Tweet
Originally posted by naptownmenace
View Post
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.
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
-
I agree with most/all of your points. This last part made me chuckle. remembering the random Tuesday in January when me and 500 other guys all moved down to the lower bowl of Market Square watching a game. It was kind of nice in a way as the crowd was so small that you could hear the players and coaches the whole time. Fun times. -
Yes I remember going to games like that with my father.Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
But the fact that you have go back to the 1980's to hate on the Pacers fanbase just shows my point here. The city has changed quite a bit since then. Back then the area I lived (Emerson and Thompson Rd), was a gigantic corn field. Anything outside of 465 was a cornfield. Thats a false equivilency of epic proportions. That was far more about population than anything else.
Every time the Pacers gave them something to cheer for, the building was full, even when all this town was, was a cornfield. Thats reality.
You are also being extremely generous claiming 4 seperate eras of "contending". Thats just not true. Thats how many times they sold themselves as contenders maybe.
Reality says there has been 1 single team that anyone outside of Indiana thought could actually win a title, and that was obviously the Brawl team, and their conservative approach hurt that team as well.Last edited by Taterhead; 02-21-2019, 07:21 PM."Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"Comment
-
No - if I think they're going to win a title, that's part of being a fan. I fully believe that one of these years - they will.Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
If I looked at things your way and always had the feeling that they aren't going to win one - well - why TF do you even watch or follow them ?? Seriously. Just to complain and whine ?? To constantly rag on players because they aren't living up to the unrealistic standards that you put on them and not appreciate the time and effort these KIDS put into developing into better players ??
To whine about the moves that the GM makes because it's not the one YOU would make ??
To say the owner doesn't give a vermin's glutes about the product on the court as long as it's profitable - even though said owner is the reason you have the Indiana Pacers to throw hissy-fits about and didn't do it for the money when the team was this close to moving somewhere else ?? Or just simply -- going away. Like dissolving.
You're better off just being a bandwagon fan each year with the team favored to win it all. Or go support the Knicks. They spend TONS of money. That's a good owner - right ?? That's a franchise that's going to win it all next year - because look at the money they spend and the trades they make and the coaches they go through. Those are all elements of success - aren't they ??Last edited by PacerDude; 02-21-2019, 09:10 PM.Comment
-
Reading this thread made me realize how many people will never be happy until the Pacers win a championship.
Truthfully, it's not that big of deal to me anymore. I accepted the following "facts" about the modern NBA...
1) You basically need a once-in-a-lifetime talent to win a Championship.
2) You have be a favorable FA destination.
3) You have to be able to build a Superteam, but you kinda need 1 and 2 to happen first to accomplish that.
4) Keep in my mind that Lebron has mentioned multiple times that he tried to recruit players to Cleveland...Cleveland got lucky due to the multiple #1 picks (which they only got one right in Irving), and Lebron wanted to be "The One" to bring a Championship to Cleveland being that it was his home state.
Personally, I like turning on my TV to watch a game where the Pacers are mostly likely to win against any opponent on any given night. I like the Pacers being the underdog in most series, because the wins feel soooooooooo much more satisfying. Truthfully, if the Pacers intentionally tanked for even one season, I would probably stopped watching basketball, because I really don't have any interest in watching other teams.
EDIT: The one thing that bugs me the most about this thread is some people's attitudes that the Pacers NEVER had a chance to win a Championship or make the NBA Finals since their last appearance. It's funny that a non-Pacers fan made a video about this team....
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/qCIF9SFWNkI" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCIF9SFWNkILast edited by ksuttonjr76; 02-21-2019, 10:01 PM.
Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?Comment
-
Let me ask you....how many years have you loved this team enough to buy season tickets?Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
Because if you havent done it 10+ times, then you need to shut the **** up and stop acting like some super fan.
"Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"Comment
-
Ok, so now we are getting somewhere.Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
You all love this so much because your fandom is fragile AF. Mine isnt. I still watch when they are bad. I still go to games when they are bad. I dont like spending money on average. Makes me feel like a sucker.
