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

Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

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

  • Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
    ...said the kid that took Derek Rose's SAT test for him.

    NCAA and "fair", "no money", "no agents", "no thugs", "love of the game" is such a fantasy story. Like you say, it's a money machine just like the NBA. With worse officials and sloppier play. And less quality oversight of cheating to gain an advantage.

    People are mad that Miami spent all their cap on 3 guys basically, but love an NCAA that features Calipari "magically" recruiting entire classes of NBA talent every year. He doesn't even work against a cap because the under the table money has no cap. Any team can win in the NCAA? No, Northwestern is a bigger underdog to KY, UConn, LVille, etc than Cleveland is to Miami. Cleveland (now) is closer to winning a title than Northwestern is, unless they change their recruiting policies at least (ie, cheat or cheat more).
    Or Cody Zeller committing to an Indiana program that won 30 games over 3 seasons when two older brothers good enough to play in the NBA bypassed the Hoosiers. I don't buy that a top 15 recruit all of a sudden decides to go to a struggling program without a little "something extra." Sorry IU fans.

    Comment


    • Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
      I was with TraderJoe over in the club corner near BillS. But normally I sit a few rows up from the bench (half season). Always welcome a hi, but I need PD names to know who people are. The DetroitInvasion trip really screwed up my memory. So many non-PD people in A55 and G2 (or just lurkers) and so many names or Twitter handles or both.

      If I ever "remeet" you, just make fun of me and remind me. At my age it takes repeat efforts to lock things in.
      Yup, that was you. Section 115. (I was in 112) In fact, I met Trader Joe and BillS at the PD party too, so it could have been a little reunion. And I'll remember to re-introduce myself.

      Comment


      • Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

        A lot of people prefer college over the NBA (specially in Indiana) because college basketball reminds people of the "good all times", there is a reason why Hoosiers is one of the must watched movies of all times.

        College also gives people things they can related to, almost every college team(except Kentucky?) has one or two non athletic white guys, those guys make a lot of people think "I can do that".

        Compare that to the NBA and is not even close, I mean who is going to related to a guy like Lebron James? or Dwight Howard? those guys are freak of nature they don't make you think "I can do that", relating to players has a lot to do with attendance in my opinion.


        Just my two cents
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • I think thats why magic Johnson was so popular. I think I speak for everyone here when I saw a 6'9" black man going behind his back and throwing no look passes, it was like looking in a mirror.

          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


          • Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

            Originally posted by shags View Post
            Or Cody Zeller committing to an Indiana program that won 30 games over 3 seasons when two older brothers good enough to play in the NBA bypassed the Hoosiers. I don't buy that a top 15 recruit all of a sudden decides to go to a struggling program without a little "something extra." Sorry IU fans.
            No need to apologize. I generally don't get too offended by ignorant and cynical speculation.

            Comment


            • Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

              Originally posted by Pacer Fan View Post
              This state cares about basketball and if you think it doesn't then your a step out of reality. There are many, many, many reasons that people doesn't go to ball games and especially losing clubs in any sport. We can set here and hash out all the reasons valid or not in whoever's eyes. But at the end of the day those reasons are more valid then some realize or want to admit.

              Just put a product on the floor that is worth peoples money and time and they will come.
              Other communities would have taken less time to recognize the quality of the Pacers NBA product. Just like IU fans aren't waiting for Crean to win 3 big 10 titles or make a Final 4 to sell the joint out. This coming off of just as many miserable and scandal filled seasons.


              Here's my problem with all the Hoosier chest thumping as basketball fans.

              If you visit other cities, other arenas or even live in other places you quickly realize Indiana is NOT some great unique leader. There is an image cultivated on years of IU greatness and a love of HS basketball and the greatest sports movie ever made. But if you think you are going to sit down in Oracle and have fans with less knowledge or passion for the sport, you're wrong.

              I went to several games in The Hive and despite UNC, Duke and a general hotbed of non NBA basketball, they loved their NBA team too. The team that never made a Finals. They turned on Shinn, not the team.


              There's this idea that when you touch down in Indy it's noticeably different than it is when you touch down in San Antonio or LA or Sacto or DC. It isn't. NYC isn't just a bigger city, it's not as simple as that. They have a massive passion for basketball that's on par with Indiana. Or better put they have communities the size of Indy that have as much or more passion for the sport. Maybe in Manhattan it's not that way, but in Queens or the Bronx perhaps or some other sub-section that is basically it's own city/region? NYC is big because it's 8 cities smashed together, but at least one of those cities loves ball just as much as we do.

              The freaking Carrier Dome just hosted the largest on-campus crowd in NCAA history, so I think upstate NY even enjoys ball just a tiny bit.



              You can't judge yourself without taking a good look at others to really know where you stand.




              And this is an IU city/state, period. What's funny about that is that Bob Knight NEVER did anything to embarrass the school or fanbase, never choked a kid, never used poo to make a point, and never got bounced out of the tourney early or failed to meet expectations. IU never had any non-basketball issues, never had a tampering scandal, never had periods of less than stellar play...you know, all the things that people cite as reasons to not watch the Pacers. But the Pacers are only on their 3rd season of good basketball, it takes time....way more time than IU has been back, but ignore that because it doesn't count and Bob Knight yay!



