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

Simon: can't continue to lose money on the team

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

  • Simon: can't continue to lose money on the team

    Pacers owner: Money losses can’t continue

    Pacers' co-owner Herb Simon told the The Indianapolis Star's editorial board today that he can't continue to lose money on the team.

    Simon said he needs to resolve the team's financial situation — saying it has lost money nine of the 10 years in Conseco Fieldhouse — before he gives the team to his heirs. He repeatedly said he does not want to move the team, but he said the team could no longer operate the Fieldhouse at a loss of about $15 million per year.


    “There comes a point when you can't do it any more," Simon said. “We have to straighten this thing out if we can.”

    http://www.indystar.com/article/2009...RTS04/90310061
    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

  • #2
    Re: Simon: can't continue to lose money on the team

    We're gonna lose this team if we aren't careful.


    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Simon: can't continue to lose money on the team

      Originally posted by Bball View Post
      Pacers owner: Money losses can’t continue

      Pacers' co-owner Herb Simon told the The Indianapolis Star's editorial board today that he can't continue to lose money on the team.

      Simon said he needs to resolve the team's financial situation — saying it has lost money nine of the 10 years in Conseco Fieldhouse — before he gives the team to his heirs. He repeatedly said he does not want to move the team, but he said the team could no longer operate the Fieldhouse at a loss of about $15 million per year.


      “There comes a point when you can't do it any more," Simon said. “We have to straighten this thing out if we can.”

      http://www.indystar.com/article/2009...RTS04/90310061
      It's sounding more like a threat every day.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Simon: can't continue to lose money on the team

        So it comes down to putting his hand out and asking local government (AKA taxpayers) to fix a failed business model rather than looking internally at trimming fat, better marketing, let alone going to the NBA and lobbying for real change to a sustainable business model?

        I really do have a problem with the way this is playing out.

        It is not the city and state's fault the way this has played out. Escalating player salaries, an over-reliance on fat cats to fill the arenas of the NBA, bloated TV contracts not based on economic realities, a commissioner that has probably out-stayed his welcome, etc are all coming home to roost. And that is on a natl scale. Locally, our bloated hierarchy, several ill-advised player moves and bad contracts, refusal to address problems, and bad marketing hasn't helped us weather the storm.

        And now all that meets the economic downturn that shows no sunnyside yet. I have no doubt the NBA economic model was destined to fail on its own but this has certainly hastened the failure at the fringes. And the Pacers have certainly positioned themselves squarely on the fringes with several years of questionable decisions.

        If they've only made a profit once in the whole time they've been at Conseco then they don't need to be looking at the taxpayers to bailout that failing business model. They need to look internally as well as the NBA as a whole. Something is wrong with that picture.

        And as much as I hate to say it, they need to fix the cause of that before they come to the taxpayers looking for corporate welfare. If that is 'unfixable' in Indy then I don't think we'll be alone in seeing teams either fold up or leave in search of greener pastures. But I doubt they ultimately find them.

        Herb Simon:
        Ask not what the taxpayers can do you for. Ask what you can do for the taxpayers.
        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


        • #5
          Re: Simon: can't continue to lose money on the team

          Originally posted by Bball View Post
          So it comes down to putting his hand out and asking local government (AKA taxpayers) to fix a failed business model rather than looking internally at trimming fat, better marketing, let alone going to the NBA and lobbying for real change to a sustainable business model?

          I really do have a problem with the way this is playing out.

          It is not the city and state's fault the way this has played out. Escalating player salaries, an over-reliance on fat cats to fill the arenas of the NBA, bloated TV contracts not based on economic realities, a commissioner that has probably out-stayed his welcome, etc are all coming home to roost. And that is on a natl scale. Locally, our bloated hierarchy, several ill-advised player moves and bad contracts, refusal to address problems, and bad marketing hasn't helped us weather the storm.

          And now all that meets the economic downturn that shows no sunnyside yet. I have no doubt the NBA economic model was destined to fail on its own but this has certainly hastened the failure at the fringes. And the Pacers have certainly positioned themselves squarely on the fringes with several years of questionable decisions.

          If they've only made a profit once in the whole time they've been at Conseco then they don't need to be looking at the taxpayers to bailout that failing business model. They need to look internally as well as the NBA as a whole. Something is wrong with that picture.

