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

The Salary Picture

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

  • #16
    Re: The Salary Picture

    Seriously when the Pacers hire you guys to sign players to contracts then you can worry about managing the rosters and salary cap.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: The Salary Picture

      The Pacers are getting to a point where they're no longer wasting as much money, and that's a positive sign. I'm curious as to what they'll do when they have to re-sign the Grangers and Harrisons.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: The Salary Picture

        Originally posted by Putnam View Post
        Yeah.

        Plus, the better teams are not those with the maxed out payrolls. Teams are better advised to keep their payrolls manageable and moderate rather than chasing talent at any price. The correlation between money and performance is pretty loose, and even when you can afford it, as the Knicks can, spending doesn't buy wins.

        Finally, from a strictly personal point of view I don't believe professional athletes deserve what they are paid, and I'd rather the Pacers were low in the scale rather than one of the most costly teams.

        There is nothing disloyal about this. Of course I want them to be good and win games. I wish the payroll were lower because I really believe they'd be a better team right now if they were several million dollars lower. And there are several teams in the NBA with lower payrolls that are certainbly better than the Pacers.

        Anyway, let's don't let trolls divert this thread. The point is really a positive one. The Pacers have improved their payroll, which is a good thing.
        The only way a lower salary helps (talent wise ) is if the salary is low enough to gives money under the cap to sign free agents or flexibility to make trades. Now we are in a position wear we want to rebuild(current lineup doesn't work out), we can concievably get to that position. Without flexibility the salary means nothing (talent wise).

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: The Salary Picture

          It's not worth stressing out about it. Do you worry about every business that you give money too's financial situation? I didn't think so.

          You guys really need to stop taking it so seriously. When you spend a lot of time on the internet complaining about players on the team, moves by Walsh, and how much money the players are getting paid you take too much fun out of it. It's just a basketball team, it's for your entertainment. Walsh and all the other executives get paid to worry about this stuff, you don't have to. Just enjoy the team, if you don't like them find another team. Just stop with all the negativity, its not worth it.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: The Salary Picture

            Originally posted by Leisure Suit Larry View Post
            but some of you guys act like the players are working for you.
            On that point, I think your are right. I will admit that to a certain extent, I feel that way.

            I've followed this team for going on 40 years. I'm embarrassed to say that I've spent more on season tickets and fan memorabilia for this team than I've ever made in a single year's salary.

            These guys, whenever they step on a court, have "Indiana" across their chests. Since I travel a lot, I am able to take a great deal of pride in the way they play the game, their winning seasons, and in the way that they represent my city.

            Of courese, when they do things that don't represent my city well, I have to take a lot of grief.

            But without expounding further, yes, I do believe they in some small way work for me. Because they have an influence on how my city is percieved.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: The Salary Picture

              Originally posted by spazzxb View Post
              The only way a lower salary helps (talent wise ) is if the salary is low enough to gives money under the cap to sign free agents or flexibility to make trades. Now we are in a position wear we want to rebuild(current lineup doesn't work out), we can concievably get to that position. Without flexibility the salary means nothing (talent wise).

              Not necessarily true. I could be wrong, but I'm thinking $10 million less will help towards the net profit/loss, and may help keep the Pacers in Indiana.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: The Salary Picture

                Originally posted by Leisure Suit Larry View Post
                It's not worth stressing out about it. Do you worry about every business that you give money too's financial situation? I didn't think so.

                You guys really need to stop taking it so seriously. When you spend a lot of time on the internet complaining about players on the team, moves by Walsh, and how much money the players are getting paid you take too much fun out of it. It's just a basketball team, it's for your entertainment. Walsh and all the other executives get paid to worry about this stuff, you don't have to. Just enjoy the team, if you don't like them find another team. Just stop with all the negativity, its not worth it.
                The salary cap and how much we pay our players is an intregal factor in both our long-term and short-term ability to put a quality line-up on the floor. It's unfortunate, but the way a GM manages the cap can be as significant as how they judge player talent in the modern NBA.

