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 BlueNGold View Post
    They're both arrogant, but that misses the point.

    There is a lockout going on. Tell me why the owners should be forced to operate their business.
    Personally, I think that due to the unique nature of professional sports, cities and players should have more rights and respect. As a fan, I understand that even though our tax dollars have built, housed, and financed the Pacers, it isn't ours. And the team can demand whatever it wants or leave at the drop of hat. I don't like it, but it is what it is. So, if I don't like that, why would I be in favor of the same thing happening to players?

    I think there should be more rules to regulate how owners can operate business. But that is another topic entirely.

    Comment


    • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

      Originally posted by billbradley View Post
      Personally, I think that due to the unique nature of professional sports, cities and players should have more rights and respect. As a fan, I understand that even though our tax dollars have built, housed, and financed the Pacers, it isn't ours. And the team can demand whatever it wants or leave at the drop of hat. I don't like it, but it is what it is. So, if I don't like that, why would I be in favor of the same thing happening to players?

      I think there should be more rules to regulate how owners can operate business. But that is another topic entirely.
      There are volumes of laws regulating business. That even applies to the NBA generally and contract law in particular.

      Personally, I think the players have knowingly assumed the risks of playing in the NBA to make huge dollars playing a sport. There's nothing wrong with that, but the risks exist...as is obvious right now. There is one employer for them and they knew that going in. There isn't anyone holding a gun to their heads as they decide to enter the draft. If they don't like how the league operates, perhaps they should have considered that awhile ago.

      With that said, they will continue to be millionaires playing basketball for a living, flying in private jets, being treated like kings. I think they need to realize they are not in the same position as owners. They're in a great position, but they simply do not own the business. Perhaps they should start a company like Microsoft, then buy an NBA franchise so they can actually own the business and call the shots. Why is this so hard to understand?

      Comment


      • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

        Originally posted by Kstat View Post
        also, referring to the owners as "the 1 percent" is pretty stupid.

        if you're classifying this battle as millionaires vs billionaires, the owners are actually "the 0.0001 percent."

        However, the players THEMSELVES ARE THE ACTUAL 1 PERCENT.
        yes, OCUPPY the NBAPA

        Comment


        • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

          Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
          When you've got players complaining about things that aren't even in the current offer .... that's going to sound stupid no matter what way its said. Twitter, interview ... whatever.
          Out of curiosity, do you know what's in the offer? Because I don't. And we're all hearing information and misinformation, including the players.

          Call them ignorant if you want, but that makes pretty much everyone with an opinion ignorant. We know that players are having a hard time getting information currently, whether it's purposeful or because the Union is just disorganized, so players are getting information the way we are. And they are reacting the way we are.

          I will say this. Maybe next time, the NBPA ought to ban all players from talking about the lockout, anywhere. Like the NBA has done. Not necessarily because I have a problem with people sharing their opinion, but because of fan reactions.

          I'm not saying guys aren't going to say stupid stuff. They are. And some of them, just in general, are dumb. But I think the generalization is getting to be a bit much..
          Last edited by Sookie; 11-12-2011, 08:55 PM.

          Comment


          • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

            Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
            There are volumes of laws regulating business. That even applies to the NBA generally and contract law in particular.
            I know, I meant more laws concerning the owner's connection to the city and businesses directly connected to the city because of the team.

            Perhaps they should start a company like Microsoft, then buy an NBA franchise so they can actually own the business and call the shots. Why is this so hard to understand?
            It's easy to understand. And perhaps cities should start buying teams like the Packers. But that isn't realistic.

            Again, the owners can do whatever they want to the players or cities, because they are the owners. I just don't like it. I'm not going to change my position because the owners are targeting employees instead of tax payers.
            Last edited by billbradley; 11-12-2011, 11:40 PM.

            Comment


            • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

              ...as opposed to the players targeting taxpayers....

              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

              Comment


              • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                Originally posted by billbradley View Post
                Personally, I think that due to the unique nature of professional sports, cities and players should have more rights and respect. As a fan, I understand that even though our tax dollars have built, housed, and financed the Pacers, it isn't ours. And the team can demand whatever it wants or leave at the drop of hat. I don't like it, but it is what it is. So, if I don't like that, why would I be in favor of the same thing happening to players?

                I think there should be more rules to regulate how owners can operate business. But that is another topic entirely.
                So, when a profeesional team brings in 1 million dollors of revenue to a city per game, equalling, say 41 million in city revenue, plus, teams create alot of jobs in the city. So, you don't like the owner to lobby for 10 million from tax payers? really?
                Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

                Comment


                • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                  Originally posted by billbradley View Post
                  I know, I meant more laws concerning the owner's connection to the city and businesses directly connected to the city because of the team.



                  It's easy to understand. And perhaps cities should start buying teams like the Packers. But that isn't realistic.

                  Again, I the owners can do whatever they to the players or cities, because they are the owners. I just don't like it. I'm not going to change my position because the owners are targeting employees instead of tax payers.
                  I think there's a difference between the two. If you owned a company, you may or may not feel differently.

                  The company is their property. This is not a great analogy, but it applies to most people. You own a car, right? What if some person tried to tell you what you should do with your car (e.g. give them a ride because you had done that before and they liked that) and got mad if you didn't do what they wanted? Do they have a right to tell you what to do with your car?

