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: Larry Bird meeting with Kings, wants $5 million per year and maybe partial ownership

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

  • #91
    Re: Report: Larry Bird meeting with Kings, wants $5 million per year and maybe partial ownership

    http://www.cbssports.com/nba/blog/ke...y-to-land-bird

    The Kings are continuing to pursue former Pacers president Larry Bird, but a person briefed on Bird's plans told CBSSports.com on Friday that it would be surprising if Bird took the job.

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Report: Larry Bird meeting with Kings, wants $5 million per year and maybe partial ownership

      Watch them hire Morway.
      "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

      "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Report: Larry Bird meeting with Kings, wants $5 million per year and maybe partial ownership

        Originally posted by Sandman21 View Post
        Watch them hire Morway.
        I'd suspect Bird was called by Sac not to take the front office job, but more to give a Morway recommendation.

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Report: Larry Bird meeting with Kings, wants $5 million per year and maybe partial ownership

          Originally posted by Sandman21 View Post
          I think it means Bird is testing the waters and seeing whats out there offerwise. If he gets one he likes, Herb will have to match or exceed or Larry is going elsewhere. If Larry comes back, Walsh becomes a part time consultant, but otherwise is retired.

          If Bird comes back the only thing Walsh will be consulting about is shuffleboard!

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Report: Larry Bird meeting with Kings, wants $5 million per year and maybe partial ownership

            Originally posted by docpaul View Post
            I'd suspect Bird was called by Sac not to take the front office job, but more to give a Morway recommendation.
            Bird doesn't seem like he'd be Morway's best reference...
            This is the darkest timeline.

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Report: Larry Bird meeting with Kings, wants $5 million per year and maybe partial ownership

              What seems to be clear is that Bird is going anywhere other than Indy. The bull that he had to fix his back never made sense. Did he in fact have surgery? Does anyone know that he repaired his back?
              Simon is comfortable with Walsh and will be so even if the team goes back in the toilet. To me there are two Donnies. The one who took some chances in his younger days and made a few great trades and the recent Donnie and the Donnie who was the Knicks GM. Since the former Donnie is gone I would be happy with Larry (recent exec of the year).

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Report: Larry Bird meeting with Kings, wants $5 million per year and maybe partial ownership

                Originally posted by Tom White View Post
                The comments by Wells were recent, but how old are the quotes he is using?
                Probably when Wells interviewed Herb over the phone for this article:

                http://www.indystar.com/article/2013...ference-finals

                Herb Simon found himself looking around Bankers Life Fieldhouse at times during the playoffs.

                The Indiana Pacers owner, usually sitting next to president Donnie Walsh in the corner near the tunnel, couldn’t help but smile as he looked around the building.

                Gold T-shirts and gold towels were often the theme during the Pacers’ incredible run to the Eastern Conference Finals.

                The deep financial hole the Pacers have been in for so many years, isn’t completely behind them yet, but Simon said he feels his franchise is turning the corner.

                The Pacers — led by Paul George and Roy Hibbert — are set to be competitive for years to come and if the support they received during the playoffs is any indication, the fans who once turned their backs on the franchise are now supporting them.

                “I think the fans bought into our team and it certainly pleased us,” Simon told The Star in a recent phone interview. “This is a real team. It’s a bunch of people who played together, cared for each other and worked to get better as a team. That’s the exciting part of it.”

                The Pacers, bottom feeders in attendance for a number of years, were 20th in the league in capacity this past season, playing to 84.4 percent of the fieldhouse’s capacity during 41 regular season games. Their average attendance of 15,269 ranked 25th among the 30 franchises, slotted between Charlotte and Atlanta.

                They sold out all nine home games — three each against Atlanta, New York and Miami — during the playoffs.

                “We’re very grateful to the city and the state for embracing us,” Pacers Chief Operating Officer Rick Fuson said. “Great guys, great team. It’s a renewal in basketball and the Pacers in Indiana at the highest level. The excitement and genuine carrying the people express for the team is very heart felt.”

                The Pacers — as they have done consistently throughout the years — declined to provide dollar figures on the financial state of the franchise.

                Simon said they are heading in the right direction, but there’s still work to do in order for the Pacers to get out of the red.

                “If you’re saying ‘I’m losing less money than I did a few years ago,’ the answer is yes,” Simon said. “We’re still not up there in ticket sales like we should be, but we’re getting better every day.”

                The Pacers had their highest season-ticket renewal rate in the past 10 years, almost 90 percent, putting them in the top eight in the league, Fuson said.

                The Pacers also had a 32 percent boost in concession stand sales in the playoffs compared to the regular season. Merchandise sales were up 28 percent and their gross sales nearly doubled, according to Fuson.

                The Pacers don’t keep all the money they generated in the playoffs; 10 percent goes to the city of Indianapolis, 50 percent goes to the NBA as part of revenue redistribution, and the Pacers get the remaining portion after they pay for expenses like the T-shirts and towels they provided fans during the playoffs.

                The new revenue sharing program put into the collective bargaining agreement after the lockout ended in November 2011 will help teams like the Pacers.

                The players went from receiving 57 percent of the basketball-related income in the old collective bargaining agreement to 49 to 51 percent of BRI, based on revenue projections, in the new agreement. That's a drop of about $200 million annually in player compensation.

                “The revenue sharing will help somewhat, but a market size like ours is a struggle,” Simon said. “We have to continue to have a top team, a winning team because we don’t have some of the income as some of the larger markets, but we’re going to do everything we can to be competitive.”

                The optimism going forward is one of the reasons Simon has no interest in relocating or selling the franchise he and his late brother Melvin have owned for the past 30 years.

                “I can’t see that happening while I’m still around,” Simon said. “My job is to make this team viable and to keep it here in the city where it belongs. I’m going to do everything I can to make that happen.”

