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

Lockout News and Discussions thread

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

    Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
    Does the proposed amnesty situation perhaps provide us an out with Posey's contract?
    It could if that's what Bird wants to do, but I don't know how much of a benefit that will be.

    Comment


    • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

      Originally posted by Strummer View Post
      Maybe this is a minor point, but I don't think this is entirely true. The $160 million that the players got was from an escrow account made up of 8% of each players salary. So the NBA didn't "cut a check". The players just ended up getting the total value of their contracts this year. Apparently it's the first time it's ever happened under this CBA.

      It's not clear to me that there is a mechanism to make it fall exactly on 57%. Otherwise the NBA would probably have had to pay a little more or a little less than what was in escrow. But it sounds like the players just got their 8% returned.

      The escrow account is discussed here:
      http://www.nba.com/2011/news/feature...ate/index.html
      It would take forever to find the video, but in one of David Stern's conferences he stated that 57% of BRI fell above player contracts. Yes, some of the money returned was escrowed money held as a safety net in case the 57% of BRI came in below the scheduled salaries, but there were additional funds due to the players as well.

      Comment


      • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

        Owners absolutely won't go over 50 percent? - CBSSports.com

        Originally posted by Royce Young
        The players have dug in. Fifty-three percent of the Basketball Related Income or bust. Repeatedly, negotiations have collapsed on the discussion of BRI with last week's momentum falling apart right at the one-yard line because the players were still set on only going as low at 52.5.

        The union's obviously convinced that the owners will finally give in and nudge up the extra couple percent. They feel coming down from 57 to 52.5 covers the owners' losses and gives them the opportunity to be profitable. At least that's what their fancy pants MacArthur "genius" economist says.

        Still, the owners aren't budging. At least according to NBA.com.
        The players aren't going to get 52, or 51, or 50.5, or 50.000001, and if they hold out for those numbers, they're not going to have a season. You'd have to be crazy not to see that now, so it's this for the players: take the deal this week or next, or lose the season. If they are willing to die on principle, they wouldn't be the first. But they will die, in the metaphorical sense.
        At some point the players have to give in because the money lost fighting over a couple percent of BRI won't ever be recouped. They're set to lose those percentage points in a matter of months, and that's for the entire life of the next CBA.

        So unless it just becomes a principled matter where players stick to their guns regardless of what the economics say, they'll have to budge.

        Or maybe it's all part of the game. Round and round we go.

        Comment


        • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

          Originally posted by Tom White View Post
          I don't know about the rest of you guys, but I'm ready to start a campaign to get Unclebuck elected the next NBA commissioner.

          OK, but I must warn you, commisioner Buck expects Stern type money.

          Comment


          • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

            Originally posted by purdue101 View Post
            It would take forever to find the video, but in one of David Stern's conferences he stated that 57% of BRI fell above player contracts. Yes, some of the money returned was escrowed money held as a safety net in case the 57% of BRI came in below the scheduled salaries, but there were additional funds due to the players as well.
            You're right, the owners had to cut a check for $26 million this season according to:

            http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q15

            Comment


            • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

              I think Billy is negotiating out of fear more so than anything else. IMO, he is fully aware that 50/50 is the landing spot and a fair deal based upon the economics the owners operate under. The agents and high profile players are holding him hostage. The only problem is that these high profile agents/players represent only a small faction of the union. I bet 75% of the players would take 50/50 right now, no questions asked. However, he would lose his job b/c the high profile names would want his head on a stake.

              As UB stated, give him an out to save face. Maybe a minor system concession.

              Comment


              • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                Originally posted by BillS View Post
                I want it to be painful but not impossible or unheard of for a player to choose to leave his current team. I want the choice to be something a player makes when nothing else is working, not as a first resort. I want the concept of "moving because my current team isn't working hard enough to build a team around me" to NOT mean "I want to move to a team willing to pay me AND throw LT money at as many role-players or other stars as possible figuring one will fill the gap sooner or later".

                I want players not to be doomed to play for a Donald Sterling team for a whole career, but I want them to have some responsibility and incentive to work with teams that ARE trying to build something around them, rather than being able to say "screw it, there's an easier way, I'm going to MIAMI".
                Yeah...you worded it better then I did...but essentially what you said.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                  Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                  Because 95% done is not 100% done, and there's disagreement on some of the final sticking points (primarily whether or not tax paying teams can use the MLE, and I think also whether or not tax payers can make sign and trades).

