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

  • #91
    Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

    Originally posted by Putnam View Post
    Yes, Duke. Ruthhart is a general/business writer and he presents it as Pacers-asking-for-handout. Wells knows better and wouldn't have ritten it that wayprobably, but the understanding hasn't spread very far at all. We can't be sure who wrote the even more pointed headline and subheads, but they show a really pi55y attitude toward the Pacers.


    I have argued in other threads that the Pacers role in the community is exaggerated. And this issue here proves my point.

    Asking a relatively minor private business to manage municipal affairs for the city is not responsible or smart on either side. Imagine the city telling the corner hotdog vendors that in addition to selling a few dozen dogs a day to the lunch crowd, they also have to keep the downtown streets paved. Imagine the vendors saying OK to it. Several years later, we'd all be complaining that the streets were crumbling, the vendors would cry that people weren't buying enough brats, and the city would be saying it didn't have the budget to "take over" this "new" expense.
    I think that the article was well written.

    The problem I have is with the morons who still think that the team is full of players who "shoot up" downtown.

    EDIT:

    Actually, after reading through it again, the article does throw off this vibe that the Pacers are trying to hold the city hostage.
    Last edited by duke dynamite; 04-14-2010, 09:59 AM.

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

      Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
      I think that the article was well written.

      The problem I have is with the morons who still think that the team is full of players who "shoot up" downtown.

      Well, to be fair, the references in the article to the shoot-em-ups were all in past tense. That stuff did happen, and the article only said that a) it happened, and b) it hurt the Pacers image in the community.

      What can we say against that?
      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


      • #93
        Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

        Pat Andrews, vice president of the Marion County Alliance of Neighborhood Associations, said neither the Pacers nor the city has demonstrated that the team creates the kind of "economic stimulus" both have suggested.

        She said if city officials decide to assume the $15 million cost of running the fieldhouse, it would "send the wrong message" during a time when Ballard has cut funding for parks and failed to address basic needs such as improved streets and sidewalks.


        She added that the Pacers have brought some of their financial woes on themselves. Poor teams and players with legal run-ins drove down the Pacers' popularity, attendance and revenue, Andrews said.
        What in the last paragraph is untrue, or even exaggerated?





        EDIT: and before some wise guy corrects my grammar, let me observe that "have brought" is in fact the present perfect tense rather than the past tense.



        .
        Last edited by Putnam; 04-14-2010, 10:03 AM.
        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


        • #94
          Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

          Originally posted by Putnam View Post
          What in the last paragraph is untrue, or even exaggerated?
          Well, there are many factors you can correlate into the equation. That just happens to be one or two of them.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

            Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
            I think that the article was well written.

            The problem I have is with the morons who still think that the team is full of players who "shoot up" downtown.
            I read some of the comments and it just left me shaking my heads. I was surprised to see how many people were acting like the Pacers still had Artest, Tinsley, and Jackson on this team. Given how much effort Pacers have gone through to change the view of their team I am surprised so many people are that ignorant.

            You will never get a sensible debate out of people like that. There are arguments to be made about the Pacers affect on the local economy, where the revenue for non Pacers events should go, and other items. You will never get that from a majority of posters on Indystar.

            I think a lot of people just get on there to say idiotic and hateful things.

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

              I read some of the comments and it just left me shaking my heads.


              Is that you, Zaphod?






              .
              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


              • #97
                Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

                Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                Is that you, Zaphod?






                .
                Sometimes I have fat fingers.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

                  Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
                  And that is true. I just hope the general public feels the same way, too.
                  Based on the first 14 pages of comments on that article, the general public vehemently disagrees, but a few want something to get worked out, which is at least a start.

                  The main detrimental impact to the city that needs addressed by the Pacers is the question of the economic viability of the city and central Indiana for major business and industry to locate here. Is there enough population base with enough income to support discretionary spending or tax increases for anything, including a professional franchise in the sport that Indiana has nearly always been considered to be a hotbed for? If we as taxpayers won't support that, what would we possibly support when it comes to business?

                  If we, as taxpayers, don't support the franchise now, how friendly will we be considered to be towards other businesses going forward with respect to tax breaks and other perks for businesses that wish to locate here? Negative perception of Indianapolis due to this could cost our area a LOT going forward.

