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

Dominic Rhodes Under Arrest

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

  • #16
    Re: Dominic Rhodes Under Arrest

    By the way it's the top Front Page Story on Indystar.com right now.

    Why Not Us ?

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Dominic Rhodes Under Arrest

      Don't worry Able - this will build. Before long Rhodes will be equated with a serial murderer.

      I'd say his chances of being re-signed with the Colts just took a hit. Then you add that to his arrest a couple of years ago.

      Bye Dom - figured you were gone anyway. Thanks for helping get the rings.
      The poster formerly known as Rimfire

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Dominic Rhodes Under Arrest

        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
        What, have I missed another event that involved Dom?

        Why in the world is this being compared to Tinsley, considering this last incident was his second this season, and this is Dom's first?

        from the Star article:

        This is Rhodes’ second arrest in Marion County.

        In March 2002, he was arrested on battery and domestic battery charges after police said he struck his live-in girlfriend, Latrina Moore, and pushed her to the ground. A deputy dispatched to Rhodes’ Indianapolis home observed a red mark on the left side of Moore’s face and a swollen lip, according to court records.

        In September of that year, Rhodes admitted to the crime and was placed in a diversion program.
        The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Dominic Rhodes Under Arrest

          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
          What, have I missed another event that involved Dom?

          Why in the world is this being compared to Tinsley, considering this last incident was his second this season, and this is Dom's first?
          When was Tinsley arrested this year?

          Or is it "guilty by association"?

          Or is Jackson taking the "fall" for Tinsley?

          Not sure what you are saying here, outside that presence at a bar-fight is now worse then driving a car DUI 50% over the speed limit.

          What if he had hit one of your friends?
          So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

          If you've done 6 impossible things today?
          Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Dominic Rhodes Under Arrest

            Here's another point that I don't hear mentioned very often, and I think it makes a HUGE difference between the way that incidents involving football players and basketball players are compared.

            When a football player does something stupid, he's one of 53 guys on the team. A basketball player is one of 14. Maybe it's not right, but it sure seems to water down the impact that the event has on the team. Maybe the incident is just as serious, but the consequences in terms of the team are certainly not. The only way this would affect the Colts on the same level as it would the Pacers would be if it were Peyton, Marvin, and Reggie shooting up Club Rio. Of course, given that there is not an established pattern of such behavior involving those three, we know that's not very likely to happen.

            With an incident like the Brawl, three starters get suspended for huge chunks of the season. Then, the following season, Artest shows his unlimited character by ****ting all over the franchise that stuck by him through his asinine behavior. Then you have the thing at Club Rio, 2 of your 5 starters (one of them being a key figure from the Brawl) and one of your key offseason acquisitons are involved. Then you have 8 Seconds, involving 2 of the same players from Club Rio. It's a pattern, it's ridiculous, it's embarrassing for the city, it's a series of events that goes all the way back to the Brawl, and something serious needs to be done to correct it.

            The Colts are nowhere near the low level the Pacers have acheived. In fact, I am starting to wonder where the bottom is for the Pacers. Every time I think the franchise has turned the corner, a new incident happens to remind me that they aren't even close to as low as they can go. Now when you can start to say the same things I have just said about the Pacers and apply them to the Colts, there might be an argument. But as it is, comparing the Pacers to the Colts in this case is simply ridiculous.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Dominic Rhodes Under Arrest

              Wait - I didn't know Rhodes was arrested before. I must have missed all the prior Kravitz articles about all of that. I must have missed the fan outrage.

              Travmill - if we can't compare the Pacers with the Colts - then I have no idea who we are supposed to compare the Pacers to. Would you suggest Eli Lilly.

              Tinsley hasn't been arrested once since he's been a member of the Pacers. Has he? (sure maybe he should for his horrible defense at times) - but I don't think he has been arrested)

              In fact I think it would be interesting to compare the criminal records of the Colts players vs. the Pacers players. Sure the Colts have 4X as many players - but some people might be shocked to learn that they also have 4X as many players with criminal records on the Colts roster. (disclaimer - I don't know if my last sentence is correct or not - but it would be interesting to see)

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Dominic Rhodes Under Arrest

                Originally posted by travmil View Post
                With an incident like the Brawl, three starters get suspended for huge chunks of the season. Then, the following season, Artest shows his unlimited character by ****ting all over the franchise that stuck by him through his asinine behavior. Then you have the thing at Club Rio, 2 of your 5 starters (one of them being a key figure from the Brawl) and one of your key offseason acquisitons are involved. Then you have 8 Seconds, involving 2 of the same players from Club Rio. It's a pattern, it's ridiculous, it's embarrassing for the city, it's a series of events that goes all the way back to the Brawl, and something serious needs to be done to correct it.
                So trading Jax and trading Artest isn't doing something serious.

