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

attendance

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

  • #31
    Re: attendance

    No, Indy is fair weather, and I can prove my point.

    2003- The Colts vs the Titans did not sell out. This was an early game in the season and the Colts were facing their top rival back then. The Titans beat the Colts twice in 2002, and beat the Colts in the playoffs in 1999. This was a monster game that would decide the landscape of the AFC south. Any Colts fan knew that if we can finally beat the Titans, than the Colts would be contenders.

    The Colts had made the playoffs in 2002, as well as 1999 and 2000. So you cannot have said at the time that the Colts were a "bad" team.
    Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: attendance

      We have to be a playoff contender with a comfortable, secured position in the standings and more wins than losses.

      What is appears to me is that Indiana doesn't want to see their pro teams suck, but when they're good, they're willing to buy more tickets.

      Also, there is still a great deal of fan support in the city. I mean we have sellouts on opening night so the 18,000+ people in attendance are there to see the Pacers and would come out more often once we're doing well.

      Once we're winning a lot more consistently, we'll probably get about 15,000-16,000 average in attendance during the season and maybe sellouts for the home games in the playoffs.

      EDIT: The whole off the court bad guy problem is long behind us and people know that this team has changed a great deal.

      Indiana is a fair weather fan state because they want to see their teams doing well. It's been tough watching the Pacers in the past few unsuccessful seasons, but with all of these young guys for the future, it's gotten more exciting to watch. We just need to win.
      Last edited by Trophy; 11-17-2010, 10:57 AM.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: attendance

        Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
        I don't even buy the idea that Indy is a college sports town. We just had Butler win 25 games in a row last season and they only sold out Hinkle for a handful of games. Yet they had 40K show up for practice in the Final Four. What does that say? New season this year and Butler just had their home opener with the National Finalist Banner ceremony, and they only had 6,600 people at Hinkle. Butler ranked 18th in the nation can't get more than 7000 people to come to the games. So when you hear some good ol' boy here in the city say I hate the NBA, I only like College Ball you ask them how come they don't go watch Butler on a regular basis. You have a top ranked team in the nation in your back yard Certainly Butler plays that old school ball they love so much right?
        Sounds like decent numbers for an institution with an enrollment of 4,500. So you're saying it's a shame that folks who like basketball but maybe have no interest in Butler should still go? Why not attend a high school game instead?

        Frankly, I think one of the biggest factors is Indiana's love for basketball actually hurts the Pacers attendance. Both of my sons played ball through YMCA leagues, to middle school, and through high school. The Mrs. and I loved every minute of it and our passion for the Pacers while strong did take a backseat during those times. We were STHs in the early 80s, but once the boys became involved in their own games our focus changed especially during their high school years. I guess what I'm trying to say is those who have a love for the game probably also have folks they need to give their support to before a professional franchise. I've personally been a fan since the Pacers started (showing my age) but when you are rooting for family or friends the pros are put on the backburner.
        You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: attendance

          When we started doing well towards the end of last season, we had pretty big crowds.

          We need to play like that consistently.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: attendance

            Im glad the OP made this point

            I was sitting at home watching the game thinking

            "Man I have never seen Conseco so empty. It was like going to a D League game"

            really sad, if this keeps up I can see Simon moving the team
            Sittin on top of the world!

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: attendance

              I was pretty shocked at tipoff. It got better as the first quarter went on - still not good, though.

              I often wonder how much the 7 pm start times hurt us - do people have problems getting there on time? Would going to 7:30 make more sense, seems to be common in the rest of the East.
              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


              • #37
                Re: attendance

                Originally posted by BillS View Post
                I was pretty shocked at tipoff. It got better as the first quarter went on - still not good, though.