So maybe you and youre fragile fandom, which is based on us beating the Bobcats, maybe that is the real problem here?"Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"Comment
-
People need to stop thinking in terms of tanking vs competing or real fans vs fair weather. Is it so impossible to just ask yourself immediate future vs distant future. Are you willing to sacrifice the now for a chance at a handpicked core that will win big in the future? We had that chance and traded Kawhi for G hill. Y not do it again? I will gladly sacrifice the now to be true contenders in a few years.Comment
-
My father was a season ticket holder since they played in the Pepsi Colliseum. I bought my first season ticket package when I was 15 years old, I saved for a year and a half to buy them, because my father didnt let me go with him every game and it killed me. I had 3 sisters and he wanted everyone to be able to go. My father actually helped me pay for my first tickets because I was short and about to sell my first car before I ever got a chance to drive it, and he knew I would actually do it. I personally held season tickets from 94- 2005. In 2005, I actually sold my 1962 Lincoln Continental to pay for them, and I loved that car more than anything other than basketball. In 2006, I decided it was smarter for me to just buy really good seats for about 10 key games every year instead. From 2007-2010, I lived in Arizona and still found away to attend 32 games over those 3 seasons. And since I moved back to Indiana in 2010, I have continued to attend games on a regular basis, and by regular basis I mean about every 2 weeks or so.
But over the last 5 years I have woken up and realized how foolish I have been to pour my money into supporting this team in the fashion I have, for 25+ years now. Because simply put, the team doesnt value fans like me. They take me for granted. They are after the people who dont even really care. This year I have been to 5 games, and honestly dont think I am gonna continue to go until the owner either pays us back or sells the team.
One thing that really gets under my skin is for some idiot to question my fandom. Because I know for a fact, you havent put in a damn thing compared to me. And my dad is 70 and is 2x the fan I am, been there from the start. Another thing that bothers me is for the owner to **** on us in exchange for some douche who will stop watching the minute times get tough. You dont cater to casual fans for that reason.
No, basketball isnt something I enjoy. Its something I actively love. Big difference. And I can love basketball without the Indiana Pacers."Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"Comment
-
Then why are you doing the very same thing you hate? You called out ksuttonjr76's fandom just one post before saying that questioning your fandom gets under your skin. Why? Why are you doing to others what you hate being done to you?Originally posted by Taterhead View PostOriginally posted by IrishPacer
Empty vessels make the most noise.Comment
-
Comment
-
And that is the problem, if the Pacers had a $2,000 per year budget, then they could do whatever you want them to do, but unfortunately it is quite a bit larger. They need to be able to be solvent, and having 500 super fans, such as yourself, isn’t enough to pay the bills. They need the fair weather fans to stay afloat, risking 5 years of an average attendance of 500 people to increase their odds of winning a championship from 1% to 3%, isn’t worth losing the team, it just isn’t.Originally posted by Taterhead View PostComment
-
If I were a casual fan, it wouldnt bother me one bit.Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
nuntius, what is so hard to understand about this? Ive spent a small fortune following this team. He hasnt. Its not the same.
"Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"Comment
-
Except for the fact that there is more like 10k-12k of those fans like me, and we are who keeps them afloat during bad times.Originally posted by kent beckley View Post
Go ahead and please the people who will abandon you at the drop of a hat. See how that works out for you."Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"Comment
-
Hasn't he? How can you know? Just because he says that he would stop watching basketball if we intentionally tanked it means that he hasn't spent money on the team in the past? You're making an assumption on his fandom simply because he disagrees with you. That's exactly the kind of thing that people in the start of this thread did to you and you got worked up about it.Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
No, it's absolutely the same thing.Originally posted by IrishPacer
Empty vessels make the most noise.Comment
-
If those of us who buy season tickets through thick or thin were enough to support the team then we wouldn't be having this conversation. Yes, I said "us", and I completely disagree that all current season ticket holders are thick-or-thin season ticket holders - not least because we don't have 50%+ of BLF capacity filled by full season ticket holders, much less immovable ones.Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
If losing in the current year guaranteed winning in a future year we wouldn't be having this conversation - certainly we wouldn't be having it if tanking for 2 years won a championship every time.
