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

10-5-2011 Letter from Fisher and Hunter to Players

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

  • #31
    Re: 10-5-2011 Letter from Fisher and Hunter to Players

    Originally posted by Doddage View Post
    I don't particularly like the negative tone that Fisher uses towards the owners in this letter. Hey Derek, these are the guys that have paid you and your colleagues' ridiculous salaries.
    Ridiculous? Derek's only made $57,842,000 in his career......
    PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: 10-5-2011 Letter from Fisher and Hunter to Players

      Originally posted by MagicRat View Post
      Ridiculous? Derek's only made $57,842,000 in his career......
      My bad. I guess I was off the mark there with my comment.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: 10-5-2011 Letter from Fisher and Hunter to Players

        Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
        We were thankful to be joined yesterday by ten other players including Board members Matt Bonner, Keyon Dooling, Maurice Evans, Roger Mason Jr., and Theo Ratliff, together with Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, Ben Gordon, Paul Pierce, and Amar'e Stoudemire. Before meeting with the group of 12 owners, we had a very spirited discussion in our own room as we reflected on the lessons learned over the past several years while preparing the players for this labor struggle. The overwhelming feeling was that the players are prepared to sacrifice and stand for what we believe is fair.
        They are prepared to sacrifice.
        The 10 players listed plus Derek Fisher have combined total career earnings of: $957,111,223.
        Last edited by MagicRat; 10-10-2011, 04:20 PM.
        PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: 10-5-2011 Letter from Fisher and Hunter to Players

          Originally posted by Peck View Post
          Would you please explain who you mean by "we"?
          Probably him and and Brian from family guy.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: 10-5-2011 Letter from Fisher and Hunter to Players

            Not sure whether this is "prepare yourself for no season" or saving face for taking a less than ideal deal.

            I'm hoping, selfishly, it's the latter. But I also hope they get a fair deal.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: 10-5-2011 Letter from Fisher and Hunter to Players

              Why am i thinking it's the owners who are compromising the most and want to see a complete season more than the players?
              No hard cap and the split in the 50% range

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: 10-5-2011 Letter from Fisher and Hunter to Players

                Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
                If I'm not mistaken as it stood the last few years, the owners took out a percentage of the league revenue before the split anyway. In this case the owners wanted to drop the players 7% of what they were getting before, while ADDING another near $400 million that didn't count as part of the money they could draw from per year. I'm not sure I blame the players for scoffing at that.

                The problem with your stance of allowing the owners to take away operating expenses, is that they're rich owners of sports teams for a reason. I'd guess many of them are shrewd negotiators and businessmen. You give them that freedom and suddenly everything will become an operating expense. You'd just trust their word that easily? I wouldn't.

                Which is the players stance at this point.
                I agree that the players shouldn't blindly accept the owners' claims. But if the 15% is legitimately due to operating expenses, then a 50/50 split is fair.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: 10-5-2011 Letter from Fisher and Hunter to Players

                  Originally posted by speakout4 View Post
                  Why am i thinking it's the owners who are compromising the most and want to see a complete season more than the players?
                  No hard cap and the split in the 50% range
                  Because it's not actually in the 50% range and the new soft cap is essentially a hard cap. (Not to mention, the Hard cap wasn't truly wanted by any of the major market teams)

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: 10-5-2011 Letter from Fisher and Hunter to Players

                    Originally posted by quinnthology View Post
                    Why can't we just admit that we're uncomfortable with black men having power?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: 10-5-2011 Letter from Fisher and Hunter to Players

                      Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                      Because it's not actually in the 50% range and the new soft cap is essentially a hard cap. (Not to mention, the Hard cap wasn't truly wanted by any of the major market teams)
                      Sophistry. The new soft cap is not a hard cap. The new soft cap is a new soft cap.
                      If the owners have indeed lost 300m I would not be adverse to see the pendulum swing the other way for awhile so the owners can recoup some of those losses.

                      Putting this another way is anyway against Herb making some excess profit for the duration of the new CBA? Would anyone be adverse to not seeing teams leaving their local market because they are bleeding financially?