                I often wonder how much the 7 pm start times hurt us - do people have problems getting there on time? Would going to 7:30 make more sense, seems to be common in the rest of the East.
                I know the Pacers have done a lot of research on whether 7:30 or 7:00 is a better time for games to start. My guess is 7 is more popular because I think games ending at 9:20 is much better than 9:50.
                Last edited by Unclebuck; 11-17-2010, 01:39 PM.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: attendance

                  Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                  Im glad the OP made this point

                  I was sitting at home watching the game thinking

                  "Man I have never seen Conseco so empty. It was like going to a D League game"

                  really sad, if this keeps up I can see Simon moving the team
                  I don't think we have the issue of moving because we have support from the city and they won't let us ever leave Conseco Fieldhouse. The deal over the summer for the CIB to pay for the Fieldhouse operations was a big help.

                  We're probably one of the last teams that will ever move just because we do have a lot of support in Indianapolis.

                  It'll just take wins to get big crowds.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: attendance

                    I have a simple formula that can sum it all up:

                    winning=more butts in seats

                    losing=less butts in seats
                    Larry Bird and Ryan Grigson- wasting the talents of Paul George and Andrew Luck

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: attendance

                      Originally posted by bhaas0532 View Post
                      No, Indy is fair weather, and I can prove my point.

                      2003- The Colts vs the Titans did not sell out. This was an early game in the season and the Colts were facing their top rival back then. The Titans beat the Colts twice in 2002, and beat the Colts in the playoffs in 1999. This was a monster game that would decide the landscape of the AFC south. Any Colts fan knew that if we can finally beat the Titans, than the Colts would be contenders.

                      The Colts had made the playoffs in 2002, as well as 1999 and 2000. So you cannot have said at the time that the Colts were a "bad" team.
                      Not true...the Colts game against Tennessee in 2003 was a sell out. A matter of fact...the Colts have sold out every game since the last game of 1998. Check out the link for the facts....http://www.allbusiness.com/sports-re...1768429-1.html

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: attendance

                        winning with the young guys getting a bunch of minutes would be even better
                        In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: attendance

                          Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                          Im glad the OP made this point

                          I was sitting at home watching the game thinking

                          "Man I have never seen Conseco so empty. It was like going to a D League game"

                          really sad, if this keeps up I can see Simon moving the team
                          the pacers arent even thinking about moving the team and im sure any owner would love to keep the pacers in conseco fieldhouse and indianapolis

                          teams like the hornets, kings, and grizzlies have absolutely no support in their cities which we will result in them moving as there have been sources of that happening

                          the hornets havent had big crowds this season and are off to a great start
                          its always been that way for that team
                          In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: attendance

                            once we're a winning team we will no longer be seeing this many open seats
                            i think this photo was from the 07-08 season the season where we were dead last in the attendance and ill admit to being a part of those that didnt go


                            now this is the crowd we will see when we're a winning team
                            Last edited by Scot Pollard; 11-17-2010, 03:25 PM.
                            In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: attendance

                              We are a losing team. We haven't have a winning season since 2005-2006. That sums it up right there.

                              The Colts have earned the love of the city because they have won, year after year, and did something the NBA Pacers have never done, which is bring a championship to the city.

                              Like what was mentioned, the Colts didn't sell out back in 2003, the home opener against the Titans, which was my first game I ever went to, btw, but they went on a win streak, made a deep playoff run and have been winning and making the playoffs ever since.

                              If the Pacers did sneak into the playoffs this year, it would help, because we would at least have a somewhat winning record .500 or a little under, but we have to be successful, and continue it, and then and only then will we get the casual fans back and the buzz in the city.

                              I feel like the the take on the Pacers now isn't as negative as it has been in recent years, and the Pacers have done a great job marketing them and making them really fan friendly, and have gotten off their high-horse and actually started listening to the fans, because they were desperate, and also with the drafting of high character guys.

                              Right now, I think we are almost to lovable loser level.

                              I can only hope once we start winning the Pacers brass doesn't stop with the reaching out to fans and I hope they don't get the mindset that they don't have to do it anymore. Unfortunately, I think it will happen.
                              Super Bowl XLI Champions
                              2000 Eastern Conference Champions




                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: attendance

                                Sorry for being a little off-topic, but I'll be in Indy next week and was planning on going to the CLE game on Tuesday. I'm debating on springing the extra cash for decent seats or buying my usual balcony seats. How strict are the ushers about letting people move down into empty seats?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X