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 am not expecting good news today. Just hope both sides keep quiet and schedule another meeting.

    .

    Comment


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

      About the only thing less shocking than the lack of anything good from today's meeting would be sticking one's finger in a light socket of a lamp from the SS Minnow on Gilligan's Island prior to the Professor figuring out how to construct a bike powered generator from bamboo, palm fronds, and coconuts while trying desperately to hide his lust for Mary Ann.

      Comment


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

        The Mayans were correct my world is ending in 2012 no pacer basketball
        The Brawl set our franchise back years but it was a hell of a lot fun to watch!

        Comment


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

          NBA Lockout Update: Owners committee to meet Friday

          NEW YORK — The sides didn’t say much of substance after today’s NBA labor talks.

          From Brian Mahoney of the Associated Press: “Stern celebrated his 69th birthday Thursday but didn’t appear in a festive mood after meeting for about five hours with leaders from the union. … Stern said the owners’ labor relations committee would talk Friday, and both sides said they hoped to meet again next week.

          Comment


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

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            I am not expecting good news today. Just hope both sides keep quiet and schedule another meeting.

            .
            Are you seriously David stern? Haha basically everything you've said via lockout is spot on

            AUSTRALIA'S NO.1 PACER FAN

            Comment


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

              The good news is that the lockout will end because nobody leaves money on the table forever...

              Comment


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

                A glimmer of hope in this article. And since some of you don't trust Chris Sheridan, here it is from Ken Berger and he says the drop dead date to keep regular season in intact is Friday October 14th.

                I know all the headlines are about the preseason games being cancelled and training camps pushed back, but I still contend that things are not as bad as many (I think) want to believe

                http://www.cbssports.com/#!/nba/stor...or-full-season


                Owners' revised proposal means there's hope for full season


                By Ken Berger
                CBSSports.com NBA Insider





                NEW YORK -- Last we left our negotiating heroes, Billy Hunter had drawn a line in the sand: The players were prepared to make a significant economic move, but only if the owners dropped their insistence on a hard cap.

                The NBA said, "Nope." Each side retreated to a neutral corner. The brains of both operations got together Wednesday, followed by the heavy hitters on Thursday at a snobby boutique hotel on Manhattan's Upper East Side. And guess what?

                After more than two years of negotiations, it's finally time to negotiate.

                Following a series of small compromises by both sides, it was the owners' turn to move the needle in a significant way. And they did: According to a person briefed on the negotiations, the league put forth a new number on the split of revenues, or basketball-related income, on Thursday, a step that could help propel the talks forward even as the start of training camps were set to be delayed and preseason games canceled -- with such gloomy but fully expected and insignificant announcements expected Friday.

                "It's moving," said another person with knowledge of the talks. "Not as fast as some people would want, but it's moving."

                According to one of the people familiar with the bargaining, here is some of what transpired Thursday: After signaling last week that the players' offer to move lower than the 54.3 percent share of BRI was a starting point that could lead to a deal on economics, league negotiators came back with their own number. Unsurprisingly, the number was lower than what the players had last proposed, though multiple people involved in the talks refused to specify by how much.

                The owners' proposed BRI split was made without specific system details tied to it, and the number itself was "unacceptable" to the union leadership, one of the sources said. Thus, the faces of both sides emerged from the Manhattan hotel after five hours of bargaining and delivered the same vague non-answers with strikingly similar flatlined demeanors and monotone voices.

                "I'm sorry, but the most important thing is to see whether we can't have negotiations conducive to ultimately getting a deal, which is what our committee and our board will like," commissioner David Stern said on his 69th birthday. "And having these conversations with you doesn't add anything to that. And that's the dilemma."

                But despite hand wringing over the imminent delay of training camps and the cancellation of preseason games -- an announcement is expected Friday, according to sources -- what happened here actually had the potential to be productive. For the first time since their initial proposal in January 2010 -- when they offered a $45 million hard cap that would deliver the players well below 50 percent of BRI -- the owners proposed a revised BRI split that was closer to, but still below what the players have indicated they would be willing to accept. In this impossibly slow negotiating dance, that qualifies as progress.

                The owners' number, one of the people familiar with the details said, represented a willingness to move off their most recent formal proposal to cap player salaries at $2 billion a year for the bulk of a 10-year proposal. So, do the math: Assuming 4 percent revenue growth next season to $3.95 billion, the owners' $2 billion proposal represented roughly 50.5 percent of BRI for the players. If the players were willing to go down to, say, 53 percent with assurances that a soft cap would remain in place, that would be $2.094 billion -- leaving the two sides only $94 million apart in the first year of the deal.

