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

Is Peyton Manning's neck going to revitalize interest in the Pacers?

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

  • #31
    Re: Is Peyton Manning's neck going to revitalize interest in the Pacers?

    If the question is asking me whether or not a season or multiple seasons of bad Colts teams means that bandwagon Colts fans might become bandwagon Pacers fans with the assumption of an over .500 year or years for the Pacers, my instinct is to say yes it will happen to at least a modest degree.

    But I think it's reasonable to assume that if both the Colts and the Pacers were doing well, both would see improved attendance and fan support within the greater Indianapolis area and beyond.

    When's the last time both were good at the same time? 2004? I think the Colts had more "buzz" at the time, but then again it's always been thought (by some at least) that those Pacers teams just weren't liked as much as the Jackson/Miller/Dale/Rik teams were, so who knows what would have happened if you had a good Manning Colts team at the same time as a good 13/31/32/45 Pacers team.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Is Peyton Manning's neck going to revitalize interest in the Pacers?

      What I worry about is the general Indianapolis and central Indiana area fans who are now 23 years old or younger have grown up where the Colts are the team, where as the Pacers fall behind the area college teams.

      At my work we have a weekly newsletter where 1 employee answers a series of questions, and one of the questions is which sport teams are your favorite is your favorites root. Of the dozen or so, almost everyone has mentioned the Colts, some are fans of other NFL teams, also many have mentioned college teams. But no one has mentioned the Pacers, and I would guess no one has considered mentioning the pacers.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Is Peyton Manning's neck going to revitalize interest in the Pacers?

        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
        When's the last time both were good at the same time? 2004? I think the Colts had more "buzz" at the time, but then again it's always been thought (by some at least) that those Pacers teams just weren't liked as much as the Jackson/Miller/Dale/Rik teams were, so who knows what would have happened if you had a good Manning Colts team at the same time as a good 13/31/32/45 Pacers team.
        That 2004 Colts team had issues filling the RCA Dome. 2005 was worse. Both of those seasons the Colts didn't even come in the top-25 in attendace percentage.

        And one thing I think people don't really take into consideration that right now the NFL can sell itself. Not many clubs have attendance issues, and not many teams have less than 80% of seats sold per game. The NFL is in your face no matter where you go. They can just market their game better than the NBA or MLB. Plus there are less home games in a year than other professional sports which provide the opportunity for every game to be made into a much bigger event than just football. (i.e. tailgating, pre-game concerts, etc.)

        Also, most teams now are really close talent-wise and the league is very competitive. You see teams like Buffalo and Washington gaining momentum which wasn't there in the 2000's.

        I don't believe this time right now or any Post-Manning era Colts team will see a rapid decline in interest, and LOS will still be close to full on a regular basis. With or without Manning.
        Last edited by duke dynamite; 09-22-2011, 03:33 PM.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Is Peyton Manning's neck going to revitalize interest in the Pacers?

          "People on PD are bored" - Roy Hibbert
          "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Is Peyton Manning's neck going to revitalize interest in the Pacers?

            Originally posted by Constellations View Post
            Wrong. If we don't have a winning football team, which we don't, I pretty sure they will revert to a team that just went to the playoffs.
            I'm not too optimistic with the start, but it's two games into the season. Who knows if this will be a losing season or not. Peyton could return, no one knows.

            Also, look, we made it to the playoffs with a losing record and won one game. Obviously we Pacers fans know we could have beaten the Bulls that series, and that we are a potential rising team but the casual/bandwagon fans probably didn't even know the Pacers made the playoffs or didn't care.

            The Pacers will have to win consistently like the Colts did, to get a buzz around Indy, IMO.

            Some people think and I'm not saying you, but I've seen some people around here saying how attendance is going to improve so much after we made the playoffs last season, and I just don't see it.

            A below .500 record and playoffs for the first time in 5 years isn't going to make the casuals come out yet, at least not in hordes.
            Super Bowl XLI Champions
            2000 Eastern Conference Champions




            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Is Peyton Manning's neck going to revitalize interest in the Pacers?

              A good Pacers team = higher attendance. For that reason alone is why I believe the Pacers will realistically average at least 15,000 per game once the season begins and take it from there as the years go on.

              It doesn't matter what the Colts do. People here are well aware of this Pacers team coming off a playoff run and will tune in.

              Both teams root for each other. Having at least one winning team is good for the whole city as far as overall interest inside and out.
              In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Is Peyton Manning's neck going to revitalize interest in the Pacers?

                Originally posted by Scot Pollard View Post
                A good Pacers team = higher attendance. For that reason alone is why I believe the Pacers will realistically average at least 15,000 per game once the season begins and take it from there as the years go on.

                It doesn't matter what the Colts do. People here are well aware of this Pacers team coming off a playoff run and will tune in.

                Both teams root for each other. Having at least one winning team is good for the whole city as far as overall interest inside and out.
                We couldn't even sell out playoff games when we were last contenders. I'd love to see Conseco packed full of Pacers fans, but I just don't see it happening yet.

                37-45, playoffs for the first time in 5 years isn't going to make the casuals go nuts. IMO, we are still proving ourselves. It isn't even close to a given we'll make the playoffs when the season does start. To when in years past with the Reggie-led Pacers and Peyton-led Colts we'd have a great shot for the playoffs and were expected to qualify.

                I just hope we don't miss games.
                Super Bowl XLI Champions
                2000 Eastern Conference Champions




                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Is Peyton Manning's neck going to revitalize interest in the Pacers?

