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

New CIB budget inclues $21mm for potential new Pacers deal

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

  • New CIB budget inclues $21mm for potential new Pacers deal

    http://www.indystar.com/article/2013...ers-fieldhouse

    The Capital Improvement Board is still negotiating a longer-term agreement with the Indiana Pacers, but its 2014 budget includes an estimated $21 million in spending to support an eventual deal.

    That sum includes $11 million for a potential payment to offset the NBA team's costs of operating Bankers Life Fieldhouse. A one-year extension that goes through June 2014 had cost $10 million.

    And the CIB also budgeted $10 million for still-unspecified upgrades at the fieldhouse. CIB President Ann Lathrop said those upgrades are needed items, but are part of negotiations.

    Lathrop called a deal with the Pacers likely by the end of the year; it could extend the team's commitment beyond 2019. She said the amounts in the proposed budget, which is up for vote by CIB members this afternoon, are approximate but reflect current talks with Pacers Sports & Entertainment.

    Lathrop did not reveal anything else about negotiations or hint at the possible agreement term or overall dollar amount being discussed.

    The proposed $115 million operating budget for 2014 reflects a $35 million increase over this year.

    That is due to the anticipated Pacers costs and long-planned maintenance and upgrades at all CIB-overseen facilities, including the convention center and Lucas Oil Stadium.

    Overall, the budget would have a $33 million deficit, dipping into savings set aside in recent years for building upkeep as well as operating reserves.

  • #2
    Re: New CIB budget inclues $21mm for potential new Pacers deal

    shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh........

    Don't say this to loud, it will disturb the paranoia of a few who think the team wants out of town as fast as possible.


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

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: New CIB budget inclues $21mm for potential new Pacers deal

      Remind me again why the NBA expects millions of dollars from each local community again and again to be given to their franchises?

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: New CIB budget inclues $21mm for potential new Pacers deal

        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
        Remind me again why the NBA expects millions of dollars from each local community again and again to be given to their franchises?
        Because they keep getting it, can ya blame em?

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: New CIB budget inclues $21mm for potential new Pacers deal

          Originally posted by Hicks View Post
          Remind me again why the NBA expects millions of dollars from each local community again and again to be given to their franchises?
          Exactly. I mean, I love the Pacers as much as anyone, but I can see where these taxpayer handouts would tick off your average Indy resident. This city has trouble paying for essential services, yet they always conveniently find tens of millions to handout to billionaires. This is why the Colts or Pacers will never leave Indy. Indy is a perfect place to be for billionaire owners who love taxpayer handouts. Taxes for the common man get raised, why millions of taxpayer dollars continue to flow into the hands of billionaires.

          Are the Pacers still going to lead us to believe that they are actually losing money after a deep playoff run? That's always reeked of major BS.
          Last edited by Sollozzo; 08-28-2013, 07:13 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: New CIB budget inclues $21mm for potential new Pacers deal

            http://www.wthr.com/story/20756941/i...t-tax-increase


            In short; 10% of ticket sales is tax to begin with, which will be about 5 mio a year is my guess perhaps even more but I like to err on the safe side
            add to that the tax on the food etc, it ends up being a "give it back" more than anything and why does it not say how much is going to Colts/Lucas stadium?
            So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

            If you've done 6 impossible things today?
            Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: New CIB budget inclues $21mm for potential new Pacers deal

              I guess when I see this and I think about how different communities have to pony up millions of dollars to help pay for these arenas, I just feel like there's possibly some kind of exploitation going on. I mean how much does a community pay Walmart to help build its building?

              I think we are good to go with keeping this team for as long as bankers life Fieldhouse is usable, but I do worry what's going to happen once that day comes that we need something newer.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: New CIB budget inclues $21mm for potential new Pacers deal

                Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                I guess when I see this and I think about how different communities have to pony up millions of dollars to help pay for these arenas, I just feel like there's possibly some kind of exploitation going on. I mean how much does a community pay Walmart to help build its building?

                I think we are good to go with keeping this team for as long as bankers life Fieldhouse is usable, but I do worry what's going to happen once that day comes that we need something newer.
                Wal Mart doesn't have any tickets to lucrative sporting events to hand out to mayors like the Pacers do. I guess they could bribe politicians with some Sam's Club memberships, but that's hardly as cool as Pacer-Heat tickets.

                These politicians receive tickets to the games. You can't expect them to tell the truth as to whether the team is losing money or not. I've never believed that they have, at least not for a period as long as they make us believe. The worth of the Pacers franchise has increased by hundreds of millions since the Simons bought the team. How could the worth of a business increase by such a drastic amount if it was constantly losing a ton of money? It makes no sense at all.