          And as much as I hate to say it, they need to fix the cause of that before they come to the taxpayers looking for corporate welfare. If that is 'unfixable' in Indy then I don't think we'll be alone in seeing teams either fold up or leave in search of greener pastures. But I doubt they ultimately find them.

          Herb Simon:
          Ask not what the taxpayers can do you for. Ask what you can do for the taxpayers.
          I like it!

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Simon: can't continue to lose money on the team

            I mentioned this in the other thread but if the Simons have been all about keeping the team in Indy why are they suddenly talking about leaving it to the heirs? If they can no longer operate the team in a sustainable way then shouldn't they be looking for a local buyer first and foremost?

            It sounds like they do want the team as an asset afterall... not that I blame them for that but then we all need to be realistic about what the goals are here. It's not solely keeping the Pacers in Indy that is motivating the Simons.
            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


            • #7
              Re: Simon: can't continue to lose money on the team

              If Indiana wants a basketball team taxpayers are going to be paying for it. The simons have to be competitive in the market when paying players and staff otherwise they would never have a winning record.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Simon: can't continue to lose money on the team

                I too don't like the way this is playing out. I think it is Gnome who says while it is ridiculous for taxpayers to prop up sports franchises, if Indy doesn't do it, the franchise will find a city that will. However I don't know if Gnome would stand by that statement in this economy.

                The most I would offer is conditional relief that is given on the basis on the franchise becoming more lean in its own expenses. Otherwise, forget it, take your terrible business model somewhere else. I wonder how much the team actually loses in one year. Why isn't the team more transparent about how much it actually loses, precisely, in one year?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Simon: can't continue to lose money on the team

                  Originally posted by justinDOHMAN View Post
                  If Indiana wants a basketball team taxpayers are going to be paying for it. The simons have to be competitive in the market when paying players and staff otherwise they would never have a winning record.

                  The Simons have been part of the problem in driving salaries up in the market by continually overpaying players and holding onto underperforming players and bloated contracts too long.

                  It's not the taxpayers' fault things have gotten to this point. We have to be careful in looking at this like the Simons (and TPTB under them) have operated this organization in the best way possible or that the NBA overall has a sustainable business model that can weather storms and is not based on a popularity boom that they shouldn't have expected to be able to sustain.

                  The taxpayers are already pumping money to the Simons and it's not enough (they say).

                  Businesses need to be allowed to fail or else they never learn to fix their own messes.

                  And all that said.... I still question the math that has them losing this kind of money. If that is accurate, then they have ran the business into the ground with too many bad decisions or Indy can't afford the Pacers no matter what the Simons do.
                  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


                  • #10
                    Re: Simon: can't continue to lose money on the team

                    Originally posted by dcpacersfan View Post
                    I too don't like the way this is playing out. I think it is Gnome who says while it is ridiculous for taxpayers to prop up sports franchises, if Indy doesn't do it, the franchise will find a city that will. However I don't know if Gnome would stand by that statement in this economy.

                    The most I would offer is conditional relief that is given on the basis on the franchise becoming more lean in its own expenses. Otherwise, forget it, take your terrible business model somewhere else. I wonder how much the team actually loses in one year. Why isn't the team more transparent about how much it actually loses, precisely, in one year?

                    They are not asking for "teamlosses" to be covered, they want the same, well a trimmed version, of what the Colts get, who on a sidenote, need 27 million a year.

                    see my post in the other thread
                    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                    If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                    Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Simon: can't continue to lose money on the team

                      Originally posted by Bball View Post
                      The Simons have been part of the problem in driving salaries up in the market by continually overpaying players and holding onto underperforming players and bloated contracts too long.

                      It's not the taxpayers' fault things have gotten to this point. We have to be careful in looking at this like the Simons (and TPTB under them) have operated this organization in the best way possible or that the NBA overall has a sustainable business model that can weather storms and is not based on a popularity boom that they shouldn't have expected to be able to sustain.

                      The taxpayers are already pumping money to the Simons and it's not enough (they say).

                      Businesses need to be allowed to fail or else they never learn to fix their own messes.

