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

Seems to be a good market for real estate if Dale chooses Detroit

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

  • #31
    Re: Seems to be a good market for real estate if Dale chooses Detroit

    Originally posted by Kstat
    Hicks, that statement is so one-sided biased I don't know where to begin.

    Let's have someone post a KKK thread or the general average IQ of Indiana's population and see how "funny" you think it is.....I assure you both are plentiful.

    In no way is it a light-hearted comment when you decide to dedicate a thread to bashing someone's home. Furthermore, you unlocking this thread was an act of sheer lunacy. If your intent is to have a 10-page flame war, you're on the right track.



    That's another thing I never thought I'd hear you say.

    The rules should apply EQUALLY to EVERYONE. That's the way it's always been here. Nobody should have their hands tied simply out of team affiliation.

    What people generally will and will not accept is one thing, and I accept that. However, the rules shouldn't be biased as well.
    What about the article was biased though? Is there something in the article you find the author was factually incorrect about or deliberately misleading? I read articles about problems in Indianapolis all the time. If you can find an article by a respected news source which chronicles problems in Indy go ahead and post it. I love to read interesting articles that challenge the Capitol Improvements board's vision of Indy. I'd much rather see that than some photo montage of a young, overhyped receiving core with no one to throw the football to them.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Seems to be a good market for real estate if Dale chooses Detroit

      Originally posted by McClintic Sphere
      What about the article was biased though? Is there something in the article you find the author was factually incorrect about or deliberately misleading? I read articles about problems in Indianapolis all the time. If you can find an article by a respected news source which chronicles problems in Indy go ahead and post it. I love to read interesting articles that challenge the Capitol Improvements board's vision of Indy. I'd much rather see that than some photo montage of a young, overhyped receiving core with no one to throw the football to them.
      I was calling Hicks biased, not the article.

      And obviously I wouldn't post an article about problems with Indianapolis, and use it as a punch-line, because it would serve no purpose other than to **** off the people who live there. Pretty much how this article came off.

      And if there was a SERIOUS point to this thread, it should have been posted in the news forum, not in the basketball forum. You post it in the basketball forum, it comes off as a slap in the face. It's not as if you were asking for legit topic discussion by posting it in a place where nobody visits to talk about urban development.

      I'm perfectly ok with discussing Detroit's issues. I do it every single day. I just don't appreciate making light of the problems in this manner.

      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


      • #33
        Re: Seems to be a good market for real estate if Dale chooses Detroit

        Originally posted by Kstat
        I was calling Hicks biased, not the article.

        And obviously I wouldn't post article about problems with Indianapolis because it would serve no purpose other than to **** off the people who live there. Pretty much how this article came off.

        And if there was a SERIOUS point to this thread, it should have been posted in the news forum, not in the basketball forum. You post it in the basketball forum, it comes off as a slap in the face.
        The only possible slap in the face is the one to Dale and that's only if he makes the wrong choice. Really now, the good thing about urban blight is that it inevitably leads to urban renewal. It's Jungian or even Hegelian in it's predictability.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Seems to be a good market for real estate if Dale chooses Detroit

          Originally posted by Dr. Cox
          I think what the Pistons fans here need to keep in mind, is that while this is an NBA site, it's 2nd to being a Pacers site, and like it or not Pacers fans can make more of these kinds of posts and get away with it than an outsider can because this is our home, not yours, speaking in terms of who we root for and what this site was built for. I try hard to keep it welcoming to all who want to talk, but at the end of the day the Indiana fans are going to get some privilages in ways outsiders can't, because it's a shrine for the Pacers 1st before being a general NBA talk board. So while I'm not gonna let it sink to anything ridiculous, a Pacer fan is going to be allowed to make some light or modest jabs that a fan of another team won't because we are Pacers-biased.
          I couldn't agree more.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Seems to be a good market for real estate if Dale chooses Detroit

            Originally posted by Pacers#1Fan
            I couldn't agree more.
            Yeah, I'm sure you loved that one.

            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


            • #36
              Re: Seems to be a good market for real estate if Dale chooses Detroit

              Originally posted by Kstat
              Hicks, that statement is so one-sided biased I don't know where to begin.

              Let's have someone post a KKK thread or the general average IQ of Indiana's population and see how "funny" you think it is.....I assure you both are plentiful.