                  Originally posted by Merz View Post
                  He is not wrong at all. You said yourself "a team that just went to the playoffs" the Pacers have to do it on their end. The Pacers need to worry about getting interest in the team on their own accord. They can't worry about how the Colts are doing.

                  The fans will come back if the Pacers are a contender with players the city can embrace. The Colts dropping out of contention might help a little but the Pacers contention is where the interest will come from.
                  The Pacers aren't worried about the Colts in the first place. The last time I checked, the Pacers got to the playoffs on their own.
                  Follow me at @Bluejbgold

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Is Peyton Manning's neck going to revitalize interest in the Pacers?

                    Originally posted by Lord Helmet View Post
                    We couldn't even sell out playoff games when we were last contenders. I'd love to see Conseco packed full of Pacers fans, but I just don't see it happening yet.

                    37-45, playoffs for the first time in 5 years isn't going to make the casuals go nuts. IMO, we are still proving ourselves. It isn't even close to a given we'll make the playoffs when the season does start. To when in years past with the Reggie-led Pacers and Peyton-led Colts we'd have a great shot for the playoffs and were expected to qualify.

                    I just hope we don't miss games.
                    Of course we sold out for playoff games when we contended. I don't know what you're talking about. Perhaps the 2006 season where the interest was getting lower and lower with all the off the court shootings right in Indy is what you mean by not selling out for the playoffs?

                    When you have a good team here in Indy, people will definitely watch and attend. Especially for basketball.

                    I agree with what you're saying. A season back to the playoffs for the first time in a while isn't going to trigger a major buzz in Indy again, but it's certainly a very good beginning and people are aware of this team and its future.

                    If we make the playoffs again for a second straight season, we will likely sellout with Pacers fans mainly and a few bandwagon fans out there too depending on who we're playing.

                    So I'd say 15,000+ on average during the season is a pretty realistic prediction for a team just coming off a playoff season for the first time in years.
                    Last edited by Scot Pollard; 09-23-2011, 06:14 PM.
                    In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Is Peyton Manning's neck going to revitalize interest in the Pacers?

                      Originally posted by Constellations View Post
                      The Pacers aren't worried about the Colts in the first place. The last time I checked, the Pacers got to the playoffs on their own.
                      That's pretty much what I was saying there. It's the same way they'll get the fans back. On their own.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Is Peyton Manning's neck going to revitalize interest in the Pacers?

                        Originally posted by Scot Pollard View Post
                        Of course we sold out for playoff games when we contended. I don't know what you're talking about. Perhaps the 2006 season where the interest was getting lower and lower with all the off the court shootings right in Indy is what you mean by not selling out for the playoffs?
                        That's not quite accurate as I've purchased day of game on a walk-up tickets for all rounds of the '94 play-offs.

                        Same was true for all 1st round games in '95 and the 2nd & 3rd home games in the second round against the Knicks that year. The ECF's were indeed sold out ahead of time that year.

                        In '96, got walk up tickets for all games of that series with the Hawks.

                        '98 & '99 Walk up tickets were only in the nosebleeds and those were hard to come by for all rounds on day of game basis.

                        2000.... New building, a team that ran roughshod during the regular season with an unbelievable streak at home! No way play-off tickets were available.

                        Originally posted by Scot Pollard View Post
                        When you have a good .750 team here in Indy, people will definitely watch and attend. Especially for basketball.
                        Well, that just depends on what your definition of "Good" is, so I figured I'd help you be more specific to what Indy fan expects before he shows up in mass! That is also proven to me because when they just start to fall away from .750, folks locally will find reasons not to care again! This has been true for both the Colts and Pacers over the years!

                        Originally posted by Scot Pollard View Post
                        I agree with what you're saying. A season back to the playoffs for the first time in a while isn't going to trigger a major buzz in Indy again, but it's certainly a very good beginning and people are aware of this team and its future.
                        Well said... It is all JUST a step in the right direction!

                        Originally posted by Scot Pollard View Post
                        If we make the playoffs again for a second straight season, we will likely sellout with Pacers fans mainly and a few bandwagon fans out there too depending on who we're playing.
                        I don't see it if we put another low seed into the play-offs. Before Larry Brown and our team grew... putting low seeded .500 teams in the play-offs hardly moved the needle here in Indy. It wasn't until the team was winning CONSTANTLY at a .750 clip before the needle was moved locally on the Pacers. I don't see that any different these days considering how much Bulls Red was in the stands during these play-offs!

                        Originally posted by Scot Pollard View Post
                        So I'd say 15,000+ on average during the season is a pretty realistic prediction for a team just coming off a playoff season for the first time in years.
                        ...maybe after Christmas. Pacers usually seem to struggle at the gate while the HS Football and other prep sports are happening.

                        Bottom Line: Don't expect the casual fans to crash the gates just to see a team that has "something to build on". You won't see the casuals show in mass numbers until we have a team that has "Something to prove!!!"
                        Last edited by Roaming Gnome; 09-24-2011, 07:11 AM.
                        ...Still "flying casual"
                        @roaminggnome74

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Is Peyton Manning's neck going to revitalize interest in the Pacers?

                          Good post, Gnome. I remember our 61 win season in which we had the best record in the NBA we still didn't sell out first round games. I mean technically we might have but there were empties upstairs and not just a few from what I remember....
                          Super Bowl XLI Champions
                          2000 Eastern Conference Champions




                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X