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

Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

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

  • #46
    Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

    Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
    $15 million or $150 million, I'll be pretty disappointed regardless if the Pacers were to leave if you ask me.
    Sure, but for right now the Pacers are only asking for the city to pick up the $15M per year. If the city leaders were smart they would agree to pick that up in exchange the Pacers agree to stay for the next so many years

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
      Sure, but for right now the Pacers are only asking for the city to pick up the $15M per year. If the city leaders were smart they would agree to pick that up in exchange the Pacers agree to stay for the next so many years
      In a perfect world...

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

        Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
        If the current NBA isn't profitable without tax payers chipping in to fund operating cost then they should have seen that a long time ago. Like 9 years ago when the first signs of going into the red was apparent.
        Well, the solution is to fill the arena. But that's not going to happen for a mid-30's win team. And when they first started losing money -- let's assume late in the Isiah Thomas era, the drive to keep the team competitive kept them close to positive net profits. For a season, they had to pay two coaches. I think the amount of money they lost during that season was less than the amount paid for two coaches. We know in the following seasons that the just-out-of-reach ECFs were the threshhold to profitabilty, so they just needed to fill the arena one or two more times. In recent seasons, the player payroll far exceeds its productoin. That's why the right move is to let those contracts expire -- they need to reduce aggregate expenses, period -- instead of trading the expiring contracts for similar-sized contracts.

        In Indianapolis, the sports/ entertainment business is cyclical. The Colts will eventually struggle to sell half the seats of their stadium when the team puts out a bunch of 5-11 and 6-10 seasons again. And then the "Colts to LA" rumors will start again. That will probably coincide with a revitalized Pacers team that is capturing all the love and attention and the casual Indiana fan will say, "who cares about the Colts, this is a basketball town anyway."
        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
        And life itself, rushing over me
        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

          I'd imagine if Simon offers to let the CIB take over concerts and other events in the arena and the CIB gets to keep the profits from those events (while Simon gets the Pacers and Fever funds) then the 15mil Simon is asking for would be no problem.
          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


          • #50
            Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

            Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
            Well, the solution is to fill the arena. But that's not going to happen for a mid-30's win team. And when they first started losing money -- let's assume late in the Isiah Thomas era, the drive to keep the team competitive kept them close to positive net profits. For a season, they had to pay two coaches. I think the amount of money they lost during that season was less than the amount paid for two coaches. We know in the following seasons that the just-out-of-reach ECFs were the threshhold to profitabilty, so they just needed to fill the arena one or two more times. In recent seasons, the player payroll far exceeds its productoin. That's why the right move is to let those contracts expire -- they need to reduce aggregate expenses, period -- instead of trading the expiring contracts for similar-sized contracts.

            In Indianapolis, the sports/ entertainment business is cyclical. The Colts will eventually struggle to sell half the seats of their stadium when the team puts out a bunch of 5-11 and 6-10 seasons again. And then the "Colts to LA" rumors will start again. That will probably coincide with a revitalized Pacers team that is capturing all the love and attention and the casual Indiana fan will say, "who cares about the Colts, this is a basketball town anyway."
            Well, if you're talking 20+ years from now, when the lease is up with the Colts. Once the team starts putting out mediocre records, the stadium will struggle to fill, just as the Pacers are experiencing now, but I don't know if it would be smart to say that rumors of the Colts moving would spring up again, because to my knowledge they are locked here for some years.

            But you are always going to have your uniformed cynical people, just like the people that bash the Pacers still for having "thugs" on the team, when they haven't had an incident in almost 2 years I thought.
            Super Bowl XLI Champions
            2000 Eastern Conference Champions




            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

              Originally posted by Speed View Post
              Ha, well it's not New York, thank God!!

              Also, I don't think business owners think ya it's a nice place, but where can I get my party on every night.
              In fairness, The Onion is hillarious, but it's also run out of Chicago, IIRC, so they'd naturally rip on Indy.

              To Speed's point about the intangible aspects and benefits to the city, a couple of thoughts...

              When I was down at IU during my MBA, out of town recruiters would always push their respective 'quality of life' and respective sports teams were always a big part of that pitch, when applicable (so why did I end up in Ottawa again??? )

              Also, I recall when the Ottawa Senators made the Stanley Cup a few years ago... for those of my family and friends who watched, it was about the only time they ever saw anything from this city on TV. Conversely, you'd be surprised what random bits about Indy people seem to know up here due to the multiple Pacers/Colts runs in the past... the latest is me providing context to people up here by telling them that I grew up about a 5 minute drive from Butler's campus.

              Putnam is correct in that many people have tried and failed to make concrete, measured impact studies that tell the whole tale. Much of the benefit is indirect and intangible.
              "I mean, you'd walk into our dressing room and run into Mel Daniels holding a .45 -- it makes you wonder."

              Bob Netolicky

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

                Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                In Indianapolis, the sports/ entertainment business is cyclical.
                As it is just about anywhere else in the country.