                Who will lead the Pacers front office in the future is still up the air.

                Simon and Walsh both left the door open for Larry Bird to return to the franchise when he decided to step away a year ago.

                Now they’re waiting on Bird, who was responsible for putting the Pacers together, to make a decision. The Sacramento Kings are also interested in Bird working in their front office.

                “We know Larry,” Simon said. “Larry will make a decision shortly and let us know. I’m sure he’s checking out his options. That’s the deal Donnie and I made with him. He can step away and if he wants to come back, Donnie and I will figure out a way to make it work it out.”
                "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Report: Larry Bird meeting with Kings, wants $5 million per year and maybe partial ownership

                  Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                  Maybe Bird wants Walsh as a consultant to know what not to do, I can see him asking Walsh what to do just to do the opposite.
                  Hey it could work, I mean obviously this is how Vogel learned from Satan. Watch what he did and then do everything the exact opposite.


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

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Report: Larry Bird meeting with Kings, wants $5 million per year and maybe partial ownership

                    At least from reading the quote it sounds like Simon would welcome Bird back and that's good news.
                    This is still Larry's team, he needs to come back and finish the job he started.


                    Originally posted by Sandman21 View Post
                    Probably when Wells interviewed Herb over the phone for this article:

                    http://www.indystar.com/article/2013...ference-finals
                    Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Report: Larry Bird meeting with Kings, wants $5 million per year and maybe partial ownership

                      Originally posted by Peck View Post
                      Hey it could work, I mean obviously this is how Vogel learned from Satan. Watch what he did and then do everything the exact opposite.
                      It periodically strikes me just how bizarre that is. I mean Vogel cut his teeth under guys like JOB and Slick Rick Pitino--ardent admirers of the three point shot. Pitino preaches defense in college, but his full court pressing antics aren't something that will ever really work in the NBA. It almost seems like Vogel was like, "Okay, these guys are getting way too cute. Let's get back to basics. Defense, rebounding, high percentage shots."

                      Comment


                      • Re: Report: Larry Bird meeting with Kings, wants $5 million per year and maybe partial ownership

                        Originally posted by cdash View Post
                        It periodically strikes me just how bizarre that is. I mean Vogel cut his teeth under guys like JOB and Slick Rick Pitino--ardent admirers of the three point shot. Pitino preaches defense in college, but his full court pressing antics aren't something that will ever really work in the NBA. It almost seems like Vogel was like, "Okay, these guys are getting way too cute. Let's get back to basics. Defense, rebounding, high percentage shots."
                        Forget the Xs and Os differences, think about his approach to player relations in contrast to his teachers, specifically JOB, Pitino's always been liked by his players and not really a hardass or anything far as I know. But man, he followed JOB every step of the way and they couldn't be any more different in the way they interact with their team.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Report: Larry Bird meeting with Kings, wants $5 million per year and maybe partial ownership

                          Originally posted by docpaul View Post
                          I'd suspect Bird was called by Sac not to take the front office job, but more to give a Morway recommendation.
                          I'd suspect out of the lot, Mullin would get a better recommendation from Larry than Morway would....
                          http://www.nba.com/gamenotes/pacers.pdf

                          Comment


                          • Re: Report: Larry Bird meeting with Kings, wants $5 million per year and maybe partial ownership

                            http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap...ning-To-Pacers


                            Donnie Walsh has no idea if Larry Bird will return as president of the Indiana Pacers.
                            Walsh spoke with Bird shortly before the playoffs began and didn't glean anything about his plans.
                            “I told him he should come back, but he didn't really give me an answer, so I said that's the last time I was going to ask,” Walsh said. “And it was.”
                            The Sacramento Kings are interested in Bird leading their front office. Should Bird take the job, he would face a rebuilding job even greater than the one he spearheaded with the Pacers.
                            “It takes a lot of courage to go do it the first time,” Walsh said. “Do you want to do it again and rebuild the team? It won't be fun. It's not fun. And you're going to lose (for awhile).”
                            Walsh is willing to resume retirement if Bird returns to the Pacers front office.
                            “The only way I'd come back is if (Bird) would say, 'I need you to help me with this,' or something like that,” Walsh said. “I know I could do that. In that role you can call people in the league and find out a lot of things. You're not the GM or the president.”
                            Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Report: Larry Bird meeting with Kings, wants $5 million per year and maybe partial ownership

                              Did you forget he played in Boston? He collected a check in Indiana. Grew up in Indiana.....

                              Comment


                              • Re: Report: Larry Bird meeting with Kings, wants $5 million per year and maybe partial ownership

                                Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
                                http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap...ning-To-Pacers


                                Donnie Walsh has no idea if Larry Bird will return as president of the Indiana Pacers.
                                Walsh spoke with Bird shortly before the playoffs began and didn't glean anything about his plans.
                                “I told him he should come back, but he didn't really give me an answer, so I said that's the last time I was going to ask,” Walsh said. “And it was.”
                                The Sacramento Kings are interested in Bird leading their front office. Should Bird take the job, he would face a rebuilding job even greater than the one he spearheaded with the Pacers.
                                “It takes a lot of courage to go do it the first time,” Walsh said. “Do you want to do it again and rebuild the team? It won't be fun. It's not fun. And you're going to lose (for awhile).”
                                Walsh is willing to resume retirement if Bird returns to the Pacers front office.
                                “The only way I'd come back is if (Bird) would say, 'I need you to help me with this,' or something like that,” Walsh said. “I know I could do that. In that role you can call people in the league and find out a lot of things. You're not the GM or the president.”
                                I really don't like this Walsh situation, Bird needs to decide if he's coming back and if he isn't we need to get rid of Walsh, his heart is clearly not in this.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X