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

Non Guaranteed Player contracts…..Would they help the NBA or destroy it?

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

  • #16
    Re: Non Guaranteed Player contracts…..Would they help the NBA or destroy it?

    I like guaranteed contracts it promotes team play. Otherwise every year every player is playing for his next contract - and I believe that promotes selfish play. It is the responsibility of each teams management to pick the right players to give longterm contracts to.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Non Guaranteed Player contracts…..Would they help the NBA or destroy it?

      To me it all starts at the grade school leval, And as it goes into HS it is worse, about how good am I, and if they go to College it is increased even more. By the time a boy reachs the NBA. It is not if they know how to play basketball because most of them don't. All they know how to do is run and gun. That is why the world is stomping the USA. Today. out players dont know what fundamentals are.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Non Guaranteed Player contracts…..Would they help the NBA or destroy it?

        Originally posted by naturallystoned View Post
        I am pretty sure that the MLB and NHL have them but I am not sure because frankly I could care less about those two leagues.
        NHL has them. They have a hard cap with guaranteed contracts.
        Slug 'em Sabres!!!!!
        http://youtube.com/watch?v=cj1SUF4wzu0

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Non Guaranteed Player contracts…..Would they help the NBA or destroy it?

          I raised this issue a few months ago. Does anyone object if I combine the threads?

          http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthread.php?t=25107
          Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
          Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
          Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
          Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
          And life itself, rushing over me
          Life itself, the wind in black elms,
          Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Non Guaranteed Player contracts…..Would they help the NBA or destroy it?

            I've advocated non-guaranteed contracts for years. With the players union, it will never happen, but it could benefit the sport in a number of ways.

            1. It would put more control of players in the hands of the coach. I doubt you would have a jerk like SJAX cussing out his coach on the sidelines.

            2. Over a period of time, I believe it would result in a lower average salary in the NBA. I think players would have to accept lower salaries in otder to have any kind of a comfort level that they might be able to stick with a team longer term.

            3. As a result of #2, I believe it would also result in more controlled, possibly even lower ticket prices for fans.

            4. On the court, it would most likely result in 48 minutes of competitive basketball, rather than 3 quarters of 75% effort and 1 quarter of all-out effort.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Non Guaranteed Player contracts…..Would they help the NBA or destroy it?

              One of the things I love about the NBA is the guaranteed contract.

              While they can hamstring a franchise, they are definitely the right thing to do for players.

              I just think that they whould be shorter, with more options. I think no contract should last more than 5 years, and options should be built into the third year of 5 year "max" deals, and should never extend farther than 5 years after the extension is signed.
              “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

              “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Non Guaranteed Player contracts…..Would they help the NBA or destroy it?

                All that is needed is for the owners and general managers to act like the contracts are guaranteed and not short term monopoly money.
                Originally posted by Natston;n3510291
                I want the people to know that they still have 2 out of the 3 T.J.s working for them, and that ain't bad...

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Non Guaranteed Player contracts…..Would they help the NBA or destroy it?

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                  I like guaranteed contracts it promotes team play. Otherwise every year every player is playing for his next contract - and I believe that promotes selfish play. It is the responsibility of each teams management to pick the right players to give longterm contracts to.
                  Are there no scouts in your world? The guys who play for themselves either wouldn't get picked up or only be a team that was desperate for what he brought.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Non Guaranteed Player contracts…..Would they help the NBA or destroy it?

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    I like guaranteed contracts it promotes team play. Otherwise every year every player is playing for his next contract - and I believe that promotes selfish play. It is the responsibility of each teams management to pick the right players to give longterm contracts to.
                    That alreay happens.

                    A prime example, and the most recent, would be Bonzi Wells.
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Non Guaranteed Player contracts…..Would they help the NBA or destroy it?

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      I like guaranteed contracts it promotes team play. Otherwise every year every player is playing for his next contract - and I believe that promotes selfish play.
                      I know what you're saying but wouldn't the selfish players be cast aside? I think that would sort itself out fairly quickly and then we'd all be better off for it. To be selfish that would mean you aren't doing what the coach wants. And if you aren't doing what the coach wants, that means the doghouse for you. And if you stay in the doghouse only the dumbest player in the world could possibly think his contract would be picked up into the next season.



                      It is the responsibility of each teams management to pick the right players to give longterm contracts to.
                      This I agree with BUT: It's already (IMHO) proven that they can't do that. Some of it is understandable, some of it is the hand in the cookie jar syndrome. But then the understandable part is when a player looks like they are on an ascension and then levels off much sooner than anticipated. How much of that is because they got a guaranteed contract and got 'satisfied'?

                      -Bball
                      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


                      • #26
                        Re: Non Guaranteed Player contracts…..Would they help the NBA or destroy it?

