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

Pacers schedule released. 10 national tv games

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

  • Re: Pacers schedule released. 10 national tv games

    Originally posted by cdash View Post
    Pray tell then, what would be your grand marketing scheme for the NBA? Long term. What are these people with beaucoup degrees and highly competitive NBA marketing jobs doing wrong?
    That has already been covered in this thread.

    Don't assume that just because someone has a degree, or a job, even highly paid, that they are competent. Most people on here seem to think Walsh is incompetent.

    Just an FYI, I am one of those people who has a degree in this field.

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers schedule released. 10 national tv games

      Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
      Also your worst case scenario here is highly unrealistic. If LA, NY, Boston, Chicago, or whoever is in a financial crisis the problem is going to be league wide and not isolated to a specific team.
      It doesn't even have to be a financial crisis. If teams are losing $10M a year, on average or whatever the amount is, $100M in profits get eaten up by 10 teams. In order to depend on revenue sharing to plug the holes, you've got to ensure that the large markets make enough to cover the rest. It starts getting into some really big numbers when you're talking about 23-24 teams completely depending on revenue sharing.

      Revenue sharing with the NFL is a different animal, because of how their contracts with networks are set up directly through the NFL front office as opposed to each team having it's own deal with a network.


      My position isn't from ignorance, just a different business philsophy. I think they're should be some revenue sharing, I just don't like how much the league is depending on it right now.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers schedule released. 10 national tv games

        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
        It doesn't even have to be a financial crisis. If teams are losing $10M a year, on average or whatever the amount is, $100M in profits get eaten up by 10 teams. In order to depend on revenue sharing to plug the holes, you've got to ensure that the large markets make enough to cover the rest. It starts getting into some really big numbers when you're talking about 23-24 teams completely depending on revenue sharing.

        Revenue sharing with the NFL is a different animal, because of how their contracts with networks are set up directly through the NFL front office as opposed to each team having it's own deal with a network.


        My position isn't from ignorance, just a different business philsophy. I think they're should be some revenue sharing, I just don't like how much the league is depending on it right now.
        I'm not saying you are ignorant, or wrong, only that in reality there are a lot of ignorant and wrong people you have to compromise with. What you are proposing is the ideal situation, but the ideal situation rarely happens because someone with influence and power is ignorant/selfish and refuses to accept the ideal situation.

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers schedule released. 10 national tv games

          Originally posted by cdash View Post
          Pray tell then, what would be your grand marketing scheme for the NBA? Long term. What are these people with beaucoup degrees and highly competitive NBA marketing jobs doing wrong?
          They are taking the easy way out. It's easy because we're seeing a number of great players in this era who haven't been taken out by injuries. Where is the NBA if LBJ lost a season or two to an ACL? Who is the GOAT who sells out arenas on his own and is the focus of every interview show, commentary, and commercial?

          We'll get to a low point in the cycle where there will be a gap of players at that level. Does the NBA just shrug and let the fans go? Does it try to market an upcoming Vince Carter-type player as "the next LeBron! No, really, we promise!"? Or does it fall back on more difficult work that was done while LBJ and the Superteam of the Miami Heat made it easy and find that people got caught up with their local team AS WELL AS the big name superstar, and therefore continue to pay for the product?
          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: Pacers schedule released. 10 national tv games

            can we take the Spurs as an excellent example. They have been in playoff game after playoff game, the viewing public has seen them for 14 years, they watched them year after year after year. They have gotten much more exposure than any brilliant marketing scheme/plan ever could. And yet the Spurs have been rejected by the viewing public year after year. The public doesn't want to watch them.

            So what makes any of you believe that a brilliant marketing plan is going to make the viewing public want to watch teams like the Grizzlies and the pacers. Sure they will watch when they play the Heat (just like they watch the Spurs when they play the Heat), but not if they play other teams. And no amount of marketing is going to change that. Just like the Spurs being front and center for 14 years hasn't increased their Q rating and their TV ratings and their nationwide appeal.

            People watch who they want to watch regardless of marketing. So why not use the marketing to marginal help what we know the public already wants to see, what has been proven time and time again for as long as the NBA has been around - they want to see the star players. History has proven that.
            Last edited by Unclebuck; 08-07-2013, 04:32 PM.

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers schedule released. 10 national tv games

              Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
              That has already been covered in this thread.

              Don't assume that just because someone has a degree, or a job, even highly paid, that they are competent. Most people on here seem to think Walsh is incompetent.

              Just an FYI, I am one of those people who has a degree in this field.
              Where has it been covered? I want an outline of a plan. Not just a "well, let's put every team on TV equally as much in order to build their brand."

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers schedule released. 10 national tv games

                How is it a different animal? Because they are more popular? As a kid in the 90's growing up, the NFL was not nearly as popular as the NBA. What did the NFL do right in that time frame compared to what the NBA did wrong? The NBA had Michael Jordan, their big star retire. What big stars retired from the NFL? Marino, Elway, Montana? Didn't have any effect on the NFL's popularity, it actually grew when their stars retired, because they don't rely on stars for marketing. It is more Packers vs. Saints, then Aaron Rodgers vs. Drew Brees. Plus, the NFL has built up great fanbases. Face it, most NBA fan bases suck. There is no excitement at any regular season games minus a few here and there. Sure it gets exciting when it gets to the playoffs.