                The Colts will eventually struggle to sell half the seats of their stadium when the team puts out a bunch of 5-11 and 6-10 seasons again. And then the "Colts to LA" rumors will start again. That will probably coincide with a revitalized Pacers team that is capturing all the love and attention and the casual Indiana fan will say, "who cares about the Colts, this is a basketball town anyway."
                At the rate the Pacers are going they'll still be losing so I'm not sure they'll uphold their end of the bargain in your scenario.

                I just hope the new CBA addresses a way to minimize the mistakes of management from lingering like it has with the Pacers. It's one thing for current management to screw the pooch but how long should any team have to pay for the sins of past management too?
                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


                • #53
                  Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

                  Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                  To me its just another form of corporate welfare. The taxpayer pours in money so a company can operate. Collectively we can front the money but when you have so many incentives for other companies doing the exact same thing the problem because much much bigger.
                  But its not corporate well fair what so ever. As stated in Dukes post. The Pacers pay $1 a year in rent. But assume all responsibility for the fieldhouse and its operations. That was a great deal for the city back then because thats costs off the books, and great for them today. However economic climate changes and the tenants (the pacers)have said they no longer what that deal, and their lease states that the deal could be renegotiated after 10 years. The Pacers aren't trying to scam the tax payer. They are merely asking for the CIB to run a CIB property just as they do at LOS. Just like any tenant and landlord.

                  I would imagine that if the city had to take over the costs completely then they would charge the Pacers much more than $1 rent. I'm sure the CIB would be wondering how much they can realistically charge the Pacers for such rent and also how much other events at the Fieldhouse would bring. Obviously the Pacers couldnt' do it enough to cover their own costs. So yeah the city is going to lose money on this, but they could also lose the Pacers as well.
                  You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

                    Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                    But its not corporate well fair what so ever. As stated in Dukes post. The Pacers pay $1 a year in rent. But assume all responsibility for the fieldhouse and its operations. That was a great deal for the city back then because thats costs off the books, and great for them today. However economic climate changes and the tenants (the pacers)have said they no longer what that deal, and their lease states that the deal could be renegotiated after 10 years. The Pacers aren't trying to scam the tax payer. They are merely asking for the CIB to run a CIB property just as they do at LOS. Just like any tenant and landlord.

                    I would imagine that if the city had to take over the costs completely then they would charge the Pacers much more than $1 rent. I'm sure the CIB would be wondering how much they can realistically charge the Pacers for such rent and also how much other events at the Fieldhouse would bring. Obviously the Pacers couldnt' do it enough to cover their own costs. So yeah the city is going to lose money on this, but they could also lose the Pacers as well.
                    Let me just be honest here. I am not a economist nor do I have a MBA so I may have a simplistic view here but let me explain my view.

                    To me the government can collect from only 2 sources, coporations and individual tax payers. How much does each one contribute I honestly don't know but I do know that no corporation is going to pay my rent or my utilites because I couldn't make enough money. Futhermore if I "knew" it was going to be a problem and did hardly anything about it how much more should I be held accountable.

                    Right now the Colts are making money off of taxpayers dollars and IMO the Pacers just want to do the same. Am I wrong? Maybe but I am not worth a Billion dollars and I am not asking someone to pay my rent and utilities.
                    Last edited by Gamble1; 04-13-2010, 04:11 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

                      I have no problem with my tax dollars funding the operation costs of Conseco, there are far worse ways the government can, and probably does, waste our money. However, if the CIB does take over the operating costs of Conseco, the Pacers need to pay more than just $1/yr in rent.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

                        Originally posted by chrisjacobs7 View Post
                        I have no problem with my tax dollars funding the operation costs of Conseco, there are far worse ways the government can, and probably does, waste our money. However, if the CIB does take over the operating costs of Conseco, the Pacers need to pay more than just $1/yr in rent.
                        Why?

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

                          Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
                          Why?
                          I'd imagine to address the misconceptions of folks like Gamble, even though the Pacers are worth more to the city in tax revenue than 15 million.
                          You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

                            Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                            I'd imagine to address the misconceptions of folks like Gamble, even though the Pacers are worth more to the city in tax revenue than 15 million.
                            I would suppose letting the Pacers off the hook and not making them pay a lease would be a good idea.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

                              Originally posted by Lord Helmet View Post
                              ... but I don't know if it would be smart to say that rumors of the Colts moving would spring up again, because to my knowledge they are locked here for some years.
                              As are the Pacers currently. Didn't the terms of Indiana Fieldhouse "guarantee" the team would stay in Indiana through at least the 2018-19 season (twenty years)? If that's the case, this is all nonsense anyway.

                              But its non-nonsense. There are "exit" payments to break a lease, and I'm sure that LA County/ City of Industry would be willing to advance those funds to the owner of the NFL team about to break a lease to relocate there. I don't know if King County/ Seattle feels the same way about a basketball team.
                              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                              And life itself, rushing over me
                              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

                                Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
                                I would suppose letting the Pacers off the hook and not making them pay a lease would be a good idea.
                                I believe technically the lease can't be "nothing" so 1 dollar is the typical "valid contract" number used in these situations.
                                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