                  In contrast, tax payers might not have a relationship with the Pacers. Sure, the business owners around Conseco benefit big time, but Joe Taxpayer living on North Meridian is not seeing that benefit and might not see any benefit. The Pacers and the city, therefore, should be very careful about making deals that financially benefit the Pacers lest there will be ethical issues.

                  This isn't the case with their business which, by definition really, is their choice to run, close or sell.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                    Originally posted by Pacer Fan View Post
                    So, when a profeesional team brings in 1 million dollors of revenue to a city per game, equalling, say 41 million in city revenue, plus, teams create alot of jobs in the city. So, you don't like the owner to lobby for 10 million from tax payers? really?
                    Like I said, at what point is it enough? We build the arenas, they don't pay rent, they get revenue for all events, parking, money, deals and tax cuts for surrounding businesses, etc. And the money generated by the Pacers is debatable.

                    The NBA Lockout and the Economy: An Overstated Impact
                    http://moneyland.time.com/2011/11/07...stated-impact/

                    Comment


                    • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                      I think there's a difference between the two. If you owned a company, you may or may not feel differently.

                      The company is their property. This is not a great analogy, but it applies to most people. You own a car, right? What if some person tried to tell you what you should do with your car (e.g. give them a ride because you had done that before and they liked that) and got mad if you didn't do what they wanted? Do they have a right to tell you what to do with your car?
                      This is what I mean. Pro sports are unique because growth depends so much on the city and players that each should have more input and share in that growth than some stranger and your car.

                      In contrast, tax payers might not have a relationship with the Pacers. Sure, the business owners around Conseco benefit big time, but Joe Taxpayer living on North Meridian is not seeing that benefit and might not see any benefit. The Pacers and the city, therefore, should be very careful about making deals that financially benefit the Pacers lest there will be ethical issues.

                      This isn't the case with their business which, by definition really, is their choice to run, close or sell.
                      But that is the point, politicians are forced to succumb to the demands of owners or lose support. Tax payers end up paying for teams and arenas that they don't own. And the owners still ask for more.

                      And eventually, the owners will get more. First the players, then us.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                        Originally posted by BillS View Post
                        Based on the retraction and other info, I thought this D-League issue wasn't at all in the current proposed agreement, so there is nothing to can or revise.
                        There is a complete working document of proposals for the CBA, but the NBPA is only being asked to say yes or no to a certain key set of them. That set does not include any discussion of the D-League.

                        There are 30 or 40 other issues that haven't been agreed to, but remain negotiable. This is one of them. The NBA has proposed this D-League approach in the past, but as I understand it, it has already changed in form, and it has even been couched in terms of setting up a committee to discuss D-League strategy.

                        In this instance, it is the same as the NBA requesting an increase in the age limit. It exists, but it is not important.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                          Just an example of how out of touch with reality some players are:

                          "If this deal is accepted...I advise guys to stay in school and get ur degree, Master's if possible. U might be able to make more $ that way than playing in the NBA in ur 1st five years. Being the 1st pick of the draft would mean nothing." - Nazr Mohammed

                          http://blogs.herald.com/miami_heat/2...he-league.html

                          I didn't know you could make $500K+ as a new university graduate. I've obviously been working in the wrong jobs! */sarcasm*

                          Players, the game is up. The deal only gets worse from here. The owners have said what they're willing to pay, so that's it. And please stop with all the "we're making so many concessions" talk. The last deal is finished. This is a new deal being negotiated.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                            Originally posted by pacerDU View Post
                            Just an example of how out of touch with reality some players are:

                            "If this deal is accepted...I advise guys to stay in school and get ur degree, Master's if possible. U might be able to make more $ that way than playing in the NBA in ur 1st five years. Being the 1st pick of the draft would mean nothing." - Nazr Mohammed

                            http://blogs.herald.com/miami_heat/2...he-league.html

                            I didn't know you could make $500K+ as a new university graduate. I've obviously been working in the wrong jobs! */sarcasm*

                            Players, the game is up. The deal only gets worse from here. The owners have said what they're willing to pay, so that's it. And please stop with all the "we're making so many concessions" talk. The last deal is finished. This is a new deal being negotiated.
                            How stupid can you make yourself look? Nice that he said "masters, if possible." haha
                            "We've got to be very clear about this. We don't want our players hanging around with murderers," said Larry Bird, Pacers president.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                              Looked at Nazr's twitter page, and he's getting killed. He's now taken up to blocking people who don't agree with him. Stupid comments like those make it clear that he doesn't get it. Seems to be running rampant from players lately, even Granger made a dumb one.

                              Enjoy getting raped like the NHL players.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                                Originally posted by billbradley View Post
                                And eventually, the owners will get more. First the players, then us.
                                Too many assumptions are being made. The first is that the owners are unfairly and unreasonably sticking it to the players which i don't accept and the second is that the owners will unfairly and unreasonably stick it to the public and the public can't do anything about it. There are many people who will challenge whether a franchise should be supported under all circumstances. Seattle lost their team and they are a lot richer city than we are.

                                You are making assumptions based on what you believe to be true but are not necessarily correct. While the pacers do ask for help they are deemed by the city to be worth that investment financially and otherwise and it isn't because city dwellers are fanatic pacer fans.
                                Last edited by speakout4; 11-12-2011, 10:01 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X