                And you know what - as of right now the "8 seconds" thing is nothing. The only thing we know is they were there - And the Club Rio thing - Marquis and Jamaal didn't do anything did they?

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Dominic Rhodes Under Arrest

                  I would have thought that Dom would have been in bad at that hour, after saying his prayers and having his milk and cookies.
                  Slug 'em Sabres!!!!!
                  http://youtube.com/watch?v=cj1SUF4wzu0

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Dominic Rhodes Under Arrest

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck
                    Wait - I didn't know Rhodes was arrested before. I must have missed all the prior Kravitz articles about all of that. I must have missed the fan outrage.
                    Must have - the Colts had 3 or 4 incidents right around that time. I don't remember all the details and they certainly didn't make the Sportscenter highlights by charging into stands but there were several - the highlight was when a player's wife died in a car accident and they found out he had been arrested for some sort of domestic abuse not long before that.

                    Then there was another player the Colts actually traded for who'd had a history of domestic violence, some drug issues and ended up getting shot by (I think) his wife. There were a couple of others.

                    I certainly remember some fan outrage and articles about it. A lot of shouting for the Colts to clean up their act. Don't know if it made it to the level enjoyed by the Pacers (or the Bengals now) but it was certainly there.
                    The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Dominic Rhodes Under Arrest

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck
                      Travmill - if we can't compare the Pacers with the Colts - then I have no idea who we are supposed to compare the Pacers to. Would you suggest Eli Lilly.
                      I'm not defending what Dominic did. I'm merely stating the fact that the Colts have a long way to fall before they can be compared to the Pacers, which is true. Arguing otherwise isn't exactly the strongest position to take given the enormous amount of evidence stating the opposite. You can point to Tinsley's lack of an arrest record all you want while ignoring the fact that he's been at the center or involved in three incidents that brought monumental embarrassment to this city and the sports fans who live here. It's not going to change the fact that the Pacers have dug their own hole, and the Colts simply have not followed them into it.

                      Besides, I'm not sure you want to compare the Pacers with Eli Lilly. Even with the Pacers tiny amount of employees, I would wager they'd compare far less favorably to Lilly's 40,000 than you'd like to believe.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Dominic Rhodes Under Arrest

                        Originally posted by able
                        When was Tinsley arrested this year?

                        Or is it "guilty by association"?

                        Or is Jackson taking the "fall" for Tinsley?

                        Not sure what you are saying here, outside that presence at a bar-fight is now worse then driving a car DUI 50% over the speed limit.

                        What if he had hit one of your friends?
                        Where did I say he WAS arrested?

                        Or is it "put words in my mouth," not once but twice in the same post.

                        Show me where I said that a bar fight is worse than driving drunk.

                        And on a personal note, one of my friends did die in an auto accident where the driver had been drinking. The driver was also a very good friend.

                        But guess what, that's been four weeks and his blood draw level still hasn't been released. He blew a .27 on the scene, but even the lead investigating officer admitted to my face that the onsite PBT was wrong. The hospital, unoffically, tested him at .05, which is under the legal limit.

                        I'm involved in a situation first hand worse than this, and the current situation has given me a little more insight on how the state actually determines you were "drunk." The link you posted said he tested a .09, which btw is unofficial because that has to come from the ISP and that could take over a week. I was also told that the onsite PBT, hospital test, and the ISP tests hardly ever match up. He said that sometimes they go up, sometimes they go down, and it's not out of the question that it varies by .03 (he said .03 specifically because that would be the change needed in my friends case for him to be considered drunk).

                        But again, show me where I said Tinsley had been arrested twice and where I said that a bar fight is worse than drunken driving.
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Dominic Rhodes Under Arrest

                          UB, I completely agree about the obvious double-standard Kravitz applies concerning the Pacers and Colts.

                          However, the difference is that this is involving one player, not a group, and it's somewhat of an isolated incident whereas the Pacers as a whole have had a negative public perception due to continuous events, starting with the Palace brawl.

                          Plus, winning a championship tends to lend a little leeway by the fans.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Dominic Rhodes Under Arrest

                            Btw, lots of people drive 81 or more in a 55. I see it daily, and I even do it sometimes. But I hadn't been drinking beforehand. Can't speak for the others, though.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Dominic Rhodes Under Arrest

                              Originally posted by Shade View Post
                              Plus, winning a championship tends to lend a little leeway by the fans.
                              I completely agree with that and that is the point I've tried to make in the past.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Dominic Rhodes Under Arrest

                                Rhodes better not be re-signed.

                                I've seen enough of this crap with the Pacers. The Colts better not put up with this crap, no matter how good Rhodes is, no matter how many championships they win.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X