                  Otherwise the Pacers, as a private enterprise that really doesn't have a huge direct impact in terms of overall economic activity for the city as a whole (a lot more impact on bars and restaurants and hotels and housing in the near vicinity of the Fieldhouse than anything else) because people will simply spend their money on other entertainment or bills, don't really have a leg to stand on in these negotiations in my opinion. They are not the same as car companies and other major manufacturers that have a large network of supporting businesses who will all be forced to scale back or cease to exist in the event that the Pacers leave or, as another option, simply fold.

                  Even as a fan, it is difficult for me to get enthused about further taxpayer support of the franchise because of the precedent it sets for other struggling businesses that probably have a larger impact on our local economy.

                  The user fee on all tickets for facilities operated by the CIB option, with some revenue from the events kicked back into the CIB instead of the Pacers is really the only fair option to solve this IMO, and that may not be enough due to the increased cost per ticket sold both for the Pacers and the Colts, as well as for concerts and other events in a difficult economy.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

                    Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                    Yes, Duke. Ruthhart is a general/business writer and he presents it as Pacers-asking-for-handout. Wells (or Kravitz?) knows better and wouldn't have written it that way probably, but the understanding hasn't spread very far at all down the hall among the Star staff, let alone the public. We can't be sure who wrote the even more pointed headline and subheads, but they show a really pi55y attitude toward the Pacers.


                    I have argued in other threads that the Pacers role in the community is exaggerated. And this issue here proves my point.

                    Asking a relatively minor private business to manage municipal affairs for the city is not responsible or smart on either side. Imagine the city telling the corner hotdog vendors that in addition to selling a few dozen dogs a day to the lunch crowd, they also have to keep the downtown streets paved. Imagine the vendors saying OK to it. Several years later, we'd all be complaining that the streets were crumbling, the vendors would cry that people weren't buying enough brats, and the city would be saying it didn't have the budget to "take over" this "new" expense.
                    Hmmm sounds like politics as usual. Mandate a program and make the states pay for it.
                    Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

                      Everyone always talk about the taxes. Does anyone even know what the tax amount/percentage will even be? The increase in taxes seems like a moot point, if they only impact you by 2-3 dollars every two weeks or month....


                      Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

                        I still think that a license plate similar to the one the Colts have would be beneficial.

                        The only problem is that I fear not many people would get one.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

                          I'm afraid my worst nightmares are about to come true.

                          As always, it grates me no end that the reason the CIB is in huge trouble stems very much from the ridiculous sweetheart deal they gave the Colts, but the Pacers (since they came second due to the renegotiate clause) are, of course, the bad guys trying to strangle the city.

                          The timing here couldn't be worse, and I'm very afraid the league and Herb may end up deciding to fold the franchise (since selling it isn't an option and it would get rid of part of the annual payment to the Spirits).
                          BillS

                          A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                          Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

                            Originally posted by BillS View Post
                            I'm afraid my worst nightmares are about to come true.

                            As always, it grates me no end that the reason the CIB is in huge trouble stems very much from the ridiculous sweetheart deal they gave the Colts, but the Pacers (since they came second due to the renegotiate clause) are, of course, the bad guys trying to strangle the city.

                            The timing here couldn't be worse, and I'm very afraid the league and Herb may end up deciding to fold the franchise (since selling it isn't an option and it would get rid of part of the annual payment to the Spirits).
                            Unfortunately, I agree.

                            Maybe, though, for old times sake, the Pacers could have another telethon and simulcast it on 1070 and 93.1 (if you read this, Mr. Boyle, what are the odds that this could actually happen in today's media market?), FS Indiana, and for the nostalgia of it, channel 4. I think that might prove effective in properly promoting the franchise and changing overall public perception of it by giving it a major platform from which to present its case, while evoking memories of simpler, somewhat similar, times both for the Pacers and in general. It could give corporate sponsors additional goodwill generating opportunities for stepping up in a public fashion to support the Pacers. Who knows, maybe even the Colts would step up and do the right thing and support the franchise that helped pave the way for them to come here to start with.

                            Otherwise, the road looks very rocky (and I don't mean in the good ice cream flavor sort of way).

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

                              Keep the faith, keep the faith. I believe in the city leaders, I think they will do what is needed to keep the Pacers alive and in Indianapolis

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers face uncertain future at Conseco Fieldhouse

                                Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
                                I still think that a license plate similar to the one the Colts have would be beneficial.

                                The only problem is that I fear not many people would get one.
                                They don't make Pacers state plates?

                                I don't find that right. They should have both the pro teams.

                                EDIT: Come to think of it, I don't think NY has Knicks plates. Just the baseball and football teams.
                                Last edited by Trophy; 04-14-2010, 11:46 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X