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

Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

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

  • Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

    I think its just this.

    Many owners are okay with the current parameters of whats been talked about, but of course would be okay with much more (hard cap). A few owners want to get EVERYTHING, regardless of the price.

    I think this gets pretty ugly in the next two weeks and I think we lose games.

    I also think those hardline owners aren't a large enough faction to cause the loss of the season.

    Dan Gilbert has almost no reason to not to TRY to lose the season. He can't be a guy the other owners listen to, in the long run.

    Side Note: I'm not a Fisher fan, on the court, but he deserves a freaking medal for doing this for free. He's a pretty smart guy and has a great demeanor and attitude about this. I'm very impressed with how he's handled this so far!

    Comment


    • Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

      Originally posted by Speed View Post
      I think its just this.

      Many owners are okay with the current parameters of whats been talked about, but of course would be okay with much more (hard cap). A few owners want to get EVERYTHING, regardless of the price.

      I think this gets pretty ugly in the next two weeks and I think we lose games.

      I also think those hardline owners aren't a large enough faction to cause the loss of the season.

      Dan Gilbert has almost no reason to not to TRY to lose the season. He can't be a guy the other owners listen to, in the long run.

      Side Note: I'm not a Fisher fan, on the court, but he deserves a freaking medal for doing this for free. He's a pretty smart guy and has a great demeanor and attitude about this. I'm very impressed with how he's handled this so far!
      Why would Gilbert want to lose the season? If I was him I would be eager for the season and for my 2 top 5 pick players. Also if he loses the whole season there is a good chance they do a lottery based system for next years draft which is the deepest draft since 03. There record over the past 3 seasons isnt that bad compared to a team like Indy. So I think he would want to get back to ball just so he can assure a top 3 pick in next years draft. I doubt he wants to miss the whole season half the season I could believe.

      Comment


      • Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

        Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
        Why would Gilbert want to lose the season? If I was him I would be eager for the season and for my 2 top 5 pick players. Also if he loses the whole season there is a good chance they do a lottery based system for next years draft which is the deepest draft since 03. There record over the past 3 seasons isnt that bad compared to a team like Indy. So I think he would want to get back to ball just so he can assure a top 3 pick in next years draft. I doubt he wants to miss the whole season half the season I could believe.
        I can't find it at the moment, but I read in an article (and agreed) that Gilbert would benefit from getting out from Baron Davis contract and his team sucks, basically. They are going to lose again this season, bad, imo. Those are couple of big (and fat) reasons, I think.

        Comment


        • Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

          Originally posted by Speed View Post
          I can't find it at the moment, but I read in an article (and agreed) that Gilbert would benefit from getting out from Baron Davis contract and his team sucks, basically. They are going to lose again this season, bad, imo. Those are couple of big (and fat) reasons, I think.
          Speed, I have to disagree about a few owners trying to take as much as they can. I think the larger owners like Buss, Cuban, Allen, and Dolan could give a **** what Gilbert, Sarver, Simon, Sterling, Kohl, and Miller want. The league set-up completely favors their revenue streams over the smaller owners' revenue streams. Of course, they aren't trying to ruffle feathers, because they can buy more talent with larger income. The smaller market owners want a system where their money goes just as far. They should speak up and delay further negotiations on the premise that they now have the floor to make their demands. There will be a middle ground eventually, and I don't believe that "eventually" to be too far in the future.

          I disagree about Fisher saying that you can't equate dollars to competitive basketball. That is horsesh**. When there is no maximum cap, a billionaire owner who can cover most of his costs like Paul Allen will be willing to spend more on talent. The Simons who basically just cut a check every year, are still billionaires, but they know they will be cutting a check anyway, and will pinch pennies much more.

          If you make more money on the venture, you will be willing to put more into it. And dollars equate to talent. Bad GMs waste talent, but all GMs still buy talent.
          Last edited by pacergod2; 09-16-2011, 06:02 PM.
          "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

          Comment


          • Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

            Ready to negotiate that hard cap: David Stern - TrueHoop Blog - ESPN

            Originally posted by Henry Abbott
            This lockout stuff is moving fast. Where we are today is not where we were the day before, nor the day before that.

