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

Indianapolis Business Journal Article on future of Pacers

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

  • Indianapolis Business Journal Article on future of Pacers

    This article discusses local and league concerns about the Pacers who have slipped to dead last in attendance.

    http://cms.ibj.com/ASPXPages/6iframe...0342&NoFrame=1


    [~]) ... Cheers! Go Pacers!

  • #2
    Re: Indianapolis Business Journal Article on future of Pacers

    It's things like this that should make our players play hard every night. Every single player on the team have a chip on their shoulder. I just don't understand why this doesn't motivate our players
    R.I.P. Bernic Mac & Isaac Hayes

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Indianapolis Business Journal Article on future of Pacers

      1. Inept management.

      1A. Ownership that is overly loyal to management and/or too unmotivated to do what needs to be done.

      That's now the problem.

      Really, you can't blame players or management because ownership has really missed the boat on stepping in to put a stop to the bleeding and seeing to it that those issues were handled.

      So either this team is being ran (into the ground) exactly like they think it should be ran.... or they don't care.

      Like I said, I've all but made up my mind the Simons bought the team for the wrong reason(s). Yes, they kept the team in Indy, but they didn't get into it to bring a basketball championship to the Indy. And unfortunately, it's looking more to me like a part of it could've been that they just wanted a pro sports team so they could be like other billionaires and join that club.

      If I was the city I'd offer to cut the yearly lease price in half, but that is as far as I would go (sarcasm: the lease is 1.00 per year). IOW: This mess needs righted internally. Until the Pacers straighten up their own mess and start running this franchise like it should be with some vision and energy, the city should NOT waste taxpayer dollars on propping them up and be even more of an enabler.

      As another poster said, the fact that there is even a valid argument as to who is and has been calling the shots just points to more of the problem.

      This team is getting exactly what it deserves for allowing Walsh to hang on too long... and nobody externally has any idea whether Bird can sink, swim, or fly on his own because we have no idea what he's actually responsible for or where he's had his hands tied (or wings clipped). Internally, that should be known though.

      Adam said it and I agree- The Simons loyalty (to a fault (my words)) to Walsh is the ruination of this franchise.



      -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


      • #4
        Re: Indianapolis Business Journal Article on future of Pacers

        I agree with almost everything you said, but I don't think it matters if the Simons bought it for the wrong reasons as long as they'll spend the money, which they are willing to do to be good and have done.

        Their lack of judgement or accountability when it comes to decision makers is a good point. Its the wrong thing to do for all the right reasons, that doesn't cut it in the business world.

        Another point is that maybe they wouldn't be hemmoraging money if they didn't pay Walsh and Bird to do the same job now for 4 years.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Indianapolis Business Journal Article on future of Pacers

          Originally posted by Speed View Post

          Another point is that maybe they wouldn't be hemmoraging money if they didn't pay Walsh and Bird to do the same job now for 4 years.


          ...And pay them well too! I've said this so much I'm sure people know it by heart, but I just don't understand what Walsh is still doing here if Bird is really the one in charge.

          -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


          • #6
            Re: Indianapolis Business Journal Article on future of Pacers

            Maybe slipping to dead last in attendance will fire up the trade machine as people call for a change.
            Roy Hibbert.... It's the POWER!!!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Indianapolis Business Journal Article on future of Pacers

              I don't buy for one second the Simons bought the Pacers for the wrong reason. Unless hometown civic interest is the wrong reson.
              The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Indianapolis Business Journal Article on future of Pacers

                Kester, thanks for posting this. It is a good article, except for this bit:

                Originally posted by IBJ
                The Pacers have to hope the off-the-court incidents that have marred the team’s reputation in recent years don’t have a lasting effect that supersedes whatever success the team can find in the win-loss column, sports marketers said.

                No. The Pacers have to leave nothing to hope. They have to admit that the off-court incidents are having a lasting effect and that fans aren't going to come back to a team whose reputation is marred.

                I believe O'Neal, Tinsley and Harrison will have to go before the brawl is truly behind us. Three years have gone by, but this team is still the brawl team.
                And I won't be here to see the day
                It all dries up and blows away
                I'd hang around just to see
                But they never had much use for me
                In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Indianapolis Business Journal Article on future of Pacers

                  Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                  I believe O'Neal, Tinsley and Harrison will have to go before the brawl is truly behind us. Three years have gone by, but this team is still the brawl team.
                  There is some wisdom. Whatever one might think about those players, even if JO and Tins are two of our most talented players, the public is not fond of them and that is a bad thing on several levels.

                  First, the public will not follow the team and spend big bucks to come see a team going nowhere. Second, the business/networking "fans" are not going to buy blocks of tickets to bring their customers to games. It's simply not good business as long as the biggest news going on with the Pacers happens on W 38th street.

                  So, we are really in a situation where we should continually seek to move them for some amount of value. If that cannot be done, we should be seeking to find their replacements anyway. We should start with drafting a PG or PF/C in the draft this spring. Puhleeze no more SF's. We don't even need a SG as bad with Rush and Quis on the team. More than anything, we need a real center in the middle.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Indianapolis Business Journal Article on future of Pacers

                    Originally posted by ABADays View Post
                    I don't buy for one second the Simons bought the Pacers for the wrong reason. Unless hometown civic interest is the wrong reson.
                    I agree. It's not a fault to be patient and loyal and it's sad that we allow it to be categorized as such. Had Bird, Ron, JO, Tinsley, Rick, etc turned it around they'd look brilliant. That does happen, it's not like it was obviously going to fail. There are a LOT of missteps to this point, but the first few weren't clearly the beginning of the end.

