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

Bias Article Discussion

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

  • Re: Bias Article Discussion

    All I want to add to this thread is that I'm one of those that felt the Pistons should've been fined $5 million (or more) for tolerating the environment that turned into the free-for-all on that ill-fated night.

    There's really only one way the league could've achieved justice in that situation. Suspending John Greene for the rest of the season just wouldn't have done the trick for me. And Ben's punishment, IMO, was appropriate - I still believe he could not have forseen what would eventually happen between Ron and the fans. So the only option I've ever seen is a significant monetary fine to the organization - to be withheld from their share of television reveunes.
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

    Comment


    • Re: Vescey on the bomb at the Palace

      Originally posted by Bball
      IMHO this could all be another symptom of the Piston organization getting off scot-free without even a media tongue-lashing from the league over 9/11.

      -Bball
      Whoops.

      Something else to blame Detroit on?

      Comment


      • Re: Vescey on the bomb at the Palace

        Originally posted by A-Train
        I fully realize that this doesn't translate to every Pistons fan, but it WAS a Piston "fan" who threw a cup at Artest. There were also a couple more "fans" who ran out onto the court with their fists raised wanting to fight as well as another "fan" who threw a chair. Not to mention all the "fans" who were throwing drinks and food at the Pacer players that fateful night.

        Yes, those fans don't represent every Piston fan, but we all know how effective it can be to punish the whole because of the actions of a few. When that happens, the whole tends to police those few much better than anyone else is able to.

        That's basically what happened to the Pacers this year.... the whole team was punished because of the actions of one or two players. It sucks, but that's the way it works.
        no, the entire pacers team didn't get suspended. EVERYONE was not directly punished. If it was John Edwards and James Jones that went into the stands, would all the conspiracy theories be happening? No. It just happened that the guys who got involved in the brawl were 3 of your 4 best players.

        Were they INdirectly punished? Of course. The Pacers as a team suffered because the players that got involved were GOOD. But thats different than DIRECTLY punishing each piston fan because of one non-confirmed fan that phoned in a threat.

        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: Vescey on the bomb at the Palace

          Originally posted by Hicks
          Whoops.

          Something else to blame Detroit on?
          Uhhh... whatever are you talking about...???

          -Bball
          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

          ------

          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

          -John Wooden

          Comment


          • Re: Bias Article Discussion

            Originally posted by Jay@Section204
            All I want to add to this thread is that I'm one of those that felt the Pistons should've been fined $5 million (or more) for tolerating the environment that turned into the free-for-all on that ill-fated night.

            There's really only one way the league could've achieved justice in that situation. Suspending John Greene for the rest of the season just wouldn't have done the trick for me. And Ben's punishment, IMO, was appropriate - I still believe he could not have forseen what would eventually happen between Ron and the fans. So the only option I've ever seen is a significant monetary fine to the organization - to be withheld from their share of television reveunes.
            As I said before- if thats the case, then we're all in agreement. I was a big propnent of a fine of 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: Vescey on the bomb at the Palace

              Originally posted by Kstat
              Yeah, apparently we're just THAT scared of a team we beat on their home floor the last 2 games.....

              Bball glances at the final score of the Pacers @ Detroit game this past weekend...

              -Bball
              Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

              ------

              "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

              -John Wooden

              Comment


              • Re: Vescey on the bomb at the Palace

                Originally posted by Bball
                Bball glances at the final score of the Pacers @ Detroit game this past weekend...

                -Bball
                *Kstat glances at the final score of the pistons/pacers game before this*

                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: Vescey on the bomb at the Palace

                  Originally posted by Kstat
                  *Kstat glances at the final score of the pistons/pacers game before this*

                  *Bball glances at Kstat and wonders if he is missing the point...*

                  *Bball then shrugs and puts a TV dinner in the microwave*

                  -Bball
                  Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                  ------

                  "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                  -John Wooden

                  Comment


                  • Re: Bias Article Discussion

                    Originally posted by btowncolt
                    *btown glances at the shiny aluminum foil next to his desk and wonders why people spend so much time fighting with so many beautiful shiny things in the world*
                    See, only one side of aluminum foil is shiny though. Why can't they make 2-sided foil?

                    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: Vescey on the bomb at the Palace

                      Originally posted by Kstat
                      no, the entire pacers team didn't get suspended. EVERYONE was not directly punished. If it was John Edwards and James Jones that went into the stands, would all the conspiracy theories be happening? No. It just happened that the guys who got involved in the brawl were 3 of your 4 best players.

                      I didn't say the entire team was suspended, but it can be argued that the entire team was unfairly punished due to an unreasonable suspension handed down by one person who is held accountable to no one but himself.

                      Originally posted by Kstat
                      Were they INdirectly punished? Of course. The Pacers as a team suffered because the players that got involved were GOOD. But thats different than DIRECTLY punishing each piston fan because of one non-confirmed fan that phoned in a threat.
                      Well, I wasn't talking about the bomb threat by itself. There was obviously more than one person (fan) involved in the fight on 11/19. There were dozens and dozens of fans who participated that night. So far, how many of those fans have been punished in any way? Four? Five?

