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

Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

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

  • #61
    Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

    Ratings 30-40 years ago aren't what they are today. TV is now completely driven by them. The ratings dropped too much for NBC so they went another direction.

    I find it weird to argue that Conan's relationship with an exec. was a reason for his downfall. They must of had a good enough relationship for them to take the chance, and push out the #1 king of late night ratings in favor of Conan.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

      Originally posted by Merz View Post
      Do you seriously think the ratings from Carson to Leno didn't drop? It takes time whenever a long time host is replaced. It also doesn't help when the new host is getting absolutely dreadful ratings support.

      If it was all about Leno pulling people in, why was the new earlier Leno show such a catastrophe?

      Edit: I'm not arguing that switching things, when they didn't need to be, was the right move. I'm just saying Conan didn't exactly get a fair shake after the fact.

      Leno's ratings dropped for the same reason that CART's ratings dropped after they were kicked out of the Indy 500. People loved watching the CART Indy 500's (Leno's Tonight Show, but they didn't like watching a series that no longer had the Indy 500 has the centerpiece (Jay Leno Show, which was on at a different time didn't have the lore of The Tonight Show). As far as the Indy 500 (The Tonight Show) itself was concerned, people no longer wanted to watch that anymore either without the comic who they had enjoyed for the last 17 years. Conan (the Indy Racing League in this example) was seen as an inferior knockoff product compared to the quality they had witnessed over the last 17 years.

      The CART-IRL Indy 500 thing is a perfect example. The CART Indy 500's were a major success together, but CART was in bad shape without the 500 and the 500 itself was running an inferior product at it's track. Leno's The Tonight Show had 17 years worth of viewer satisfaction, but you pull the parties away from each other and it's not the same. Obviously The Tonight Show brand helped Leno out a lot. It was the perfect match. Messing it all up and putting Jay on at a new 10 PM show with no history and then moving in a new guy to the 11:35 slot who couldn't uphold the old ratings was just a terrible move.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
        TV is now completely driven by them.
        Which is why the Netflix model has experienced such epic failures with it's TV shows. The TV game is changing; evolving as it always does.

        NBC, in the short term, made a move that is going to cost it a hit in the ratings. I think the key demographics won't fall as much as the overall numbers, but they will fall. They made a move to let Fallon have the time slot and the show and build up that demographic, hoping the long-term payout is worth it. They saw the up and comers in the arena (Kimmel, Fallon, hell, Stewart and Colbert could be lumped in there) and realized they needed to make a move.

        For argument's sake, let's say Fox does decide to jump in the game and get into that coveted time slot. First off, does anyone actually think Jay Leno would be their first choice? He doesn't seem to fit their programming model (or TBS's, for that matter). Second, let's assume he did get the show. Does anyone think his numbers would be what they were on NBC? I highly, highly doubt it.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

          I have no idea why Leno had the ratings... time slot? Established show? It's not because he's better at it. He fits that shows format... it's an old, sort of stiff format. I stopped watching it years ago.
          There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

            I never watch Leno but figured I would tonight being his last show and all. Man, that's the best monologue his writing staff could give him for his last show ever? Christ. Not even a corner of my mouth perked up. THAT is what's been winning ratings battles?

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

              Mainstream audiences don't need much to giggle, I think.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                Mainstream audiences don't need much to giggle, I think.
                I dunno, I guess. I don't dislike the guy or anything but that's the most bland stuff I've ever seen. Whatever, dif'rent strokes dif'rent folks and all.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                  I'm convinced that Leno's power is in my parents generation. I am 37, and I'm not sure I've ever asked or been asked anything along the lines of "Hey did you see Leno last night?" To me, his show skews older. Just like I highly doubt my 71 year old dad has ever caught a glimpse of Conan.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                    Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                    I never watch Leno but figured I would tonight being his last show and all. Man, that's the best monologue his writing staff could give him for his last show ever? Christ. Not even a corner of my mouth perked up. THAT is what's been winning ratings battles?
                    Exactly how I feel watching Conan.
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                      Originally posted by travmil View Post
                      I'm convinced that Leno's power is in my parents generation. I am 37, and I'm not sure I've ever asked or been asked anything along the lines of "Hey did you see Leno last night?" To me, his show skews older. Just like I highly doubt my 71 year old dad has ever caught a glimpse of Conan.
                      This past week Conan got a 0.4rating for the 18-49 demographic, and a 0.7 rating overall.

                      I randomly selected Dec 16-20 to look at Leno's ratings, because of the uptick he's currently getting. Leno got a 1.0 rating for the 18-49, and a season-to-date rating of 0.9.

