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

Kravitz: Larry Bird, please stay with the Pacers

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

  • #91
    Re: Kravitz: Larry Bird, please stay with the Pacers

    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
    Question: was Reggie Miller a superstar? No, but he was a superstar to the fanbase here. In Indiana he was - he sold tickets, but he wasn't an NBA superstar overall. (lets not argue that point) my point is maybe we don't "need to bring in a superstar" maybe we have a player or two on our roster who can sell tickets just as well as a bonifide NBA superstar.
    Keep in mind though stars are made in the playoffs.

    If Granger plays as well as last year, but hits a few game winners and leads us deep into the second round, who's to say he can't do what Reggie did as far as selling tickets. Reggie wasn't reggie until the '94 playoffs - 7 years into his career.

    We could have had this same exact discussion back in April of '94 before those playoffs started.
    This is absolutely right. We have some very likable players on this roster, and it's just going to take one good playoff moment this year to really grab people's attention. We've talked about the lack of media coverage ALL YEAR for this successful, overachieving team, and it's just now starting to come around and get noticed by media from local to nationwide.

    And seriously, I think this entire board missed Larry's point in that article. To me he wasn't saying, "We won't go after any superstars." I fully believe he was saying "We want to do more, to use our cap space, to put the best possible team out there - but we HAVE to have your support."

    This team is good, but even Larry said that they've overachieved. I'm sure he's been planning on finding a way to use the flexibility he's managed to establish. But his point is true - if the fans want a superstar free agent, they have to support the franchise. We're small market. We can't just write the checks that the Knicks, Lakers, or Heat can without knowing the fans are there to cash them.

    All this nonsense about Larry never wanting to sign a superstar is not the point of his comment at all. The entire article, even though it's "supposed" to be about Bird, is just an effort to get some attention, make people feel good about the team, and sell a few more tickets.

    Originally posted by The Sleeze View Post
    Of course people would come out to see these guys, this lineup is epic:

    I want to thank this post 1000 times. That made me
    It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Kravitz: Larry Bird, please stay with the Pacers

      Originally posted by billbradley View Post
      We are close figuring it out.

      You constantly bring up problems and unrealistic expectations.

      Yesterday West was overpaid because he can't be Danny's Robin.

      Now it's, Pacers need a superstar if they wanted to sell tickets immedietly following one of the most disgraceful incidents in sports history.


      Wake up. West wasn't paid to be anybody's Robin, let alone Robin's Robin. He was paid so we can win more games and reach another level. That has happened.

      You're not going to net a superstar with a huge payroll and a team full of undesirables. We now a have top 5 team great players on and off the court and money for the first time I can remember.

      This approach was the best and maybe only way to get fans back. Now it's up to the team to show up in the playoffs. You do that and the fans will come.
      You are making it sound like is really easy to fix the problem and it's not that easy, If it was as easy as you think we wouldn't be talking about attendance at this point.
      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Kravitz: Larry Bird, please stay with the Pacers

        It takes time. If we win our first round series this year, attendance will immediately be substantially better next year.


        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Kravitz: Larry Bird, please stay with the Pacers

          The problem with the superstar argument is people act like as long as we have cap room we can just pick from any superstar we want....

          One summer evening at the Superstar Store...

          Clerk: Can I help you?
          Pacers: Yes, I have a bunch of cap room and was thinking about getting a superstar.
          Clerk: Right this way....Here are all the superstars in stock.
          Pacers: It's so hard to choose, but I think I'll go with the Deron Williams.
          Clerk: Excellent choice, shall we gift wrap him for you?
          Pacers: Yes, and please have the tag say, "To Pacers fans for dealing with Toy Murphy for all those years."
          Clerk: Sure thing.......Here you go sir, enjoy. Please visit us again when you have more cap room.
          I know "Sleeze" is spelled incorrectly. I spell it this way because it's based on a name.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Kravitz: Larry Bird, please stay with the Pacers

            Originally posted by The Sleeze View Post
            Of course people would come out to see these guys, this lineup is epic:

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Kravitz: Larry Bird, please stay with the Pacers

              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
              You are making it sound like is really easy to fix the problem and it's not that easy, If it was as easy as you think we wouldn't be talking about attendance at this point.
              What? I'm making it sound like the Pacers have put themselves in the best position possible realisticy speaking.

              What superstar were we supposed to get? We get more wins out of Humphries?

              We're built to make a run in the playoffs and that's the best chance at gaining fans anyone could ask for.

              If you're going to say that's wrong, again, what was the better scenario?

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Kravitz: Larry Bird, please stay with the Pacers

                Originally posted by BringJackBack View Post
                I don't think the problem is the cost of the game at all.... I think the problem is that the hard working people in this state are too tired to watch the team of year's past on a snowy Wednesday in the winter... And that's what hurts our record. If we make noise in the playoffs we will be so good to watch that people will look forward to coming to the games after work... It's a transition of interest from the casual person in the state.
                People work hard in all 30 NBA cities, and at least half of them have snowy winters, yet Indy is 29th in attendance... There was another thread where we argued about the attendance issues ad nauseum...

                The Indy fan situation is the result of a perfect storm of:

                (brawl + thugs) x small market x Colts success during rebuilding + lockout.