If there was a single guaranteed method of building a successful team then we wouldn't be having this conversation.
If everyone's enjoyment of sports was just watching young guys struggle while they learn the game then we wouldn't be having this conversation.
If everyone agreed on which player on the team was expendable and which player out there available in either FA or trade was the solution, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
The problem is that in the NBA you can do all the "right" things - tank into the lottery year after year, take the consensus #1 pick every one of those years, and at most get 4-5 years of being a "contender" while most likely still not winning a championship. Essentially, you can spend twice as much time being a horrible team to watch as being a team that plays well (because playing well in those tanking years keeps you from tanking, so by definition you have to not play the good players you got from the lottery or else you'll be too high in the lottery) and STILL NOT WIN A CHAMPIONSHIP.
The problem is that for every player (outside of the clear MVP candidates) that Person A thinks is a savior there is a Person B who thinks this is not the case - and this is certainly the case within the organization as well as among fans. Similarly, for every current player Person A thinks is a detriment to the team there is a Person B who thinks they have potential. For every key move that Person A is convinced puts us over the top there is a Person B who thinks it will blow things up without positive results. And, again, this is the case within the organization, not just the fan base. As above, these kind of moves could be made every time the opportunity comes up and the team could STILL NOT WIN A CHAMPIONSHIP.
So, the bottom line is that there can be valid differences of opinion as to which path to take that don't mean the disagreement is based on being greedy, lazy, non-passionate, dismissive, or stupid. If more NBA teams had won the championship over the last 3 decades the argument might be made that a refusal to follow the no-brainer path is one or more of those things, but the truth of the matter is that no such proof of the one true path exists. For every San Antonio who put together the perfect combination of coach, players, and environment and won championships there is an OKC who seem to have done lots of right things but still are not guaranteed to win anything simply because of the luck of coming up against a juggernaut in Golden State. You also have the Knicks and the Lakers who can be run so horribly they can't see the playoffs EVEN WITH LEBRON JAMES ON THE TEAM but they will still sell out because they are in a market where they have more demand than the rest of the league combined.
Here's the thought - I would venture to guess that most of the thick-or-thin fans come from the ABA era or at least the era where having your local team and supporting it was what you did. That is not the case for at least a couple of generations of fans - there are times I see more kids with flavor-of-the-month jerseys at games than I do with Pacer jerseys. Much of this is the way the NBA does marketing - the only reason to support your local team if they don't have one of the Big Hype players is so that you will have a chance to see one of the Big Hype players. So the only way a small market non-superstar team can build brand loyalty is to make the experience enjoyable enough to convert casual fans to dedicated fans. It is an uphill road for a franchise that competes with college ball fanaticism (wonder why the Pacers never have a home game when IU and Purdue are playing each other?) and - to a lesser extent now than in the 80s but still significant - high school ball. After all, the Colts nearly lost their entire following before getting Manning, and that's with the huge following the NFL has built into it. It isn't easy to keep a franchise in place, and few owners anywhere are going to be willing to buy into something that they are required to deliberately lose money on year after year after year after year after year - even though the asset value may rise, that can be offset by current cash flow losses because assets are not the same as income, but that's a whole 'nother argument.
Will the Pacers ever win a championship? Probably not, but even if they did everything the way the most vocal critics of the ownership and FO say they STILL probably would never win a championship - and we'd have a perennially losing team dependent on dreams of potential instead of production on the court to show for it. Me, since I have the clearly outmoded belief that once you get into the conference finals anything can happen, I'll take the team built to improve every year regardless of the opportunity to throw it all away and shoot for a possible better player in a couple of years.Last edited by BillS; 02-22-2019, 09:53 AM.BillS
A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...Comment
Comment