                So, it's not simply negativity or *****ing. It's discussing the finer details of the team we cheer for and how those in charge of running it are performing. If the money matters aren't something that interest you, I suggest you don't bother with these threads and allow those of us that this does interest to simply talk about it as we'd like.
                Read my Pacers blog:
                8points9seconds.com

                Follow my twitter:

                @8pts9secs

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: The Salary Picture

                  Originally posted by beast23 View Post
                  On that point, I think your are right. I will admit that to a certain extent, I feel that way.

                  I've followed this team for going on 40 years. I'm embarrassed to say that I've spent more on season tickets and fan memorabilia for this team than I've ever made in a single year's salary.

                  These guys, whenever they step on a court, have "Indiana" across their chests. Since I travel a lot, I am able to take a great deal of pride in the way they play the game, their winning seasons, and in the way that they represent my city.

                  Of courese, when they do things that don't represent my city well, I have to take a lot of grief.

                  But without expounding further, yes, I do believe they in some small way work for me. Because they have an influence on how my city is percieved.
                  I've been around for as long as you beast and I can't understand why this concept is so hard for some to grasp.
                  The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: The Salary Picture

                    Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                    Thanks for clarifying the details about Bender. But what do you think about knocking off more than $10 million from the payroll. We are still encumbered with 5 more years of Tinsley and four more years of Jackson, but those are one less than last year.

                    Except for Jermaine's max contract, I feel good about the other guys who are locked in for multiple years: Granger, Daniels and Harrington. Even Foster.

                    Don't you like the payroll better now that a year ago?
                    Currently, I'd say we don't have a single really bad contract on our roster. JO, of course, got a max deal when max deals were going for more than they are now, which is unfortunate and could burn us down the line, but not much you can do about that. We had to give him the max to keep him, and that's what we did. Can't really second guess that one.

                    Tinsley and Jackson each have maybe two more years than I'd like, but the, base yearly number isn't a big enough one to make them anything approaching "albatross" level. They are just slight inconveniences at this point, who with two years of slightly above average performance, will be fine and very movable. It goes the other way entirely if Tinsley goes down again this year or Jackson pulls anymore shenangins.

                    But overall, I think we're doing really, really well now that Bender/Croshere are off the books. And barring any major salary acquisitions, we should be able to give Danny as much as he has earned to keep him here when we offer him an extension next summer. If either Powell, Marshall, Shawne of Greene can turn into something worth keeping for the long-term, we could be in a good position to have a bunch of reasonable salaries around JO/Harrington/Granger/Tins for the next four years or so.
                    Read my Pacers blog:
                    8points9seconds.com

                    Follow my twitter:

                    @8pts9secs

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: The Salary Picture

                      Originally posted by ABADays View Post
                      I've been around for as long as you beast and I can't understand why this concept is so hard for some to grasp.
                      It's not, I'm just saying YOU are not their employer, no matter what you want to think. Whether you support the team financially or not, they are going to be writing the checks. If you were that important wouldn't they consult you before signing any players?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: The Salary Picture

                        Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                        Not necessarily true. I could be wrong, but I'm thinking $10 million less will help towards the net profit/loss, and may help keep the Pacers in Indiana.
                        That's really wild, presuming the Pacers are in danger of going somewhere.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: The Salary Picture

                          Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                          Not necessarily true. I could be wrong, but I'm thinking $10 million less will help towards the net profit/loss, and may help keep the Pacers in Indiana.
                          lol, where do you guys come up with this crap? they aren't leaving Indiana, they have a contract with the city.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: The Salary Picture

                            Originally posted by Leisure Suit Larry View Post
                            It's not, I'm just saying YOU are not their employer, no matter what you want to think. Whether you support the team financially or not, they are going to be writing the checks. If you were that important wouldn't they consult you before signing any players?
                            Larry, why do you find it necessary to even comment on this? They explained their thinking and yet you post to tell them what everyone already knows. That's redundant.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: The Salary Picture

                              The Pacers bring in more than 90 million a year minus the 61-65 million on salaries, they're not losing money thats for sure.

                              http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/about_pse.html

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: The Salary Picture

                                Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                                Larry, why do you find it necessary to even comment on this? They explained their thinking and yet you post to tell them what everyone already knows. That's redundant.
                                No, they are convincing themselves that they are more important than they are. I understand that most fans put spend money on the team but that doesn't give them the right to make decisions. I bought a hamburger at Burger King today but I'm not going to go tell them how to run their restaurant.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X