                      And all that said.... I still question the math that has them losing this kind of money. If that is accurate, then they have ran the business into the ground with too many bad decisions or Indy can't afford the Pacers no matter what the Simons do.
                      You keep saying this, but you are excluding the amount of money flowing into coffers of the city and other businesses, employment as such in and around, directly related to having that team, like the Colts.

                      BY your standards Lucas Oil would not have been build and will be closed down this summer because the Colts need twice as much money as the Pacers, money that IS for the running of the team and NOT the running of thge facility, which they (Colts) don't have to bother with.
                      So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                      If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                      Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Simon: can't continue to lose money on the team

                        Originally posted by Bball View Post
                        The Simons have been part of the problem in driving salaries up in the market by continually overpaying players and holding onto underperforming players and bloated contracts too long.

                        It's not the taxpayers' fault things have gotten to this point. We have to be careful in looking at this like the Simons (and TPTB under them) have operated this organization in the best way possible or that the NBA overall has a sustainable business model that can weather storms and is not based on a popularity boom that they shouldn't have expected to be able to sustain.

                        The taxpayers are already pumping money to the Simons and it's not enough (they say).

                        Businesses need to be allowed to fail or else they never learn to fix their own messes.

                        And all that said.... I still question the math that has them losing this kind of money. If that is accurate, then they have ran the business into the ground with too many bad decisions or Indy can't afford the Pacers no matter what the Simons do.

                        Your right. The cost of doing business. There are 28 other teams in the NBA where players would probally rather live. I know you being in Indiana probally love it. But to a NBA player with millions of dollars indiana is not a destination location. Its a place to play to make a larger paycheck. Now that may not be what you or any other pacers fans want to hear but its the truth. Its something the simons have to deal with. With the amount of money they have and how they made it I am sure the last people they need to take advice from is anyone on a message board. They own the Pacers as a hobby and at 15million a year loss ITS A EXPENSIVE HOBBY.

                        They are basically telling indiana they are tired of losing that much money and if they want the team they are going to start paying for it plain and simple.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Simon: can't continue to lose money on the team

                          If the Pacers leave, the taxpayers would still be required to pay for the Conseco fieldhouse. Are the Pacers contractually obligated to stay in Conseco? If so, would folding be their only way out? Think there's a buy-out?

                          The way the collective bargaining agreement is, Pacers are obligated to guaranteed contracts, so releasing underperforming or injured players (ala the Colts and the rest of the NFL) is not an option. Some of this is a problem. So of its the brawl. Some of its the losing records.

                          Is Indianapolis any different than other small market teams like San Antonio, Utah, and Sacramento? How can other teams afford $70 million+ in salaries and not be in the red? Are their tickets that much more?

                          The taxpayers are obligated answers to these questions before throwing money at it.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Simon: can't continue to lose money on the team

                            Originally posted by justinDOHMAN View Post
                            Your right. The cost of doing business. There are 28 other teams in the NBA where players would probally rather live. I know you being in Indiana probally love it. But to a NBA player with millions of dollars indiana is not a destination location. Its a place to play to make a larger paycheck. Now that may not be what you or any other pacers fans want to hear but its the truth. Its something the simons have to deal with. With the amount of money they have and how they made it I am sure the last people they need to take advice from is anyone on a message board. They own the Pacers as a hobby and at 15million a year loss ITS A EXPENSIVE HOBBY.

                            They are basically telling indiana they are tired of losing that much money and if they want the team they are going to start paying for it plain and simple.
                            Maybe they could sell the team to someone else who would keep them in Indy and Conseco? Heard the NFL had a backup owner to the Colts if the Irsays sold (or OD'ed) that would keep them in Indy. Never heard who that was.

                            Not sure this is the time to be selling, though.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Simon: can't continue to lose money on the team

                              The problem with selling the Pacers right now is that almost everyone, even the fat cats, feel poor at the moment. It's just not a seller's market for a money-losing trophy like an NBA franchise.

                              Cities are not exactly flush either. There is no extra public money to poor (freudian slip) into the pockets of these NBA players. Cities are too busy trying to keep the pantries open.

                              The truth is, the Simons do have an expensive hobby...and right now it's an inconvenient, expensive hobby. I bet they feel stuck somewhere between a Tinsley and a Done-leavy.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X