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

A confederate flag??

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

  • #16
    Re: A confederate flag??

    Originally posted by Zesty
    ...I also brought up the fact that the swastika was originally a symbol of good luck, but after the Nazis used it, people don't associate it with luck anymore...


    Two different swastika orientations and meanings...

    The right handed or clockwise Swastika was originally used in the Hindu religion as a sign of good luck or to symbolize something good. It then crept into other religions of the area (Buddhism, etc.). The Hindu faith has also used the left handed or counterclockwise Swastika to mean the oppositie of the right handed one for ages (way before the Nazis got their hands on it and *******ized it for years to come.)

    So, yes, most people associate the right handed symbol with good and the left handed one with bad.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: A confederate flag??

      Originally posted by Skaut_Ech
      That's it? That's your big contribution?

      Yeah, the north had slavery, too, but came to see it as wrong. There is a reason the underground railroad took slaves from the south to the north.

      The abolitionist movement started in the north, prompted the emacipation proclaimation, prompting the south's defeat in the civil war, in part because the south wanted to keep slaves and the north came to see it as wrong.

      Aw, come on, this is grade school US history 101. You had to know this already.

      "The north had slavery, too."? You gotta do better than that. Really now.

      Touch a nerve, eh?

      I just don't like to let the North off to easily. It seems so many people today think that the North was a land of pure innocence and no slavery.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: A confederate flag??

        Originally posted by Stryder
        Two different swastika orientations and meanings...

        The right handed or clockwise Swastika was originally used in the Hindu religion as a sign of good luck or to symbolize something good. It then crept into other religions of the area (Buddhism, etc.). The Hindu faith has also used the left handed or counterclockwise Swastika to mean the oppositie of the right handed one for ages (way before the Nazis got their hands on it and *******ized it for years to come.)

        So, yes, most people associate the right handed symbol with good and the left handed one with bad.
        You learn something everyday.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: A confederate flag??

          By the way, I don't like the use of the confederate flag, but then again, I don't really care, because it's just a flag, and cannot do any harm.

          The sentiment (that might be there or might not) behind the flag and what some people use it to stand for is what I care about.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: A confederate flag??

            Originally posted by Stryder
            ...the Civil War was not fought over slavery.
            Say what?!

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: A confederate flag??

              I don't agree with those who publically display the Confederate flag (or privately for that matter). To me, it has the same effect as someone saying: "I want things to go back to the way they were then..." - which is obviously troublesome. It is as if they are clinging onto the past - unable to let go and face the fact that times have changed.

              However, I do think that the flag belongs in museums, and cannot be forgotten. We cannot just erase the past; instead we must remember times/events like these, so people will never forget and rather learn from such mistakes to prevent similar mishaps from occuring again in the future.

              The ironic part about my last sentence however, is that many are using it as a way to represent the old Confederate ideals/morales, and carry on these traditions (instead of using it to put an end to such values).

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: A confederate flag??

                Last post, I promise

                But I had to say, this is the funniest thing I've read on here for a while!

                Originally posted by Skaut_Ech
                ...seeing something like that makes me wish I was single again so I could date his daughter as the ultimate revenge.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: A confederate flag??

                  Originally posted by rcarey
                  Say what?!
                  Sorry, I mistyped. That should never have been in my response.

                  But, I do believe the Civil War had more to do with the Confederacy believing in state's rights than it did with slavery. I might be stupid...who knows? Haha.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: A confederate flag??

                    Originally posted by rcarey
                    Say what?!
                    Let me preface by saying I do not fly a Confederate flag. I had realtives chased from their homes in North Carolina because as Quakers they were Abolishionist.

                    The War Between the States was fought over States rights vs. the right of the Federal govenment to dictate certain courses of action to the States. IOW A confederation of States or a Country run by a central government. The most obvious and emotional of the "issues" was the slave arguement. I have read where "the South" had already started moving toward abolishment of slavery but not quick enough for the Fed. Gov...but I cannot lay my hands on that info therefore, forget I said it.

                    Now this is strictly my opinion, but since I'm not black I cannot speak from that POV. To me the Confed. flag is not a symbol of hatred or racism, it is a symbol of a losing cause.
                    I RECENTLY SAW THE SYMBOL OF HATRED AND RACISM flying outside a home in a poor section of Greenfield. True it had the Stars and Bars in the background, but that was overshadowed by the greyish circle in the center with squiggle lines within the circle. Also within this circle were the letters KKK diagonally. And above the circle were the words WHITE POWER.
                    This was the flag of racism and hate...a prostituted version of the Confederate flag and it was within 6 blocks of my Church, a Church also hated by the KKK.

                    Sidenote...1 week later as I passed thru this area again I saw a fellow come out of that house carrying come shairs...Obiviously pissed, he slammed them into the back of his pick-up along with the rest of his furniture. The next day I noticed a FOR RENT sign on the house.
                    Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: A confederate flag??

                      Originally posted by indygeezer
                      ..The War Between the States was fought over States rights vs. the right of the Federal govenment to dictate certain courses of action to the States. IOW A confederation of States or a Country run by a central government. The most obvious and emotional of the "issues" was the slave arguement. I have read where "the South" had already started moving toward abolishment of slavery but not quick enough for the Fed. Gov...but I cannot lay my hands on that info therefore, forget I said it...

                      Boom Baby!

                      Yes, I do believe the south had taken a step in the right direction on their own, albeit a very small one, but very significant...

                      The Confederate Constitution protected the institution of slavery, but prohibited slave trade internationally.

                      As I said, a small step, but significant.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: A confederate flag??

                        The States' rights issue stemmed from slavery, however.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: A confederate flag??

                          So the Confederates were on the verge of sabotaging their economy on their own because of their conscience, but the mean old US government went and ruined it? Right.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: A confederate flag??

                            Originally posted by rcarey
                            The States' rights issue stemmed from slavery, however.
                            Much more than slavery...

                            Taken directly from Wikipedia...

                            "The Confederate States Constitution provides much insight into the motivations for secession from the Union. Based to a certain extent on both the Articles of Confederation and on the United States Constitution, it reflected a stronger philosophy of states' rights, curtailing the power of the central authority, and also contained explicit protection of the institution of slavery, though international slave trading was prohibited. It differed from the US Constitution chiefly by addressing the grievances of the secessionist states against the federal government of the United States. For example, the Confederate government was prohibited from instituting protective tariffs, making southern ports more attractive to international traders. Prior to the declarations of secession, most southerners regarded protective tariffs as a measure that enriched the northern states at the expense of the south. The Confederate government was also prohibited from using revenues collected in one state for funding internal improvements in another state. At the same time, however, much of the Confederate constitution was a word-for-word duplicate of the US one."

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: A confederate flag??

                              Back to topic,

                              I don't like it when I see people waving the Confederate flag, because we know the history behind it, but I do not know that person's intentions.

                              If the intentions are good, then it is okay with me.

                              If the intentions are bad, then while I don't like it, it is still okay with me, and they are voicing their opinion.

                              And no, I do not and have never flown a confederate flag. The closest thing that I have got to one is my Lynyrd Skynyrd shirt from a concert back in the 90's.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: A confederate flag??

                                Originally posted by Stryder
                                Boom Baby!

                                Yes, I do believe the south had taken a step in the right direction on their own, albeit a very small one, but very significant...

                                The Confederate Constitution protected the institution of slavery, but prohibited slave trade internationally.

                                As I said, a small step, but significant.
                                "Yup. Don't need to bring in any more negras. We got enough. Let's pass something to stop the international trade. We'll just grow our own!"



                                Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X