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

    HowardBeckNYT Revised offer includes some modest improvements. I found little proof to support claim that the offer is "worse" than the previous one.

    Comment


    • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

      Can someone paste this for me? Thanks.

      http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/13/sp...osal.html?_r=2

      Comment


      • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
        Can someone paste this for me? Thanks.

        http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/13/sp...osal.html?_r=2
        .

        Rumors Drown Truth on N.B.A.’s Proposal
        By HOWARD BECK

        Hours after the N.B.A. delivered its final collective bargaining proposal to the players union, the rumors and the rhetoric began to flow.

        The deal would let teams send players to the development league and cut their pay.

        Teams that used certain salary cap exceptions would lose the right to re-sign their own players.

        “Bird” rights would be jeopardized.

        The middle class would be eliminated.

        These and other concerns filled Twitter timelines on Friday, a day after labor talks concluded. They turned out to be unfounded, speculative or simply false.

        The D-League is not mentioned anywhere in the seven-page proposal that was delivered to the union on Friday — a copy of which was obtained by The New York Times.

        Nor are there any measures that could curtail “Bird” rights. While some provisions might crimp the N.B.A.’s middle class, others could boost it.

        In the absence of official documentation — neither the league nor the union released the proposal publicly — the rumors have prevailed. “The revised proposal is worse than the last offer,” Nazr Mohammed, a 13-year veteran, wrote Saturday on Twitter.

        That sentiment was echoed by several agents and players. But a review of the N.B.A.’s previous proposal and the revised offer does not support the claim. In many areas, the league improved its offer, albeit modestly.

        For instance, the league is now proposing a higher midlevel exception for luxury-tax-paying teams — $3 million for three seasons, and available every year. The league had been proposing a $2.5 million exception for two seasons, and available every other year.

        The league also increased the annual raises for “Bird” players. And, at the union’s suggestion, the N.B.A. agreed that the 10-year labor deal could be terminated by either side after the sixth year, instead of the seventh.

        Two provisions could conceivably hurt players in the middle of the league’s salary structure. The league wants to ban luxury-tax-paying teams from using the full midlevel exception ($5 million) and from making sign-and-trade deals. To partly compensate, the league last week created a new exception, worth $2.5 million, for up to two seasons, for teams that are just below the cap. In the past, teams with cap room were not permitted to use any exceptions, even after they surpassed the cap in a given off-season.

        The league also proposed raising the minimum team salary to 90 percent of the salary cap by the 2013-14 season, which should increase spending by the more frugal franchises.

        One of the N.B.A.’s new demands does leap out: a call for a 12 percent reduction in rookie and minimum-scale contracts, cutting them to 2007-8 levels.

        That provision was not listed in the prior proposal, which was sent to the union Nov. 6.

        The ban on luxury-tax-paying teams using midlevel exceptions and sign-and-trade deals — a major concern to agents — may have a minimal effect. Since 2005, only four players have been acquired by luxury-tax-paying teams through sign-and-trade deals. Those teams used the full midlevel exception only nine times in that period.

        Moreover, because the N.B.A. guarantees the players a set percentage of revenues — 50 percent, about $2 billion a year — any shortfall in total salaries has to be made up to the players.

        The speculation about teams losing “Bird” rights seems to be based on a misreading of one particular provision governing teams that move into the luxury tax. The simple explanation is that if a team is going to cross the tax threshold using multiple exceptions, it has to sign its “Bird” player first.

        As for the D-League, the N.B.A. does want to grant teams the right to send any player with up to five years experience to its minor league. However, that provision is not contained in the proposal that is now up for union approval. Rather, it is one of 30 to 40 secondary items that have yet to be negotiated. Those items are typically discussed after the main framework of a deal is approved.

        By any measure, the proposed deal would be a major win for the owners. The players are being asked to take a $280 million pay cut, with shorter contracts, lower raises and tighter restrictions on the top-spending teams. But league officials insist that the deal is not nearly as bad as the rumor mill suggests.

        “It’s of grave concern to the league that there is an enormous amount of misinformation concerning our proposal, both on Twitter and in the more traditional media,” Adam Silver, the deputy commissioner, said Saturday night. “We believe that if the players are fully informed as to what is and is not in our proposal, they will agree that its terms are beneficial to them and represent a fair compromise.”