                      I suppose it could be skewed towards the older end of that range, but Leno still beats Conan in all demographic ratings.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                        Exactly how I feel watching Conan.

                        Conan would have the highest rated show in television history if he was as popular in real life as he is on this forum. Unfortunately for Conan, the Nielsen rankings aren't calculated by Pacers Digest popularity.
                        Last edited by Sollozzo; 02-07-2014, 10:07 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                          Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                          I have no idea why Leno had the ratings... time slot? Established show? It's not because he's better at it. He fits that shows format... it's an old, sort of stiff format. I stopped watching it years ago.
                          Maybe it's as simple as the fact that people enjoy his show and have for over two decades?

                          It's pretty simple. People have liked him for a long time. You might not think that he is better at it, but any one person's opinion is purely subjective. As far as the masses are concerned, they have liked Leno on The Tonight Show for a long time and would have continued to like him if it wasn't being stolen from him yet agin. There's no deep meaning to be had here. People like his show and always have. Conan OTOH gets every possible excuse under the sun to cover up for the fact that people simply didn't want to watch him. People blame Jay Leno for it, even though Conan had a significant three month long ratings dive before Leno's 10 PM show premiered. Or they blame the head of NBC for not liking Conan, even though the guy kicked out the ratings king so that he could roll out the red carpet for Conan. I guess Michael Jackson dying in the summer of 2009 is also another excuse since that allegedly took away attention from Conan. Every excuse under the sun to cover up for the fact that people initially tuned in and gave the show a chance, but quickly turned away when they realized that it wasn't at the high quality it had been in previous years.

                          Some people might think that football is boring and dumb sport to watch, but the masses disagree.
                          Last edited by Sollozzo; 02-07-2014, 10:06 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                            Are you related to Leno?

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                              I think Fallon will do fine assuming Leno does move on and doesn't hang around in the wings. Fallon has a lot of talent. Way more showbiz talent than Conan. I think Fallon can find a groove and run with it. Conan had to learn the role on his feet heading into Late Night and to this day is still rather awkward. He just doesn't have the foundation that other hosts have (talking performance experience).

                              If Leno gives interview after interview talking about how the Tonight Show was taken from him, hinting he'd return if asked, etc. then it might cause Leno loyalists to tune out and not give Fallon a chance.

                              I think Conan brought his Late Night fans with him to the Tonight Show and that was about it. He didn't make new fans or convert Leno loyalists. THAT is what opened the door to all that followed.

                              Fallon has better odds of bringing in new fans... I think....

                              Will it be numbers equal to or better than Leno? I don't know...
                              Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                              ------

                              "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                              -John Wooden

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                                Leno loyalists are some hard-headed folks, they generally like Leno and no one else. Fairly close-minded. They like their set-in-stone, rather dry but predictable show, lol. Have this argument with my friends and family all the time, and it's always the same... they either like Leno and no one else... or they like everyone else and not Leno. They like him standing up there and delivering his lines. My grandparents, for instance, love Leno, hate the new guys. All my younger peeps like Conan/Kimmel et all and don't really care for Leno. My grandparents also are brainwashed by Fox News 15 hours a day, and are very regimented in their thinking and logic, lol.... so there's definitely a large niche group out there of people like this. I'm a Republican and I still can't stand Fox News.... Anyway, I think Leno is part of that old guard that I just don't see much future in beyond Leno himself. I think that's why the execs are always tryin' to replace him. Letterman is somewhere in between that old guard and new guard, he can still crack me up, but at the same time, I get a little tired, he can be a cynical sunnuva*****.

                                I actually think of all the late night guys, Kimmel is far and away the biggest surprise and possibly the most polished, able to carry on a great conversation and have great skits... he's been a real surprise. If you had asked me 15 years ago when he was on The Man Show that he'd develop into the host he is today, I'da said, "Nuh uh." But his show is really very good, he does a great job.

                                Conan has a very unique delivery, he's a very intelligent, witty, funny man... some folks don't have that part of their brain developed (lol), and so they don't like him. My wife hates him, but she also has no sense of humor.

                                Fallon often is the hardest for me to watch, I don't predict great things for him replacing Leno... sorta like Drew Carey replacing Bob Barker on the Price is Right, its just not the same. Like Drew Carey, I think Fallon is better suited in other formats, not necessarily a host. I'm probably in the minority though. His convos can get awkward. He has some good skits, though.

                                Ferguson is an entertaining fellow, even if the show isn't the best produced. He's still a decent talker. He's suckin' hind tit, but I'd still watch him over Leno.

                                Arsenio Hall just needs to stop.
                                Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 02-07-2014, 11:23 AM.
                                There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X