                It will get better. It has to.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Kravitz: Larry Bird, please stay with the Pacers

                  Originally posted by billbradley View Post
                  What? I'm making it sound like the Pacers have put themselves in the best position possible realisticy speaking.

                  What superstar were we supposed to get? We get more wins out of Humphries?

                  We're built to make a run and that's the best chance at gaining fans you anyone could ask for.

                  If you're going to say that's wrong, again, what was the better scenario?


                  I'm done arguing with you man, it's obvious that you don't care to have a conversation here.
                  @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Kravitz: Larry Bird, please stay with the Pacers

                    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                    People overreacting in PD shocking......

                    As a person who talks to non pacers fans until the point of been annoying about the Pacers, I could tell you that those fans have been waiting for the Pacers to make something happen and so far nothing has happened, Larry told all this people to wait for the rebuilding proccess so they could have enough money to get free agents and he went and got David West, a decent player but not somebody that would make people buy tickets.

                    You guys are right about the record, I think is great but again casual fans want to be entertained, ESPN puts only teams with superstars on tv for a reason, it's not because they hate the Pacers or don't like Indiana, it's more because they know what the casual fan(majority of fans) wants and that's to watch superstars.
                    I agree with him.

                    Look its simple. This is a front runner market. You have to have the perception of being an elite team to have success in this market. I think the casual fan will look at the Current Pacers and say how exciting but who can I root for who is going to be my guy? That what gives you that aura of legit-ness. We had Manning leading a team to 12-14 win seasons and still couldn't sell out the Dome on occasions until he became the face of the NFL.

                    So the casual fan will say, okay now that we have an exciting young team who are they gonna bring in here to put us over the top? SO when you have Bird saying i'm not going after a player like Howard cuz the revenues are n't there to pay him, that is going to turn the casual fan off.

                    I'm a Pacer diehard, so i get it, this team is awesome. Love it. But its been discussed on here to death, who we gonna bring in there this offseason to make us contenders before we sign Hibbert. Bird just said probably nobody.
                    Last edited by graphic-er; 04-18-2012, 04:05 PM.
                    You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Kravitz: Larry Bird, please stay with the Pacers

                      Vnzla, the Pacers already have a formula to bring in more fans and they are utilizing it right now. Look at attendance Reggie's rookie year and attendance in 95-96. We stockpiled talent, although it was balanced talent rather than superstar talent, which eventually translated into wins and playoff success.

                      Eventually this led to the Pacer GOAT team which was capable of beating any team in the league other than that team led by the Jordan guy. A team of that caliber today could beat any team in the NBA besides maybe the Spurs, but by the time we get to that level again the Spurs will be a totally different team, Kobe will be retired, and Dwayne Wade will be on the wrong side of 30. I can't wait to dig this post up in 5 years.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Kravitz: Larry Bird, please stay with the Pacers

                        Look at the garbage we had on our roster at the end of 07-08. Now look at our players and record just four years later. You don't have that sort of improvement unless you have a damn good GM.

                        Aside from keeping O'Brien around for too long, Bird has done an absolutely spectacular job here. I sure hope he stays.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Kravitz: Larry Bird, please stay with the Pacers

                          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                          You are making it sound like is really easy to fix the problem and it's not that easy, If it was as easy as you think we wouldn't be talking about attendance at this point.
                          And you're making it sound like we have a sub-.500 team not making it into the playoffs.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Kravitz: Larry Bird, please stay with the Pacers

                            Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
                            And you're making it sound like we have a sub-.500 team not making it into the playoffs.
                            Where did I make it sound like that?
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • Re: Kravitz: Larry Bird, please stay with the Pacers

                              Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                              I agree with him.

                              Look its simple. This is a front runner market. You have to have the perception of being an elite team to have success in this market. I think the casual fan will look at the Current Pacers and say how exciting but who can I root for who is going to be my guy? That what gives you that aura of legit-ness. We had Manning leading a team to 12-14 win seasons and still couldn't sell out the Dome on occasions until he became the face of the NFL.

                              So the casual fan will say, okay now that we have an exciting young team who are they gonna bring in here to put us over the top? SO when you have Bird saying i'm not going after a player like Howard cuz the revenues are n't there to pay him, that is going to turn the casual fan off.

                              I'm a Pacer diehard, so i get it, this team is awesome. Love it. But its been discussed on here to death, who we gonna bring in there this offseason to make us contenders before we sign Hibbert. Bird just said probably nobody.
                              WTF? What happened to Paul George being the best player out of the 2010 draft next year? What happened to Roy suddenly becoming a top-tier center in the East? Danny, David West? I don't get it. We have talent.

                              Due to the previous season(s) we were on ESPN once this year. Once. If our games agains the Heat, Thunder, LAL\C, Dallas, even the past few games against the Bucks and Sixers were on TNT or ESPN/ABC, we'd have some more buzz. We would. I guarantee it.

                              You're taking away the fact that this team is now holding up to their end of the deal. Us season ticket holders/hardcore fans have been through enough the past 6-7 years and are finally getting ours. This argument is plain stupid in terms of what you and vznla are trying to throw at us.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Kravitz: Larry Bird, please stay with the Pacers

                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                Where did I make it sound like that?
                                Because you are throwing 50 million other asinine dynamics into your argument why the fans aren't in the seats when the answers have been ovbious for almost 7 years.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X