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

Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

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

  • Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

    I'm asking a serious question here. It seems to me that the national and local media loves to bash the NBA. I mean is there any other sport where there is so much talk about TV ratings and about how "no one is watching" I mean every article, every sports talk show for the past two weeks has been discussing how bad the ratings are. Baseball ratings have really fallen off over the years and I just don't see that getting the media coverage as the NBA's falling ratings. Certainly a lot of sports ratings have taken a tumble. But it just seems like so many people enjoy the fact that the NBA ratings have fallen - If I hear another media type say "no one is watching the NBA anymore" I'm going to get sick.

    OK, I am not suggesting that the media not report the facts and I accept the fact that the NBA isn't as popular as it used to be, but it seems like the media enjoys it reporting the downfall of the NBA more so than other sports. It dominates the media coverage. And while the coverage won't keep die-hard fans away, it certainly sways casual fans a great deal.


    Do you agree with me, or maybe am I just oversensitive to the media's coverage because the NBA is by far my favorite sport.

  • #2
    Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

    Being as addicted to ESPN radio as I am I hole heartedly agree with you. people enjoy picking on the NBA for some reason. Basketball IMO needs to get a better T.V. package. Show more games nationally. Weekend double headers and such. Living in a non NBA city you don't see many games. Saturday and Sunday morning double headers would really get to kids of today into it alot more.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

      The media have been saying and continue to say identical comments about the NHL. If it's not the NFL, which is immensely popular, then it appears to be fair game for criticism, deserved or not.
      Take me out to the black, tell 'em I ain't coming back. Burn the land and boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

        I understand what you're saying. I think that one of the reasons that this happens is because people expect the NBA to maintain its popularity after it had what I view as a very successful period from roughly 1989-2001. Other sports that have lost viewership, such as hockey and baseball, have been on the way down for a number of years. Scratch the idea of the media talking constantly about the downfall of hockey, since it has always been a regional sport anyway that has had little to know following in parts of the country from the beginning of time. Baseball's fall is a little more straightforward and obvious. It was for one, an effect of the strike that occured around 1993-1994 (if my memory serves me right, I'm not a big baseball fan) and that whole notion has been beaten to death by the media, so why would the consider to cover it? The media has also spoken frequently about the steriod issue, which still is coming up every now and then. So one reason that media is diverting all of the attention to the fall of basketball right now is because hockey isn't important enough to cover, and the strike and steriod scandals of baseball have been beaten to death.

        The fall of the NBA is interesting and controversial to people because it is much less clear. Many argue that it has occured because of racial and cultural differences that have strongly emerged in the post-Jordan era between players and fans. Now you've got David Stern, who has realized that the most money is in middle rather than urban America, and he is trying to get the league to appeal to the NFL's demographic without doing things that are percieved as outrageously politically incorrect in order to rebuild the stature of his league, which like I have alluded to has fallen out of favor to due evolving trends in society rather than certain events that have just happened. It makes for an interesting story and debate, although the media hasn't really talked about it so directly all that much in fear of getting assailed, which it probably would. They talk about the lessening popularity of basketball itself, but they rarely talk about just why this has happened.

        I do think that there is fault line that has developed between the NBA and modern society now, but I don't really know what the league should do about it. I basically have lived in urban environments all of my life and grew up around lots of blacks and hispanics. Hell, my former girlfriend of 3 years and still one of my best friends is black. That being said I don't condone some of the actions taken off and on the court by many of the players today, many of which are African American due to the large amount of African American basketball players.

        Long rant that deviated from the question a bit, I know.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

          Um, you think?

          Basketball athletes are harder for mainstream America to relate to than any others.

          -The NBA is blacker than any other league

          -The players are physically more disproportionate than any other league

          -The Athletes are making more money than any other league.

          -The Players aren't hiding behind a helmet or a full body uniform. Individualism is much more prevalent than any other sport. NFL players have just as many tatoos, piercings, odd hairstyles, etc, but you never see them because they are covered with pads or a helmet.

          -The NBA allows for emotional "celebration," unlike MLB or the NFL.

          It's much easier to write a scathing column about a someone or something that you can't relate to. The average white columnist is going to treat a white athlete with considerably softer gloves than a black athlete in the same situation.

          And to be fair, it works in reverse. Just check out any of Drew Sharp's last 500 columns.


          Yes, the media loves bashing the NBA moreso than other sports. That's hardly news.
          Last edited by Kstat; 06-17-2007, 09:44 AM.

          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


          • #6
            Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

            Originally posted by obnoxiousmodesty View Post
            The media have been saying and continue to say identical comments about the NHL. If it's not the NFL, which is immensely popular, then it appears to be fair game for criticism, deserved or not.
            The difference is, the media doesn't seem to be reveling in the NHL's decrease in ratings.

            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


            • #7
              Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

              The media has to discuss something that catches the publics attention. Unfortunanetly, currently that is how unappealing the product is. This will last for awhile and if the product doesn't improve the media will drop the subject - just like they have the NHL. Simmons has a great article about how the NBA draft and offseason is more appealing than the finals. I found myself hoping for a sweep so that the media coverage would turn even more to trades and the draft - and I consider myself a fairly big NBA fan. I don't believe that is a good thing for a league. The NBA needs to make some tough, unpopular decisions to improve the product. I just don't see stern doing it.

