It's not fair to either of us.

                              I JUST WANT TO KEEP MY TEAM!
                              Last edited by VF21; 01-21-2013, 04:31 PM.
                              NBA basketball - taking my breath away since 1963.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Rumors coming from Seattle that the Maloofs have sold the Kings

                                Nobody is saying either side is a villain or that either side deserves to be left without a team, all we are saying is that in that same vein neither side is more deserving to have a team, either. Someone loses here, no matter what happens, and neither side deserves to lose. Reality goes that way, sometimes.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X