                      There is quite a difference between players not maxing out their contracts and losing money. I have yet to hear of a player who has lost money in the nba. Is Derek Fisher really worth the kind of career salary previously stated? Has Herb and other small market owners made Derek Fisher type money over that time period?

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: 10-5-2011 Letter from Fisher and Hunter to Players

                        Originally posted by speakout4 View Post
                        Has Herb and other small market owners made Derek Fisher type money over that time period?
                        Personally? Of course they have. The question is whether the TEAM has made money.
                        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


                        • #42
                          Re: 10-5-2011 Letter from Fisher and Hunter to Players

                          Originally posted by speakout4 View Post
                          Sophistry. The new soft cap is not a hard cap. The new soft cap is a new soft cap.
                          If the owners have indeed lost 300m I would not be adverse to see the pendulum swing the other way for awhile so the owners can recoup some of those losses.

                          Putting this another way is anyway against Herb making some excess profit for the duration of the new CBA? Would anyone be adverse to not seeing teams leaving their local market because they are bleeding financially?

                          There is quite a difference between players not maxing out their contracts and losing money. I have yet to hear of a player who has lost money in the nba. Is Derek Fisher really worth the kind of career salary previously stated? Has Herb and other small market owners made Derek Fisher type money over that time period?
                          If the soft cap does the same thing as a hard cap, isn't it essentially a hard cap? The last thing I read about it (which, was a week ago) was that it was going to be so expensive, it'd practically be a hard cap.

                          That said, even if it's not..the Lakers, Miami, Bulls, Dallas, Knicks, Boston, and probably San Antonio didn't want the hard cap to begin with. Then you have the owners who really want to see their teams play (probably like Herb) and was willing to bend. It's not hard to see why that went.

                          Because odds are very very high that the NBA is not losing nearly as much money as it claims it is. If they were losing as much money as they say, many more teams would have folded. Or these shrewd business men, who are billionaires, would have sold the team, because the team would be causing them so much losses.

                          And really, how is an NBA billionaire owner more deserving of making some excess profit, rather than an NBA player..who is, you know, actually playing.

                          It's definitely a personal bias of mine, because I will almost always side with the employee over the employer. But I also can't help but feel, that because so many people here like Herb, they tend to side with the owners.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: 10-5-2011 Letter from Fisher and Hunter to Players

                            Originally posted by BillS View Post
                            Personally? Of course they have. The question is whether the TEAM has made money.
                            Yes that's what we're talking about -the TEAM. Not every owner just wants to own a team, some want to make money. Hard to believe?

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: 10-5-2011 Letter from Fisher and Hunter to Players

                              Originally posted by quinnthology View Post
                              Why can't we just admit that we're uncomfortable with black men having power?
                              I'm still dumbfounded, on what would compel somebody to say something so damn stupid. Did he really expect it to go over well?
                              Last edited by Constellations; 10-06-2011, 08:29 PM.
                              Follow me at @Bluejbgold

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: 10-5-2011 Letter from Fisher and Hunter to Players

                                Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                                And really, how is an NBA billionaire owner more deserving of making some excess profit, rather than an NBA player..who is, you know, actually playing.

                                It's definitely a personal bias of mine, because I will almost always side with the employee over the employer. But I also can't help but feel, that because so many people here like Herb, they tend to side with the owners.
                                Everyone should be making money and the point is not disproportionately. If the players are making lots of money then so should the owners. You either believe that the owners are losing money or you don't but the owners unwillingness to show their books publicly does not mean they are lying about their losses.

                                Yes we like Herb because he saved the team some 25 years ago. And selfishly we like him because he took a financial beating and the day he stops taking this beating is the day we won't be sure that the team stays in Indy. Herb can sell to an Indy group who might leave in a few years or sell to an out of state group. Getting behind Herb making a fair share is just completely in our Indy interest.
                                Last edited by speakout4; 10-06-2011, 06:19 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X