              In no way is it a light-hearted comment when you decide to dedicate a thread to bashing someone's home. Furthermore, you unlocking this thread was an act of sheer lunacy. If your intent is to have a 10-page flame war, you're on the right track.
              You're letting your temper get the best of you on this one. KKK thread? Talk about hyperbole. Secondly, I made it clear that there IS bias around here because it IS a Pacers site FIRST, not second. Third, Sphere posted it as something light-hearted, not a mean-spirited "how can I REALLY hurt them today?" kind of post, unless you're calling him a liar. I've met the guy, and he never suggested he found it ammusing to do something like you suggest.

              That's another thing I never thought I'd hear you say.

              The rules should apply EQUALLY to EVERYONE. That's the way it's always been here. Nobody should have their hands tied simply out of team affiliation.

              What people generally will and will not accept is one thing, and I accept that. However, the rules shouldn't be biased as well.
              For all intents and purposes, they ARE equal to everyone, but they never will be in all ways. Vet posters have longer leashes, for instance. In this case, yes, I'm going to sometimes let go what I view as minor jabs at the other side, whereas yes, if someone from the outside tried it on me I am more likely to get pissed, because I'm human, and I'm a Pacers fan born and raised in Indiana. That doesn't mean I'm going to let anything truly mean get posted or carry on; and this was not. That's opinion, but, last time I checked, being admin here requires personal judgement call, and if you happen to not like it now, sorry. I don't let this place go to hell, and you know that, so try to keep it in mind before totally calling me out in one swift stroke.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Seems to be a good market for real estate if Dale chooses Detroit

                Originally posted by Pacers#1Fan
                I couldn't agree more.
                I couldn't disagree more.


                Alright. Say you were playing a game of checkers with your friend. After your friend wins the game, you're angry, so you say to him: "Hey, too bad about your mom dying in that car crash."

                The Detroit article is funny for you guys, but not for some of us who live in the Detroit area. And since Detroit fans are staples on this forum, it would seem gentlemanly to avoid crossing the insult line.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Seems to be a good market for real estate if Dale chooses Detroit

                  Originally posted by Pacers#1Fan
                  I couldn't agree more.
                  Don't let it get to your head, that doesn't mean I'm going to let anything worse than this go.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Seems to be a good market for real estate if Dale chooses Detroit

                    Mom dying in a car wreck? Can either of you even begin to NOT overreact?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Seems to be a good market for real estate if Dale chooses Detroit

                      Originally posted by Dr. Cox
                      Mom dying in a car wreck? Can either of you even begin to NOT overreact?
                      Laughing out loud!! Beautiful.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Seems to be a good market for real estate if Dale chooses Detroit

                        I sounded oddly like my namesake in that one...

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Seems to be a good market for real estate if Dale chooses Detroit

                          Originally posted by BabbleOn
                          I couldn't disagree more.


                          Alright. Say you were playing a game of checkers with your friend. After your friend wins the game, you're angry, so you say to him: "Hey, too bad about your mom dying in that car crash."

                          The Detroit article is funny for you guys, but not for some of us who live in the Detroit area. And since Detroit fans are staples on this forum, it would seem gentlemanly to avoid crossing the insult line.
                          staples in this forum??? maybe like a staple in someones eye

                          i would suggest u, kstat and anyone else that shares this opinion have a couple of options if u dont like it....

                          dont come to this forum

                          discontinue being a pistons fan

                          move out of detroit (probably the best option, given the circumstances)

                          accept it as a fact of life and learn to deal with it...

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Seems to be a good market for real estate if Dale chooses Detroit

                            Here I go repeating myself yet again.

                            Parts of Detroit are nice. Parts of Detroit suck. I lived downtown in a very nice high rise apartment building. I worked at the Children's Hospital and managed to make it home every night, even the nights I worked until 3AM. I was even there during the blackout and lived to tell the tale. You could ask my dad about the riots when he was in the National Guard, but that's a whole other story.

                            The house my dad's parents lived in after they got married has been torn down. The house my mom's parents lived in still stands in the area of town I affectionately call Spanish Harlem.

                            In the immortal words of Earl, "Let's move on."

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Seems to be a good market for real estate if Dale chooses Detroit

                              Originally posted by McClintic Sphere
                              It's Jungian or even Hegelian in it's predictability.
                              :cough:

                              "If you ever crawl inside an old hollow log and go to sleep, and while you're in there some guys come and seal up both ends and then put it on a truck and take it to another city, boy, I don't know what to tell you." - Jack Handy

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Seems to be a good market for real estate if Dale chooses Detroit

                                Originally posted by Vicious Tyrant
                                :cough:

                                Where did you get that smilie of me? Yes okay I'm a nerd. Monitors, censor this man, he hurt my widdle feewings.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X