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

    Originally posted by BillS View Post
    Do you fix the "middle class" problem by having a time-in-the league "base" salary that is set at a certain percentage of BRI and is paid by the league, not the team, to any player under contract? You then take the remaining BRI, create a hard cap, and teams sign players for an ADDITIONAL amount based on their playing value.

    The amount that teams kick to the league for the base part of the salary is dependent on that team's revenue contribution to BRI, thus creating for all practical purposes a revenue sharing element.

    The hard cap on the remainder is not going to hurt middle income players, they get their money from the time-in-grade if they aren't good enough to get a star payday.

    Thoughts? EDIT: I know there's already a "vet minimum" system in place, but this would need to be way above that level to be effective, such that many players would get almost all their compensation from it.
    Wow, super creative. Nicely done.

    You'd really have to be careful on how its structured monetarily. You don't want the league portion to be so high that all of the mid level players want to go to preferred destinations, since you'd get paid close to the same no matter where you played. Also, not so low that it doesn't matter (like you mentioned, the vet min.)

    Also, how would you account for the upper middle class player or lower star player, does that still function as it does now. I mean the 9-12 million dollar a year type players, but what portion is league and what portion is direct contract.

    Also, how would a star coming off his rookie deal, compare to an established star who's been in the league for 9 years? League pay vs. direct contract.

    I'm having trouble getting my mind around those scenarios.

    Maybe a 10 year 'star' just makes more money overall than a 5 year star??

    Great idea!

    Comment


    • Re: Lockout news

      The only thing I care about is less guaranteed years. No team should have to go through what the Pacers did. That really set the franchise back more years cause it'll take that much longer to get the fans to come back.

      I'm hopefully for a season, and hopefully there will be more than half a season to be played when all is said and done.

      I'm still siding with the owners on many issues though. Player are fighting for more salary, but that only means that the fans have to pay that much more for tickets. Why does it seem the fans get screwed no matter what?
      First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

      Comment


      • Re: Lockout news

        Originally posted by Speed View Post
        You'd really have to be careful on how its structured monetarily. You don't want the league portion to be so high that all of the mid level players want to go to preferred destinations, since you'd get paid close to the same no matter where you played. Also, not so low that it doesn't matter (like you mentioned, the vet min.)
        Yeah, the structure needs to be figured out so that you don't have upper lever non-star players giving up small extra pay to go play with LeBoshWade. There'd have to be some restrictions on how many "zero team compensation" players you can have, maybe - that might also make the players happy because it limits the number of players who "only" make League Payday.

        Originally posted by Speed View Post
        Also, how would you account for the upper middle class player or lower star player, does that still function as it does now. I mean the 9-12 million dollar a year type players, but what portion is league and what portion is direct contract.

        Also, how would a star coming off his rookie deal, compare to an established star who's been in the league for 9 years? League pay vs. direct contract.

        I'm having trouble getting my mind around those scenarios.

        Maybe a 10 year 'star' just makes more money overall than a 5 year star?
        That last is my thought, that if you are a star your direct payday will make your salary higher than those with your experience but not necessarily higher than guys with similar skills and more experience.

        I think this proposal definitely lifts the low end (average league minimum would effectively approach the LLE if not the MLE), but individual PLAYERS might not see those minimums if they are young.

        It would take some pretty careful working of the numbers, and some new approaches to keeping players (maybe in this scenario you extend contract lengths, or maybe you can add incentive payments that would be a separate cap level, or some other additional creative solution), but I thought it might make some sense to step back from "the way we've always done it" to try to address what seems to be the real concern of the players.
        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


        • Re: Lockout news

          Originally posted by BillS View Post
          Do you fix the "middle class" problem by having a time-in-the league "base" salary that is set at a certain percentage of BRI and is paid by the league, not the team, to any player under contract? You then take the remaining BRI, create a hard cap, and teams sign players for an ADDITIONAL amount based on their playing value.

          The amount that teams kick to the league for the base part of the salary is dependent on that team's revenue contribution to BRI, thus creating for all practical purposes a revenue sharing element.

          The hard cap on the remainder is not going to hurt middle income players, they get their money from the time-in-grade if they aren't good enough to get a star payday.

          Thoughts? EDIT: I know there's already a "vet minimum" system in place, but this would need to be way above that level to be effective, such that many players would get almost all their compensation from it.
          It is an interesting idea. Effectively, you're raising the floor salary (way above the vet minimum) and using that as a bribe to get the low level players to agree to a hard cap. The revenue sharing component here is interesting.

          The effect of this seems to be to take away the difference between mid level and minimum level players. So instead of overpaid 8th men making $8m a year, you'd have overpaid 12th men making $3m a year. Superstars still get paid the same as before. I guess the rationale for this is that the talent difference between 8th men and 12th men is a lot smaller than that of 8th man vs first or second option.

          Originally posted by Speed View Post

          You'd really have to be careful on how its structured monetarily. You don't want the league portion to be so high that all of the mid level players want to go to preferred destinations, since you'd get paid close to the same no matter where you played. Also, not so low that it doesn't matter (like you mentioned, the vet min.)
          This is probably my main criticism as well. As with any hard cap system, what kind of incentive can you offer players to stay in unattractive locations?