            It can be hard to know what to think.

            What's clear, however, is that the pieces are beginning to fall into place. Billy Hunter's line about good news in the next couple of weeks strikes a tone not that dissimilar from David Stern's. Signs are new talks, with the league's labor committee newly empowered to negotiate the remaining issues, are imminent.

            The last time the two sides met, on Tuesday, the reporting was generally dour. It was an end of talks, because they could not agree about a hard cap.

            Not to be overlooked out of that meeting, however, was the union's indication that they have financial concessions waiting in the wings, and the league's suggestion that agreeing on the economics seemed doable.

            They're close on money? That's huge. The assessment has long been that if they agree on money, nothing else could stop the season starting on time. Maybe the headlines after Tuesday's meeting should have more along the lines of "just one more issue to go."

            The problem on Tuesday was that neither side was willing to dig deep to resolve a divide between the league's urge for a team-by-team hard cap, or the union's desire to keep the same kind of soft cap (with bird rights, trade exceptions, mid-level exceptions etc.) the league has long had.

            Of course, there's plenty of middle ground there. What if contracts were shorter? What if the mid-level got smaller? What if some of the exceptions went away?

            On Tuesday nobody wanted to explore it, in particular because the owners had many different opinions about how to proceed.

            But now let's look at what David Stern said on Thursday after meeting with his owners to get them all on the same page about this hard cap issue. Stern could not have been more clear that he's ready to talk, and that his stance on a hard cap is softening:
            • "It is the view of the board and the committee that an individual team salary cap, as opposed to a league-wide salary cap, is preferred and the better way to go. But as we told the union, and will continue to tell them, everything is negotiable."
            • "The vast majority of owners are in favor of a hard cap system. Having said that, they have authorized the committee to be willing to negotiate on all points, and the committee is."
            • "I get reports that the union is coming out of their meeting today unified. We think that's a good thing. We would like to negotiate with a strong union capable of delivering a deal."
            • "The clock is ticking, but it hasn't struck midnight yet. We've got time to do what needs to be done, and we'd like to do it, actually."
            • "There's nothing scheduled right this minute because we're traveling back to New York and I assume the union is traveling back to New York. But we'll both be in New York starting [Friday] and it wouldn't surprise me if there was some conversation that was going on."


            No word yet on when the next round of talks will be, but it's a good bet it will be very soon. And with the money issue apparently close, and the league ready to think creatively on the only other "blood" issue, there is the chance things could progress quickly.

            Comment


            • Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

              Billy Hunter's position - TrueHoop Blog - ESPN

              Originally posted by Henry Abbott
              On Stephen A. Smith's show , Billy Hunter, executive director of the National Basketball Players Association, said some fascinating things about the state of negotiations.

              On predicting the future:

              I think I'll be back on your show in another two weeks talking about something different than we're talking about tonight.

              Another two weeks?

              Yeah.

              Is that a good sign? ... If you come back in two weeks, Billy, will we be laughing and celebrating something Billy Hunter?

              I don't know, we might be. I don't know. I'm waiting to see.

              On agents:

              They're not in the room, they really don't know what's going on.

              On next steps:

              There are no talks scheduled. I'm hoping that maybe the commissioner or one of the owners will say something to indicate that they're willing to come back, sit down and reconcile things. Short of that we're just going to be at a standstill.

              Comment


              • Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

                Why would Gilbert want to lose the season?
                He strikes me as a very vindictive personality. I could see him want to lose the season just to stick it to Lebron.
                "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                Comment


                • Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

                  Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                  Ready to negotiate that hard cap: David Stern - TrueHoop Blog - ESPN
                  "It is the view of the board and the committee that an individual team salary cap, as opposed to a league-wide salary cap, is preferred and the better way to go. But as we told the union, and will continue to tell them, everything is negotiable."