              As a side note I think I'm going to break something the next time I hear "David Stern is the best commisioner in sports". Let's just say that I strongly disagree with that statement.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

                I'm going to watch the Sports reporters on ESPN in a couple of minutes (something I haven't done in probably 3 or 4 years, I always used to watch that when I was home)

                Anyone want to take bets on how soon into the NBA discussion that the ratings will be brought up. Who knows it might be in the tease or set-up.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

                  Originally posted by rm1369 View Post
                  The media has to discuss something that catches the publics attention. Unfortunanetly, currently that is how unappealing the product is. This will last for awhile and if the product doesn't improve the media will drop the subject - just like they have the NHL. Simmons has a great article about how the NBA draft and offseason is more appealing than the finals. I found myself hoping for a sweep so that the media coverage would turn even more to trades and the draft - and I consider myself a fairly big NBA fan. I don't believe that is a good thing for a league. The NBA needs to make some tough, unpopular decisions to improve the product. I just don't see stern doing it.

                  As a side note I think I'm going to break something the next time I hear "David Stern is the best commisioner in sports". Let's just say that I strongly disagree with that statement.

                  What do you want Stern to do, force the refs to get the right teams into the Finals. Oops a lot of people think that is being done anyway of course you didn't hear much talk of that this year.

                  A lot of rule changes have been made over the past 7 or 8 years to try and open up the game, and it has had an impact, scoring is up across the board and teams that run are more susccessful now than they were 10 years ago. But usually the best defensive teams make it to the finals.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

                    Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                    Um, you think?

                    Basketball athletes are harder for mainstream America to relate to than any others.

                    -The NBA is blacker than any other league

                    -The players are physically more disproportionate than any other league

                    -The Athletes are making more money than any other league.

                    -The Players aren't hiding behind a helmet or a full body uniform. Individualism is much more prevalent than any other sport. NFL players have just as many tatoos, piercings, odd hairstyles, etc, but you never see them because they are covered with pads or a helmet.

                    -The NBA allows for emotional "celebration," unlike MLB or the NFL.

                    It's much easier to write a scathing column about a someone or something that you can't relate to. The average white columnist is going to treat a white athlete with considerably softer gloves than a black athlete in the same situation.

                    And to be fair, it works in reverse. Just check out any of Drew Sharp's last 500 columns.


                    Yes, the media loves bashing the NBA moreso than other sports. That's hardly news.
                    Was the NBA whiter during the Bulls years? Is the US more rascist than during that period? While I understand and agree somewhat with these reasons (they are hurdles for the NBA), I think they completly ignore the truth - The NBA product is not as appealing as in the past. The media is discussing the drop in ratings and appeal of the NBA - not causing it. During the GS / Dallas series the dominate talk was about the on court play, players, atmosphere, etc. The same with the start of the SA / PHX series - until the NBA stepped on it's own throat and killed what the fans wanted to see. After the suspensions there was no drama left in the playoffs, everyone knew the outcome.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

                      Originally posted by rm1369 View Post
                      After the suspensions there was no drama left in the playoffs, everyone knew the outcome.
                      Everyone knew the outcome of the Cavs vs Pistons series?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        What do you want Stern to do, force the refs to get the right teams into the Finals. Oops a lot of people think that is being done anyway of course you didn't hear much talk of that this year.

                        A lot of rule changes have been made over the past 7 or 8 years to try and open up the game, and it has had an impact, scoring is up across the board and teams that run are more susccessful now than they were 10 years ago. But usually the best defensive teams make it to the finals.
                        I want less games - more rest and practice time for teams, less injuries.

                        I want a more set NBA schedule - 2-3 games per week on standard days, everyone plays. My wife knows I'm watching football on Sundays. As far as she's concerned the NBA plays every day and I can watch it another day. Make Wednesday night (or whatever night) NBA night - televise a a double header with the two most appealing games.

                        I want a shorter faster, playoff system. They drag out the schedule way too long and kill any momentum that developes. Games need to be every other day.

                        Change the first round to best of 3 and the rest to best of 5. The shorter the series the better chance an underdog has.

                        Experiment with widening the court to increase spacing - see the other thread. They changed the ball for marketing reasons - to me that is a bigger change than compensating for the size and speed of the current NBA player.

                        Concentrate on marketing teams instead of players and work to get rid of the "star system". SA should be a compelling team similar to NE in the NFL - they just win. But because the NBA is completly individual based and there star is "boring" they are unappealing. Of course they play great basketball and that is what it should be about.

                        Obviously none of these will happen - they are all "impossible".
                        Last edited by rm1369; 06-17-2007, 10:20 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

                          Yes the poor NBA ratings part of the discussion was in the tease and it was the only part in the tease, we'll see if they talk about anything else. This ticks me off, but if I were a Spurs fan I'd really be upset.

                          Actually I have to give the Sports reporters a lot of credit, they acknowledged the Spurs and how well they play basketball
                          Last edited by Unclebuck; 06-17-2007, 11:05 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

                            Oh, I don't think so. Is there lots of negative coverage? Sure. But baseball gets slammed much worse (and rightfully so, in my opinion.)

                            The media loves Stern, says he's the best sports commisioner in the last 30 years, even after the Suns fiasco. The media hates Selig, and will tell you why at every opportunity. Baseball has the haves and the have-nots, and those in the media who realize there's more teams than the Yanks and the Sox slam the league for such disparity all the time. There's the drug issue, that the media pushes down our throats every day, even though the argument can be made that the fanbase doesn't really care. And then there's the face of the league, Barry Bonds, who for some reason everyone in the media seems to hate more than liberals hate Bush. And it's not about drugs, they've hated him for many, many years, and his passing of Henry Aaron is looked upon as Armageddon.

                            But as I said, the media is critical of the NBA, and IMO, that's a good thing. It means they still care and it's still relevant, unlike hockey.
                            Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Does the media enjoy bashing the NBA.

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                              Everyone knew the outcome of the Cavs vs Pistons series?
                              No, but I and nearly everyone knew that the outcome of that series didn't matter.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X