          Comment


          • Re: Lockout news

            Originally posted by wintermute View Post
            This is probably my main criticism as well. As with any hard cap system, what kind of incentive can you offer players to stay in unattractive locations?
            Maybe the incentive is based on staying with a team, like an extra year of vet experience status for every 5 years with a team or some such. You'd have to figure out a way to keep from punishing guys who get traded against their will, while making it difficult for players to force trades. That's a hard thing to take into account.
            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


            • Re: Lockout news

              I was willing to have the owners not get most of what they asked for but at this point
              I am ready for the season to be gone and more to get this fixed correctly. That means the owners get most of what they want. However I will never watch player sponsored or organized games or owners trying to pawn off second tier player games either. Pain($$$lost) is the only solution for this problem.
              {o,o}
              |)__)
              -"-"-

              Comment


              • Re: Lockout news

                Originally posted by BillS View Post
                Interestingly, the superstars want a full payday and the mid-levels don't want to give up any ground, so not only do players want a greater than 50% share of revenue (with as few expenses netted out beforehand as possible), they want the owners to be unable to control payroll expenses.
                I'm not sure what you mean here. Are you saying that player salaries will exceed 50% BRI (or whatever the negotiated % is), because neither superstars nor mid-level players want to give up money? But that won't be possible - that 50% BRI is a hard cap on aggregate player salaries.

                For example, should owners hand lucrative deals to Nene, West, Crawford, etc this coming season (assuming there is one), and that causes player salaries to inch above 50% BRI, what would happen is that the 8% escrow kicks in. And since escrow is proportional to salary, that means the money being used to pay Nene and company is coming mostly from the escrows of Kobe, Dirk, LeBron, etc.

                So as we've both agreed, aggregate money remains the same, it's the distribution to the players that is affected.

                Comment


                • Re: Lockout news

                  More genius from a player as Amare says that players have been considering starting their own league.

                  #justshutup

                  EDIT: Can you imagine them pitching this idea to the sponsors?

                  "So uh yeah, we were thinking we'll just roll a ball out and play and people will come cause we're just that awesome!"

                  "Where are you going to play?"

                  "Wherever, people clearly want to see NBA basketball so badly!"

                  "Most NBA teams aren't even selling out their arenas."

                  "That's because they aren't paying us enough! Now are you going to sponsor this league or what?"
                  Last edited by Trader Joe; 10-12-2011, 12:20 PM.


                  Comment


                  • Re: Lockout news

                    Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                    I'm not sure what you mean here. Are you saying that player salaries will exceed 50% BRI (or whatever the negotiated % is), because neither superstars nor mid-level players want to give up money? But that won't be possible - that 50% BRI is a hard cap on aggregate player salaries.

                    For example, should owners hand lucrative deals to Nene, West, Crawford, etc this coming season (assuming there is one), and that causes player salaries to inch above 50% BRI, what would happen is that the 8% escrow kicks in. And since escrow is proportional to salary, that means the money being used to pay Nene and company is coming mostly from the escrows of Kobe, Dirk, LeBron, etc.

                    So as we've both agreed, aggregate money remains the same, it's the distribution to the players that is affected.
                    I think the problem is that the distribution (how individual teams can pay players) is important for competitiveness. Teams are interested in making sure the limit set by the BRI % is distributed across teams rather than all coming from one or two teams who drive up prices for other teams on players who don't deliver. The players WANT prices driven up for those mid-level players. The teams want individual player salaries to be commensurate with the value of that player on the floor AND to be accessible to all markets, not just the rich ones.

                    That's why I had the thought of taking the bulk of the BRI distribution out of the hands of the teams themselves. It is league BRI, make it distributed by the league. Have teams handle the over-and-above values, which would still provide room for talent differentiation, competition to put together good teams, and since the direct compensation will be TOTALLY based on BRI, hard caps on the additional should not upset the players.
                    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


                    • Re: Lockout news

                      Its semi socialism, to paint it in the most unflattering light I can think of.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Lockout news

                        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                        More genius from a player as Amare says that players have been considering starting their own league.

                        #justshutup

                        LOL, that's laugh on the ground funny.

                        I hope they do it. I really do. When they fail massively, they will see just how important the owners and league are.

                        Do the players have the ability construct 18,000 seat stadiums? Do they have the ability to negotiate lucrative television deals with some of the largest TV stations in this country? Do they have the ability to make all that merchandise? Do they have the ability to create teams that will have lucrative support like these historical NBA franchises which are tied to their community? Do they have the ability to set up sweet video game deals? Basically, do they have the ability to do anything that can make money?

                        The answer is no to all.

                        Yes, the players are important. But the owners and league have the capacity to showcase their talents in a huge, money making setting.
                        Last edited by Sollozzo; 10-12-2011, 12:31 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Lockout news

                          I'm really surprised they can't find a way to close the deal considering how close they seem to be.
                          Split : 49-51 vs 51-53 = middlle 50-52
                          Years : X vs X+1 = X+1 with last year 50% guaranteed max
                          Tax : 1,75 vs 1,25 = 1,5 with a middle ground for the increase

                          Is that so hard to compromise? There won't be a hard cap and guaranteed contracts will remain so players get to keep the most important things. The above conditions except for the split will not hurt them so bad IMO and should be a step in the right direction in terms of making the whole league more competitive or at least flexible.

                          How can they say they're so far appart? I don't get it from what has transpired in the media.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Lockout news

                            Originally posted by Speed View Post
                            Its semi socialism, to paint it in the most unflattering light I can think of.
                            Got me thinking of this article
                            Of course it's in French but the basic question is : "Is the NBA communist?"

                            Kinda makes you wonder...

                            Comment


                            • Re: Lockout news

                              Originally posted by BKK View Post
                              Split : 49-51 vs 51-53 = middlle 50-52
                              50+52=?

                              Comment


                              • Re: Lockout news

                                Originally posted by Doddage View Post
                                50+52=?
                                Range of 50-52, really just makes sense for everyone to save face.

                                Apparently its not about the BRI anymore, nor is it about allowing anyone to save face.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X