                    Frankly they were hanging in there even last year prior to the trade. Rio hurt a lot, but had they stayed just over .500 and NOT had 8 Seconds, Tins/JO hurt all the time, Cloud 9 and a rash trade decision they might be getting this thing under control a bit.

                    Maybe they should have known Tins had a nose for trouble, and if that's the case then they were ridiculously loyal to him. Otherwise none of us could have avoided that situation. It seems tough to believe that Bird of all people was willing to be overly loyal to Tins prior to 8 Seconds, especially if pal Rick wasn't a big fan of Tins' game.


                    Look, the LAST major move for this roster was the GS deal. No other move has had this kind of impact. When I complained last year people said give it time. When the season ended in disaster I was told it was Rick's fault. When they won their first 3 I was told "told you so". When they started to skid it changed to that's what .500 teams do.

                    Isn't it time to own up on this, they made one bad trade and it's just getting to be one year coming up. The problem isn't a long spiral, it's that the team was on thin ice and the last thing they could afford was that one disaster trade. They did it and now they haven't had enough time to fix it.


                    I'm really sick of people dismissing 61 freaking wins as no big deal. It was 1-0 in the ECF too, not some huge flop. They lost to the champs, a team that virtually swept the Lakers after battling with Indy. It's not like they haven't put a damn good product out even in recent years.

                    Someone decided that teetering on .500 with injuries to JO/Tins and Jack with a bad rep was intolerable. It wasn't. As far as low points go it was pretty good in fact. Only making the playoffs as your down year, then going to the ECF or Finals in your good years is the stuff of elite teams.

                    Perhaps Bird isn't GM material but didn't the owners have to find out for themselves? Walsh wasn't sticking around forever. So they are finding out now. Let's see what happens this summer before assuming ownership isn't noticing. Half a season wasn't enough to be a trend. Of course I said the same thing regarding Rick, but Bird was happy to pull the trigger on that. I guess he'll understand if the Simons do the same this June.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Indianapolis Business Journal Article on future of Pacers

                      It's not the brawl, it's the losing.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Indianapolis Business Journal Article on future of Pacers

                        IMHO: Walsh has been great Bird came in just before the brawl when we were expected to be very good. The brawl could not be blamed on management neither could Artest's trade demand. The trade that brought Al back was a decision that most on here supported. Yes, it is about wins and losses. Blaming management is wrong at this point. JO with his injury situation, Tinsley with all his problems makes both at this time difficult to unload. No matter what, the Simons have a right not to absorb a huge financial loss. I am sure Bird is on the phone trying to make this team better. Its a difficult position to be in.
                        "He wanted to get to that money time. Time when the hardware was on the table. That's when Roger was going to show up. So all we needed to do was stay close"
                        Darnell Hillman (Speaking of former teammate Roger Brown)

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Indianapolis Business Journal Article on future of Pacers

                          It's the brawl and the losing. When people aren't going to games because "The Pacers are nothing but a bunch of thugs" it's about the aftermath of the brawl and all the off the court stuff that's been going on since.

                          David Stern looking into this cracks me up. When he looks at us and thinks "I did all this" does he do it with a smile on his face?

                          As for the city giving the Pacers financial help do you honestly think anyone but die hard Pacers fans are going to be in favor of it? I don't. I'm not even sure I'm in favor of it.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Indianapolis Business Journal Article on future of Pacers

                            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                            It's not the brawl, it's the losing.
                            Need to look up the chain of causation to find the root cause for the losses. IMO, character issues and poor management are the cause of the losses.

                            Specifically, the losses are caused by bad trades and chemistry problems even on talented teams. The trades and chemistry problems were caused by trade demands (ie. Ron Artest is the man!), bad relationships (JO/Artest, Tins/RC, JO/Bird, etc.) and character issues (ie selfishness and immaturity).

                            I guess some people will always believe in hanging onto players regardless. IMO the Pacers went with that philosophy for a very long time...literally years...until the pain and embarrassment and suspensions and particularly the chemistry issues just got too bad. Actually, when Reggie retired it really started to fall apart....hmmm, I think he knew where this ship was headed.

                            ...but not all of this is on the players themselves. Poor management decisions led to the assembly of this embarrassing mess. Or maybe the problem goes to the very top. Actually, I am pretty certain at this point that the problem goes all the way up. The owners should have made different decisions hiring their management.

                            No, the police reports from players like Artest, Jackson, JO, Harrison, Marshall, Tinsley, Quis, Williams,...am I missing any? Probably several. .....are not the root cause either. But neither is losing. Both are symptoms...

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Indianapolis Business Journal Article on future of Pacers

                              Originally posted by ABADays View Post
                              I don't buy for one second the Simons bought the Pacers for the wrong reason. Unless hometown civic interest is the wrong reson.

                              Where's their civic pride while this mess is compounding?

                              I'm tired of people getting passes for what they did 20+ years ago. Their the owners, if their management can't fix it then they need to do something themselves and fix their management.

                              -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

                              Working...
                              X