                        Originally posted by Kraft View Post
                        Just remember to consider this ... the NFL allows signing bonuses, which are guaranteed and count against the cap no matter what. The bonus hit on the cap is prorated out through the life of the contract, but if a player is cut, the bonus accelerates forward. So if, for example, Reggie Wayne and Peyton Manning were cut by the Colts tomorrow, there'd be a huge cap hit. It'd really hamstring the team.


                        Yes, before everyone starts thinking that in the NFL, teams can just cut guys left and right...

                        In their system there are player protections such as "Franchise Tags" and the hit on the HARD salary cap. Remember the T.O. situation? The Eagles couldn't just cut him for being an ***. In the end, he wound up getting all his signing bonus money from Philly where the team still got punished cap wise, then got to collect from the Cowboys too.

                        Also, I havn't heard anyone mention the word, "Holdout" The NFL has them every year. I'd hate for a guy in his 2nd year of a new deal to claim that he is being low balled by the team and misses camp because he is prepared to sit out a year to prove his point. Usually, the team just knuckles under and renegotiates with the player. Rarely it is the other way around where the player's bluff is called and he returns to camp.

                        Also another fact of life in the NFL is that player trades are rare and fare and few between due to the nature of their salary cap system. If you notice most of their trades are for draft picks due to the nature of their system.

                        To get the players union to even consider a change, there would have to be player protections. For those of you that think that the NBA can do what the NFL did in the 80's...Think again, the NFL owners had a strong war chest and were prepared to spend major money to break the players union. There are too many NBA owners that don't have deep enough pockets to go one year or longer to break the players union. Remember, even when the games are not going on, that Arena lease STILL has to be paid along with other service contracts!!! There is only a couple of owners in the NBA that own their buildings, most of the owners lease from their municipality.

                        The lockout shortened season nearly killed some of the owners 9 years ago. Not every owner is Simon property group.

                        Honestly, I hate when this argument comes up because it is always fueled by fan jealousy for the money that the atheletes make. Trust me, the NFL system is very owner friendly, but last time I checked NFL tickets on average are STILL the most expensive ticket to get a hold of. Those owners are not cutting prices any time soon if they ever break the union. Sometimes I never understand why fans side with the owners over the players. It's not like you as a fan will see any of the money in the form of lower ticket prices. That will just be more money to the owners bottom line. Period!
                        ...Still "flying casual"
                        @roaminggnome74

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Non Guaranteed Player contracts…..Would they help the NBA or destroy it?

                          Originally posted by Bball View Post
                          I know what you're saying but wouldn't the selfish players be cast aside? I think that would sort itself out fairly quickly and then we'd all be better off for it. To be selfish that would mean you aren't doing what the coach wants. And if you aren't doing what the coach wants, that means the doghouse for you. And if you stay in the doghouse only the dumbest player in the world could possibly think his contract would be picked up into the next season.
                          In theory, sure. Absolutely. That is an ideal world.

                          Except sometimes those players are talented, sometimes all-world talented. See: Terrell Owens. Teams keep rolling the dice on that jackass. It works for a while. And then it blows up.

                          But, wait, only poorly managed teams would do that, right? Well, see: Ron Artest. Mr. Selfish himself. Would the Pacers have simply cast him aside if his contract wasn't guaranteed? I'm guessing no -- his ability was just too great, as was his value. There was no easy replacing Ron Artest, which was proven by the fact that we held onto him forever.

                          In the NFL, replacing all-world talents like Owens is hard, but manageable. You can draft a seventh rounder and get lucky (see: Marques Colston). There's no easy plucking of an all-world defender in the NBA.

                          If only ...

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Non Guaranteed Player contracts…..Would they help the NBA or destroy it?

                            I am absolutely for non-guaranteed contracts.
                            The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Non Guaranteed Player contracts…..Would they help the NBA or destroy it?

                              Originally posted by Kraft View Post
                              In theory, sure. Absolutely. That is an ideal world.

                              Except sometimes those players are talented, sometimes all-world talented. See: Terrell Owens. Teams keep rolling the dice on that jackass. It works for a while. And then it blows up.

                              But, wait, only poorly managed teams would do that, right? Well, see: Ron Artest. Mr. Selfish himself. Would the Pacers have simply cast him aside if his contract wasn't guaranteed? I'm guessing no -- his ability was just too great, as was his value. There was no easy replacing Ron Artest, which was proven by the fact that we held onto him forever.

                              In the NFL, replacing all-world talents like Owens is hard, but manageable. You can draft a seventh rounder and get lucky (see: Marques Colston). There's no easy plucking of an all-world defender in the NBA.

                              If only ...
                              But there are MANY more players in the NFL than the NBA and how many TO's has it created or needed to be dealt with? The percentages would seem fairly favorable to me.

                              -Bball
                              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


                              • #30
                                Re: Non Guaranteed Player contracts…..Would they help the NBA or destroy it?

                                I'm happy with a system that rewards good GMs and actually allows trades. With shorter length maximum year contracts, I have little to no complaint with the NBA salary structure.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X