                  If it's as David describes, 47% and getting what they want with the remaining system issues, or 50% and letting the owners get that stuff, I think they'll wait as long as they can before finally giving in and going with the 50% option.
                  If they say they're 95% done on the total CBA, but they have such a large gap between them concerning the BRI, wouldn't it be safe to assume that the 5% revolves solely around the BRI issue?

                  We're at 53," Hunter said. "You're at 50. Maybe if we try to address the system, and some of those issues, maybe we can come back and look and maybe it will be more palatable to us after we have talked about the system."
                  http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/pos...-to-talk-about

                  The system issues aren't there anymore. He said this before they even started talking about the system, and now they are 1% lower after they get a palatable system, to use his words?

                  They kept saying over and over again, that they system needs to be right in order for them to budge. Well, they got it and they still haven't budged.
                  Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                    If they say they're 95% done on the total CBA, but they have such a large gap between them concerning the BRI, wouldn't it be safe to assume that the 5% revolves solely around the BRI issue?


                    http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/pos...-to-talk-about

                    The system issues aren't there anymore. He said this before they even started talking about the system, and now they are 1% lower after they get a palatable system, to use his words?

                    They kept saying over and over again, that they system needs to be right in order for them to budge. Well, they got it and they still haven't budged.
                    I love Hunter and how he negotiates like a child. No Billy, you're at 53, owners at 47, but the owners are willing to succomb to common sense and split the difference at 50/50. It doesn't mean 50% is the new starting ground for the owners and you're looking for another middle ground.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                      I would have staked my life on it that the owners were at 50% and the players were at 52.5% going into the series of meetings last week. Those BRI % were after the series of meetings with the mediator. Perhaps the media reports were wrong., or Stern was sicker than we all thought.

                      Edit - yes the owners did offer 50% almost two weeks ago. They moved from 47% two weeks ago.

                      http://sheridanhoops.com/page/10/

                      Union attorney Jeffrey Kessler said Portland Trail Blazers owner Paul Allen, a newcomer to the talks, came to the mediation session to represent the hard-line stance of the board of governors. “Something happened in that board of governors meeting,” Kessler said. “Yesterday we thought we were moving toward a deal. Suddenly, today, they spend very little time negotiating. As soon as we got in there and presented our offer and without caucusing, they said, ‘We don’t have to do anything else. We can tell you right now we’re at 50 percent, and it has to be our way.’ “We adjourned, we came back with the players. They said, ‘We will not agree to anything else unless you agree to 50 percent. I couldn’t believe it. … Union officials think the league’s hard-line owners – most of them in small markets who aren’t on the labor relations committee – are making it difficult for the two sides to reach a compromise. Hunter cited the Los Angeles Lakers’ Jerry Buss, the New York Knicks’ Jim Dolan, the Miami Heat’s Micky Arison and the Dallas Mavericks’ Mark Cuban as owners who are willing to make a deal. “But I think there are a group of small-market owners who are dug in, and they’re carrying the day,” Hunter said.”
                      Last edited by Unclebuck; 10-31-2011, 03:19 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                        51-49 favor of players and the deal gets annoucned by Friday
                        Sittin on top of the world!

                        Comment


                        • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                          The players just need to realize that leverage comes with the state of the economy. Take a hit now, if the deal makes the owners very profitable as the economy improves, you'll have the leverage next time. They aren't going to get either a better deal for the future by holding out, nor would they recoup losses being incurred by current players.
                          Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

                          Comment


                          • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                            Sorry if I missed this being posted (it's long.)

                            http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2011/10/...te-david-stern

                            Comment


                            • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                              Or how about the players have all the leverage in free agency for the next 6, 8, or 10 years, depending on whether the union opts out or not.

                              The players rake the owners over the coals in free agency. The owners rake the players over the coals in CBA negotiations. It is the way it works. Players take 50/50 and go be happy that you get paid millions to play basketball. Then rake the owners over the coals with deals you shouldn't be getting in the off-season.
                              "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: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                                Once again, if owning a franchise is so easy and so lucratively foolproof because the increase in valuation changes into guaranteed porterhouse steaks and lollipops, let the players form their own league by guaranteeing investors and cities a portion of those ridiculous profits. Since the players are the ones who aren't greedy at all, they could pay all current NBA cities for arenas AND operations, pay players 60% of revenues, and STILL have a profit for investors, just by cashing in that increased valuation every year. Sort of like constantly refinancing your house to get the paper valuation out of it - works every time and never hurts anyone.

                                Go for it, guys. But don't come crying to us when making the numbers isn't as easy as influencing the referees.
                                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

                                Working...
                                X