                If a team like the Pacers really has lost as much money as they lead us to believe, then the NBA by any objective measure is a complete and utter failure of a business model.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: New CIB budget inclues $21mm for potential new Pacers deal

                  Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                  I mean how much does a community pay Walmart to help build its building?
                  More than you would think. Look at Plainfield where there are 3 buildings in a quarter mile that either have previously had or currently have a WalMart in them (and Im old enough to remember the first two). Theres a reason that Walmart would build a new building about every ten years.... Tax breaks.
                  "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


                  • #10
                    Re: New CIB budget inclues $21mm for potential new Pacers deal

                    Billionaire welfare, and me and many other people who work as hard as we possibly can, can barely put food on the table after the bills are paid. And I refuse to get government help because I don't think people should be forced onto it because suits all over the world are allowed to immorally suck money from the poor at an alarmingly increasing rate, but billionaires have no problem holding their hand out.

                    I've been a die hard Pacers fan for almost 20 years now, but this is nonsense. My limited time and money could be spent elsewhere. If they can't make money, then they don't need to be in business. They can pay Hibbert 15 million a year to play a freaking game, but they can't afford to go it alone without government money? I know this is the norm, and small markets pretty much do this just to compete, but why exactly should we be stuck with the bill so a billionaire and his heirs can make a **** ton of money and sell the franchise someday to someone who could just move it to a different city anyways?

                    Maybe crap like this will spell the end of my sports fanaticism. Honestly I could live without the Colts and the Pacers, and my time could be spent doing more important stuff. I may not be at that point yet, but billionaire welfare is driving me to question my allegiances.
                    Last edited by Midcoasted; 08-28-2013, 07:30 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: New CIB budget inclues $21mm for potential new Pacers deal

                      Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                      Billionaire welfare, and me and many other people who work as hard as we possibly can can barely put food on the table after the bills are paid. And I refuse to get government help because I don't think people should be forced onto it because suits all over the world are allowed to immorally suck money from the poor at an alarmingly increasing rate, but billionaires have no problem holding their hand out.

                      I've been a die hard Pacers fan for almost 20 years now, but this is nonsense. My limited time and money could be spent elsewhere. If they can't make money, then they don't need to be in business. They can pay Hibbert 15 million a year to play a freaking game, but they can't afford to go it alone without government money? I know this is the norm, and small markets pretty much do this just to compete, but why exactly should we be stuck with the bill so a billionaire and his heirs can make a **** ton of money and sell the franchise someday to someone who could just move it to a different city anyways?

                      Maybe crap like this will spell the end of my sports fanaticism. Honestly I could live without the Colts and the Pacers, and my time could be spent doing more important stuff. I may not be at that point yet, but billionaire welfare is driving me to question my allegiances.

                      Well said. I agree with everything except the being able to live without the Colts and Pacers part.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: New CIB budget inclues $21mm for potential new Pacers deal

                        Originally posted by Sandman21 View Post
                        More than you would think. Look at Plainfield where there are 3 buildings in a quarter mile that either have previously had or currently have a WalMart in them (and Im old enough to remember the first two). Theres a reason that Walmart would build a new building about every ten years.... Tax breaks.
                        And then they get to suck in billions of dollars in profits and pay their workers so low they literally hand out government assistance forms the moment you get the job. How does Costco pay their workers double and still pull in more than enough profit? Costco should be getting tax breaks in Indiana to run Walmart out of business in my book...This whole country is just messed up and sickening anymore. The gap between the rich and everyone else just keeps growing and growing, and there is nothing being done to actually fix the problem because our crooked politicians are just two wings to the same bird...Third party, grassroots political efforts are my only hope, but as long as people are brainwashed by Fox and CNN there is no reason to have any hope...

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: New CIB budget inclues $21mm for potential new Pacers deal

                          Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                          Well said. I agree with everything except the being able to live without the Colts and Pacers part.
                          I didn't say it would be easy, but I could do it. The Colts more than the Pacers, because let's face it, I get way more excited for the start of football season.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: New CIB budget inclues $21mm for potential new Pacers deal

                            I think we need to take a step back here.

                            First, I completely understand what people are saying as far as giving rich people money, but the fact is this is the going rate for ANY sports team. If a federal law was passed to stop tax dollars going to arenas, the money would still come from the pockets of citizens.

                            The fact is, if BLF is empty, the upkeep money still has to be paid, but with the Pacers in there at least there's money coming into the city.

                            Also, lets think about all the Simons have done for this city. It's been a good relationship for both sides.
                            Last edited by billbradley; 08-29-2013, 12:33 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: New CIB budget inclues $21mm for potential new Pacers deal

                              Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                              Well said. I agree with everything except the being able to live without the Colts and Pacers part.
                              This is my problem. I'm disgusted by the way pro leagues operate in the vast majority of cases, but I honestly can't picture what I'd do if I weren't a Pacers and Colts fan, Pacers especially. I've been a fan my entire life, it's part of who I am now. To non-sports fans I'm sure that seems asinine, and it is if we're being honest, but it'd be like someone who's been playing their entire life just never touching a guitar again or something. It'd be one thing if I lived elsewhere, could be outta sight outta mind, but I'm an hour from Indy, there's no way I could just ignore the team. So I just have to live with being a hypocritical moral relativist I guess.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X