                Given that the owners moved off their $2 billion to somewhere between that and the players' number, we're talking about perhaps as little as $75 million per year holding up the future of the NBA. That's why, as one person familiar with the talks said Thursday, a deal is "there for the taking."

                When will each side be ready to take it? Not yet. Not Thursday, and maybe not next week, either. The drop-dead date to preserve the season intact -- Oct. 13 or 14 -- is still three weeks away.

                So what happens next? Stern reports by phone to the labor relations committee Friday, cancels preseason games and postpones the start of camps -- as we knew back on July 1 would happen -- and the two sides get back together early next week and negotiate the split further.

                Now that each side is on record with a number that isn't wildly out of line with the other, that shouldn't take long. That's why both sides left Thursday's bargaining session expecting next week's meeting to mark the beginning of the real dirty work -- negotiating the system that will deliver the money to the players.

                The BRI split is tied to the cap; the harder the cap, the higher the players believe their share needs to be. But as one of the people familiar with the talks said, once a compromise is reached on the split, figuring out a system to go with it shouldn't be a deal-killer.

                "There's willingness to deal on both points," said the person, referring to the split and the system. "It's been said from the beginning: If there's agreement on the money, the system should not cause us to lose games."

                From now until Oct. 14 -- the date I've marked on my calendar when regular-season games will be canceled without a deal -- the most dangerous days of these negotiations are not when the two sides are speaking with each other. It's the days in between, when they talk internally to their constituents.

                After the two sides felt they were on the verge of agreeing on the economics last Tuesday, they went to their neutral corners and things changed. Agents mobilized players and got them in revolt mode, and owners who aren't on the negotiating committee evidently weren't as prepared to move forward with the economic model that the small groups of negotiators were growing comfortable discussing.

                A lot can go wrong, and probably will, between now and Oct. 14. But that still leaves three weeks to get a deal, and about half of it's done, as far as I can tell. How hard will each side be willing to push to get what it wants? That we don't know. When will they be ready to take a deal that's there for the taking?

                They'll be ready when they're ready. They'll be ready when they have to be. If not, shame on all of them.
                Last edited by Unclebuck; 09-23-2011, 09:39 AM.

                Comment


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

                  Probably one of the best articles I've seen, so far.

                  I think Stern and Hunter have to convince their constituents as much as each other and this slow dance, conveys that as much as anything.

                  I think Stern has had this plan all along. He's not one to be surprised or do this by the seat of his pants. He's planned all along to have this progression. Wait until we cancel games (preseason) make a negotiable offer at this point with the goal being 50/50. Look Stern knows a 50/50 split makes the teams viable, he's known that all along. He also know the players can live with and will approve that number. He also knows he can get his group on board with this number.

                  The caveat is timing, they both have to ensure a sense of urgency among their people.

                  Stern couldn't go to 50% at the jumping off point in negotiations. Hunter couldn't go there without the threat of losing the season.

                  The wild card, to me, is decertification prior to the inevitable meet in the middle by these groups. If anyone is going to ruin/lose the season, its the agents. Agents are aggressive by nature... I understand their stance, but its not whats best for anyone.

                  I think Berger nailed it with this article. Theres a deal there for the taking, there just has to be the proper sense of urgency for both sides to get to a point that they can live with it.

                  I think Stern keeps the Hard Cap card in his pocket, until they get as close as they can on the BRI number, then goes in on 10/13 and says, look if you are willing to go from 52 to 50, we'll let you have the soft cap and we'll have a deal. I think its that simple. I think the end result is whats its always been... 50/50. I think Stern has known this and maybe Hunter too, but you have to get the people you represent to buy off on it as much or more than each other.

                  I see this in a whole new light now, after this article.

                  Comment


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

                    I'm starting to feel a little better after the Berger article. It might be the first positive thing he's written on the lockout.

                    Comment


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

                      Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                      I'm starting to feel a little better after the Berger article. It might be the first positive thing he's written on the lockout.

                      He's been fairly negative prior to this article in his reporting regarding the lockout. He's somewhere in the middle between Sheridan on the positive side and Yahoo's Wojnarowski on the negative side.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X