                      That's what I'm talking about.... how can THAT many people be involved in something like that and yet only a handful actually get punished?

                      I think that's where the bitterness Reggie spoke to comes from. It seems as if the Pacers were up against hundreds of people that night, yet they all (but a few) walked away scot free. Meanwhile, our season was basically ruined because of one man's decision to suspend Artest for the whole season, including the playoffs.

                      Props to you for standing up for your team and organization, though, Kstat. I know you're doing what you gotta do.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Vescey on the bomb at the Palace

                        Mind you, I'm FAR more critical of the pistons on my own board. But since there is already so much ciritism provided here, more often than not I feel I have to tell the other side of the story. That's really no different than some people here who are upset at ron and JO but are so sick of people piling on, that they are going to stand up for them.

                        Thats not to say Im standing up for them simply out of obligation. I believe every word I said. Somebody had to stand up for them, and if not me, who?

                        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: Vescey on the bomb at the Palace

                          Originally posted by Kstat
                          Mind you, I'm FAR more critical of the pistons on my own board. But since there is already so much ciritism provided here, more often than not I feel I have to tell the other side of the story.
                          If you would try it more often, you would look a LOT more fair and much less homer-ish. I highly recommend it because when you pile on to one half of it you look really bad.

                          That's really no different than some people here who are upset at ron and JO but are so sick of people piling on, that they are going to stand up for them.
                          True, and fair. Next time you might bring that up at the BEGINNING of an 8 page thread than at the end. It would be a lot more effective.

                          Thats not to say Im standing up for them simply out of obligation. I believe every word I said.
                          Sad, really.

                          Somebody had to stand up for them, and if not me, who?
                          Actually, no one has to stand up for them. If ever there was a place they can be ripped to shreds, it's on a great Pacers forum.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Vescey on the bomb at the Palace

                            Originally posted by LAPacer
                            From ditcionary.com
                            fan is short for fanatic...

                            fa·nat·ic
                            A person marked or motivated by an extreme, unreasoning enthusiasm, as for a cause.


                            Have you ever seen the the movie with Dinero (The Fan)

                            Plot Summary for
                            The Fan (1996)

                            Three-times MVP baseball player Bobby Rayburn joins San Fransisco Giants, and obsessive fan, whose profession is selling hunting knives, Gil Renard is excited over that. But Rayburn plays the worst season of his career and Renard tries to do everything to help him, but goes too far.


                            My Point: FANS can be psycho's too.
                            Excellent point. This is not as over the top as you would think. Let's just say the only reason I found this site was because of the IS forum and the only reason I visit IS and other various (Horshoe type forums was to monitor fan thoughts and behaviors toward a certain team. The next time you attend an open practice or game and someone seems like an odd duck sitting by himself he/she is probably part of a detail or a lunatic.
                            You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                            Comment


                            • Re: Bias Article Discussion

                              As I am staying out of the main points in this discussion, I would just like to know if UB still thinks McCosky is one of the best beat writers covering the NBA?

                              Comment


                              • Re: Bias Article Discussion

                                Originally posted by Fool
                                As I am staying out of the main points in this discussion, I would just like to know if UB still thinks McCosky is one of the best beat writers covering the NBA?


                                Chris Mcosky is a butt kissing idiot. He shamelessly kisses the Pistons brass's *** while on TV and in his articles. On Friday the Pistons TV feed brought him for the latest on the situation. While giving an update, for no reason he gives props to Bill Lambeer saying Bill is DETROIT MEDIA.

                                He has some thing with Reggie. I am sure about this because, about 6-7 years ago in his Sunday column he said,

                                "Reggie Miller will never win a ring" and he went on about how Reggie is a punk for all his antics on the road. Obviously, I cannot post a link. I remember this because when the Pacers were in the Finals, if they won, I was going to call into a radio show (that he comes on every week) and ask for a public apology. Too bad, we did not win.

                                Granted he is going to be proven right but I have never seen any team's beat writer predict whether players from other teams will or won't win a ring. I would venture to say there is probably some history between Reg and that reporter.

                                He basically thinks he is the show and not just a reporter. When he is on radio, he is an egotistical fool.

                                SO I WOULD NOT GIVE ANY CREDIBILTY TO WHAT HE SAYS IN THAT ARTICLE. He probably was ordered by Pistons brass to "PUT THE SPIN ON".

                                Also, the BOMB could have been in places other than the Visiting locker room. It could have been in the arena some where else. Its not like the caller would tell exactly where it is. Was the whole arena swept thrice like the lockerrooms were. Why were the fans not evacuated. Forget Pacers / Pistons or players. Why were the fans not told anything or calmly evacuated. This bothers me to no extent.

                                People get evacuated at work places for a freaking fire alarm. Forget basketball and everything. Four phone calls with bomb threats would scare the hell out of me.

                                I am sure the fans would understand if the game was cancelled. It is just a game, so it could have been replayed or forfeited or whatever. Basically, the Pistons brass took a chance with reasonable knowledge but I personally would not when it involves 20000 people.
                                ANDY: I guess it comes down to a simple choice, really. Get busy winning or get busy losing.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X