                @Pacers24Colts12

                Comment


                • Originally posted by PacersCenter View Post
                  How is it a different animal? Because they are more popular? As a kid in the 90's growing up, the NFL was not nearly as popular as the NBA. What did the NFL do right in that time frame compared to what the NBA did wrong? The NBA had Michael Jordan, their big star retire. What big stars retired from the NFL? Marino, Elway, Montana? Didn't have any effect on the NFL's popularity, it actually grew when their stars retired, because they don't rely on stars for marketing. It is more Packers vs. Saints, then Aaron Rodgers vs. Drew Brees. Plus, the NFL has built up great fanbases. Face it, most NBA fan bases suck. There is no excitement at any regular season games minus a few here and there. Sure it gets exciting when it gets to the playoffs.
                  Oh, the lack of perspective....my head hurts.

                  The nfl only has 8 home games. It's like saying baseball has crappy fan bases because the ballparks are half empty most of the time.

                  The nfl was not nearly as popular in the nba in the 90's? Seriously? A no point in human history has that ever been true.
                  Last edited by Kstat; 08-07-2013, 05:07 PM.

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

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

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers schedule released. 10 national tv games

                    The problem is, the NBA has been marketed one way for years, while the NFL has been marketed a completely different way. For that to change would take years for the NBA to market teams effectively over stars.


                    @Pacers24Colts12

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers schedule released. 10 national tv games

                      I have to be honest: I really don't know what we are even arguing about in this thread anymore.

                      Comment


                      • The typical people who want the NBA to be more like the NFL for no reason other than the colts winning a Super Bowl proves that the nfl is fair and just, and the nba is not, logic and common sense be dammed.

                        I mean, never mind that there are 22 starters on a football team and only 5 on a basketball team, lets heap praise upon the nfl for marketing to its strengths, and criticize the nba for doing the same....
                        Last edited by Kstat; 08-07-2013, 05:06 PM.

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

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

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers schedule released. 10 national tv games

                          To me, it's pretty simple: If you are an NBA team and want nationally televised games, better attendance, a larger fan base, and the spoils that come along with that, you have to win. Put a good product out on the floor.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers schedule released. 10 national tv games

                            Originally posted by cdash View Post
                            Not just a "well, let's put every team on TV equally as much in order to build their brand."
                            I don't think anyone has said that. I've been the most vocal opposition, and I made it a point to say that's not what I thought should happen.

                            I'll fully acknowledge I'm being a homer and *****ing about it right now because it impacts the Pacers this season, but I've felt pretty much always felt this way about the NBA.


                            If, for example, you cap the max teams at 20 appearances, you'd have 24 games games to hand out. The Pacers, a ECF finalist, gets 10 national games. The Grizzles, a WCF finalist, gets 6 national games. It's hard to argue that national exposure is dependent on competitiveness when 50% of your conference finals combined don't would tie for 10th on the tv games list.

                            You could get them both to 15 appearances, and still have 10 games left over to hand out to other teams.

                            EDIT: And as another example, you could make it a tier system. Take the clipps down one game, to 20, the Nets and Warriors down two games apiece to 15, and you have another 5 games to hand out.

                            Spurs could get 2 to get 15, and then you'd have 13 to disperse among the next grouping.
                            Last edited by Since86; 08-07-2013, 05:11 PM.
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                              I don't think anyone has said that. I've been the most vocal opposition, and I made it a point to say that's not what I thought should happen.

                              I'll fully acknowledge I'm being a homer and *****ing about it right now because it impacts the Pacers this season, but I've felt pretty much always felt this way about the NBA.


                              If, for example, you cap the max teams at 20 appearances, you'd have 24 games games to hand out. The Pacers, a ECF finalist, gets 10 national games. The Grizzles, a WCF finalist, gets 6 national games. It's hard to argue that national exposure is dependent on competitiveness when 50% of your conference finals combined don't would tie for 10th on the tv games list.

                              You could get them both to 15 appearances, and still have 10 games left over to hand out to other teams.

                              EDIT: And as another example, you could make it a tier system. Take the clipps down one game, to 20, the Nets and Warriors down two games apiece to 15, and you have another 5 games to hand out.

                              Spurs could get 2 to get 15, and then you'd have 13 to disperse among the next grouping.
                              Even the nfl doesn't strictly base their national TV schedule off of wins and losses. You see Dallas play Washington on MNF annually even when they both suck horribly. The NFC east and the AFC east get a huge chunk of the games because they play in major media markets.

                              No TV network would ever agree to pay billions to broadcast games where they're forced to show teams people don't want to see. They want to maximize revenue.

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

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

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers schedule released. 10 national tv games

                                Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                                Even the nfl doesn't strictly base their national TV schedule off of wins and losses. You see Dallas play Washington on MNF annually even when they both suck horribly. The NFC east and the AFC east get a huge chunk of the games because they play in major media markets.

                                No TV network would ever agree to pay billions to broadcast games where they're forced to show teams people don't want to see. They want to maximize revenue.
                                NFL has regional games as well, though, meaning a lot of people get to see something other than just the huge national hype game.
                                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

                                Working...
                                X