                  Did Stern really say this about individual team salary caps? How would that possibly work within the realm of competitive balance?
                  Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    Here is q good Q&A with Fisher

                    SI.com: Is a desire for more parity the end-all, be-all of why they want the hard cap?
                    Fisher: I guess for them it is, but we've been clear that that assumption is false. From guys who actually played the game, there isn't an economic system that will set in place how competitive the games are going to be. That comes down to coaching and training and strategy and focus and commitment to being a champion. Whether you're making one million or one dollar, if you want to be the best and you want to compete at the highest level, you will. So that's what we firmly believe and that's why the conversation becomes a little bit muddled when we're trying to be sold on that fact that if we put this system in place there will be more parity in the game.

                    By default, we have over half of the teams in the NBA that have a chance to compete for a championship every year, and then another seven or eight teams are within three to five wins each season of making the playoffs. So you're talking about maybe five or six teams that are maybe on the outside looking in. But generally, 22 or 23 teams per year have legitimate chances of making the playoffs and winning a championship.
                    .
                    Fisher is working his butt off but spouting this crap is not going to help. Right it's not about player's talent. It's coaching, strategy, and training.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

                      Originally posted by speakout4 View Post
                      Fisher is working his butt off but spouting this crap is not going to help. Right it's not about player's talent. It's coaching, strategy, and training.
                      I agree, for a guy that seems to be intelligent this is about the stupidest comment I've read.
                      "But generally, 22 or 23 teams per year have legitimate chances of making the playoffs and winning a championship."
                      Maybe 4 -5 teams have a legitimate chance and they're all way over the cap.
                      Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

                        The point--which Fisher is deliberately missing--is that there is no room of error for small market teams because of the no revenue sharing (not his problem, of course) and the soft cap. Dallas can whiff on Brendan Haywood, Boston can overpay Jermaine O'Neal, etc. Small-market teams have to be run like San Antonio or Oklahoma City.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

                          These reports have my opinion bouncing back and forth like a ping pong ball. Sometimes it really seems like there will be no basketball until 2012, then more information suggests things might yet still wrap up relatively quickly.

                          I really thought and still kind of think that the hard cap will cause this all to stall for a long time, but then I was reading yesterday that it may only be a MINORITY of owners who really want that to happen, which means that's not really the hurdle I thought it was going to be.

                          If that's true, then I can legitimately imagine this not being nearly as bad as I've feared, but it's hard to be sure on what's true and what's false these days.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

                            it sounds like both sides have basically settled on the BRI split. that would seem to be the difficult part.

                            since the players are not going to give up the MLE, all that needs to be done is figure a way to blend a hard cap with a MLE. lots of smart guys on both sides, that should be doable.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

                              Originally posted by rexnom View Post
                              The point--which Fisher is deliberately missing--is that there is no room of error for small market teams because of the no revenue sharing (not his problem, of course) and the soft cap. Dallas can whiff on Brendan Haywood, Boston can overpay Jermaine O'Neal, etc. Small-market teams have to be run like San Antonio or Oklahoma City.
                              I agree with this. Big market teams' advantage is that they can erase mistakes with money. Hopefully revenue sharing will even out the money a bit more so that this is less of a problem.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

                                Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                                These reports have my opinion bouncing back and forth like a ping pong ball. Sometimes it really seems like there will be no basketball until 2012, then more information suggests things might yet still wrap up relatively quickly.
                                My feeling is that there was a deal in principle last week, which was that players give in on revenue split while owners give in on the hard cap. In the larger meeting though, some owners balked on the hard cap question (whether it's a minority or not is open to question), hence we had that burst of angry rhetoric from the players.

                                Now though, it seems that Stern is signaling that the owners are softening on the hard cap. So it's a hopeful sign to me. UB's advice is still sound though, i.e. not to get too high or too low with every bit of news.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X