        Comment


        • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

          Does anyone know what the term "room teams" means? Is this an additional exception for teams under the cap?


          http://tracking.si.com/2011/11/12/nb...?sct=nba_t2_a5
          The details tweeted by the @NBA_Labor feed — that is, the details that the NBA wanted to be sure were well publicized — included the following (all quoted directly from their respective tweets):
          • More mid-levels than 2005 CBA: $5M for non-taxpayers, $3M for taxpayers, $2.5M for room teams
          • More cap exceptions for teams who are not taxpayers…
          • Projected tax level ranges from $70M-$85M over next 6 years; more than enough money to keep teams together
          • New trade rules to promote more player movement
          • Projected max salaries range from $13M to $19M and growing
          • Increased minimum team salary – from 75% of cap to 90%
          • Plyr-friendly changes 4 restricted FAs: qualifying offers higher & 100% guaranteed, shorter match period 4 offer sheets
          • Ability to stretch waived player’s salary frees up more money for teams to spend on FAs
          • Players retain full Bird rights
          • Repeat tax rates apply only when team is taxpayer 4 out of 5 yrs (not 3 out of 5)
          Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

          Comment


          • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

            I am much more concerned about the Fever's future than I am the Pacers.

            Whoever Herb sells the team to, will buy it to own the Pacers, but will they want to spend an extra amount to own the Fever too?

            Maybe Bird will want to buy the Fever and Steve Simon owns the Pacers.
            Last edited by Scot Pollard; 11-13-2011, 10:58 AM.
            In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

            Comment


            • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

              Come on players....take the deal.


              Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

              Comment


              • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                Originally posted by billbradley View Post
                I'm not assuming anything. You should research the current Pacers CIB deal that expires this year and what was said about the status of the Pacers going forward.
                Originally posted by Pacer Fan View Post
                It doesn't actually expire till 2019, If they was to decide to move after this year, they would have to pay a substantial penalty. Not saying Simon wouldn't pay it, But I truley don't expect it. I would give amount, but I read like 2 months ago and don't remember at the moment. 35 million comes to mind tho.
                Originally posted by billbradley View Post
                I was talking about the deal expiring and the Pacers' ability to leave. What you wrote was wrong. Just look at the past thread, penalties and all are posted along with exact contracts from CIB website.
                The lease is designed and agreed to thru 2019. I am not wrong at all. Read the freakin artical and stop changing your verbage to try and prove a point. Nowhere did you say the ability to leave till now. I had mentioned the ability to leave thru penalty or pay back and i wasn't wrong anywhere but the 35 mil is 30 mil, which I said i was not sure about the amount.

                Also you are very wrong about the Colts deal with the CIB. No free ride there. Jim paid 121.5 mil up front for a building he doesn't even own, plus, he pays $250,000.00 per year.

                http://washtimesherald.com/sports/x5...-in-Indy/print
                Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

                Comment


                • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                  Guys, please start a new thread to continue with the CIB talk. Thanks!

                  Comment


                  • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                    "New trade rules to promote more player movement"

                    ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!!

                    this is making me sad i hope the players reject this deal I for one will hate to see more super teams form while the pacers and other small market teams just be used as a farm system.

                    the NBA still needs a hard cap in the worst way

                    Comment


                    • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                      Guys, please start a new thread to continue with the CIB talk. Thanks!
                      Sorry Hicks, I had to reply...I'm done!
                      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 Dr. house View Post
                        "New trade rules to promote more player movement"

                        ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!!

                        this is making me sad i hope the players reject this deal I for one will hate to see more super teams form while the pacers and other small market teams just be used as a farm system.

                        the NBA still needs a hard cap in the worst way
                        Woah. Player movement doesn't necessarily mean superstar movement.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                          I really hope the players take this deal. There's no way they're dumb enough to give up an entire season right?

                          Comment


                          • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                            They're not going to take this deal (which, to me, isn't nearly as awful as some of them are complaining that it is), but it sounds like they're going to tweak the deal and say, "We'll accept THIS deal, if you will..." as they hand it back to the owners.

                            Then it will be up to the owners.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                              I hope they cancel the season. I'm tired of this ****. If I hear about one more " marathon " 8 hour negotiating session, in going to puke. That's not a marathon, that's a days work for me. And I don't have the luxury of sitting on my fat *** and trying to split millions of dollars. What a joke these people are.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                                Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                                They're not going to take this deal (which, to me, isn't nearly as awful as some of them are complaining that it is), but it sounds like they're going to tweak the deal and say, "We'll accept THIS deal, if you will..." as they hand it back to the owners.

                                Then it will be up to the owners.
                                Anything more than a tweak will kill it.

                                I am curious whether Stern really believes that he can beat decertification or whether he is scared to death that the players would prevail. Decertification is totally unpredictable.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X