              Local fans have an IMAGE of what IU ball is (or Butler since they started winning) and they are in love with that image. Because of that love they ignore all the warts. And because they don't love the Pacers they point to the same warts and complain and justify. I think the image was built mostly on 2 decades of elite level winning with Knight, not just good but one of the top 5 programs in the country. UNC, Duke, KY and Kansas level of good. So sure, if the Pacers go on a Bulls decade with 6 titles, fans will be made and stick. But that doesn't make the community more savvy.

              You have to earn the right to claim this basketball passion. If you are going to HS games every Friday night then you are building a rep of HS passion, but not "all things basketball" passion. If you aren't interested in watching THIS team by this point then you do not have a passion for the sport or very high awareness. National basketball fans, the passionate journalists who cover the game or former players who love the game are all excited about seeing the Pacers play. So if you aren't then it clearly implies that you have less passion or less savvy then those die-hard non-Indy citizens.

              How are Cowherd or Rusillo or Barkley more interested in the Pacers than some "basketball lover" in Brownsburg or Greencastle? Local "basketball fans" are getting their butts kicked by national basketball fans for space on their own local team's bandwagon. It makes me ashamed, but it makes those not on the wagon just more DEFIANT. Now people want to not like the Pacers just to prove some point, some "don't tell me what to like" point. If that's more important to you than seeing great basketball at the best price in town (sorry, did you donate 50000 to IU for a good seat? Didn't think so) then you are NOT a basketball fan.




              For the younger fans let me tell you, we had low attendance back in the 90's also. But you know what the difference between now and then is? Back then the small group of die-hards had a chip on their shoulder because the NATIONAL media wouldn't recognize our team. By the time the national people came around, even the casual local fans had gotten on-board and were annoyed by the lack of national coverage too.

              Now we have just the opposite, you have tons of national love and a bunch of locals telling them to mind their own business.
              Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 02-24-2013, 03:11 PM.

              Comment


              • Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

                Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                I think thats why magic Johnson was so popular. I think I speak for everyone here when I saw a 6'9" black man going behind his back and throwing no look passes, it was like looking in a mirror.
                I'm pretty sure it was Magic and somebody else...
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                Comment


                • Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                  I'm pretty sure it was Magic and somebody else...
                  Oh, right. We had a 6'9" white guy going behind the back and throwing no look passes for the rest of us to relate to...

                  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


                  • Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

                    Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                    Oh, right. We had a 6'9" white guy going behind the back and throwing no look passes for the rest of us to relate to...
                    A non athletic white guy from an small town in indiana, yep nothing to relate to....
                    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                    Comment


                    • Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

                      Didn't we have a 6'9 white guy from indiana throwing no look passes a few years ago? maybe he was 6'10.
                      "Danny Granger is one of the top players in the league. To move Danny, you better get a lot back." - Larry Bird

                      Comment


                      • Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

                        Guys Kstat is from Michigan, he's talking about what relates to him. Of course we had Bird, but that is why he is talking about Magic.


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

                        Comment


                        • Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

                          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                          A lot of people prefer college over the NBA (specially in Indiana) because college basketball reminds people of the "good all times", there is a reason why Hoosiers is one of the must watched movies of all times.

                          College also gives people things they can related to, almost every college team(except Kentucky?) has one or two non athletic white guys, those guys make a lot of people think "I can do that".

                          Compare that to the NBA and is not even close, I mean who is going to related to a guy like Lebron James? or Dwight Howard? those guys are freak of nature they don't make you think "I can do that", relating to players has a lot to do with attendance in my opinion.


                          Just my two cents
                          I don't believe that has anything to do with it. It's expensive, alright?

                          Comment


                          • Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

                            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth
                            Now people want to not like the Pacers just to prove some point, some "don't tell me what to like" point.
                            Well said. This is the vibe I'm getting from the article quoted by the OP, from the comments on recent Indystar attendance articles, etc.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                              A non athletic white guy from an small town in indiana, yep nothing to relate to....
                              Non athletic? I thought we were talking about Larry bird...were you referring to Steve Alford?
                              Last edited by Kstat; 02-24-2013, 04:47 PM.

                              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


                              • Re: Fan to Pacers: Maybe we're just not that into you.

                                [QUOTE=Naptown_Seth;1594574]

                                that features Calipari "magically" recruiting entire classes of NBA talent every year. He doesn't even work against a cap because the under the table money has no cap./QUOTE]



                                YOU DO HAVE PROOF, RIGHT? If so, have you sent it to the NCAA?

                                It's comments like this from so called "highly intelligent people" that is extremely distrubing to me. You just slandered Calipari and the University of Kentucky with what I'm guessing are assumptions with no valid proof.

                                Personally, I don't know if what you're saying is true or not, but I'm smart enough not to make/put "under the table payment" accusations like this in print. What your beliefs are is one thing, but putting proofless accusations of payments in print in another. If you don't care for Calipari and U of Kentucky that's fine, but making unsubstantiated accusations against both is another. It's one thing to do some IU/Purdue ribbing, but this is way overboard.

                                Personally, I'm saddened to see such comments allowable on a quality forum like PD. JMOAA

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X