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

The Wolf Game II: The Wolves Strike Back

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

  • The Wolf Game II: The Wolves Strike Back

    Standard rules to the game still apply. If you don't know what those are, feel free to ask after the first story is posted.

    Roles were selected using a random number generator. This was to eliminate any personal or grouping biases that may have existed on my part.

    Further additions:

    1) No voting for yourself during town votes.

    2) Your posted vote is the vote that counts - no PMing me with your "real" vote.

    3) For strategy purposes, anything said in the story has no use in figuring out people's roles. I will include people in the various stories, time permitting, and some of what they do may seem suspicious. There is no attempt at revealing actual roles in the stories. Anything there is just for entertainment value. Having said that, I will not avoid talking about people who are not human - so there should be nothing to gain by trying to apply any stories to determining roles.

    4) There are 4 wolves in this game. There is one seer and one angel. No wolf can be a seer or angel, and vice versa. The angel cannot be the seer, and vice versa.

    5) Once you're killed, stop posting in the thread. Do not PM with anyone still alive regarding the game.

    6) I reserve the right to further rule changes or additions if the situation arises requiring them.


    List of People Still Alive:

    9) Indy
    13) Robertmo
    14) Arcadian
    15) The Toxic Avenger
    16) Newman8r
    17) Suaveness

    List of People Killed:
    1) RoboDoug - Eaten, night 1! Human(ish).
    2) RoboKegboy - Eaten, night 1! Human(ish).
    3) Intridcold - Hung, day 1! Human.
    4) DisplacedKnick - Hung, day 2! Wolf.
    5) Raskolnikov - Eaten, night 2! Human.
    6) Pig Nash - Killed, day 3! Human.
    7) Since86 - Eaten, night 3! Human.
    8) Naturallystoned - Killed, day 4! Wolf.
    9) Shade - Eaten, night 4! Human.
    10) Gyron - Hung (like a chipmunk), day 5! Human.
    11) Bellisimo - Eaten, night 5! Angel.
    12) SoupIsGood - Hung, day 6! Wolf.
    13) Hicks - Eaten, night 6! Seer.
    14) Hoop - Hung, day 7! Human.
    15) Indy - Eaten, night 7! Human.
    Last edited by btowncolt; 07-02-2008, 04:20 PM.

  • #2
    Re: The Wolf Game II: The Wolves Strike Back

    Our story begins on a cold, dark, winter evening. The year is 1546. In a little town nestled in some quiet, lonely hills is our cast of characters – none realizing what will soon befall them.

    Epilogue:

    The first thing any of them saw was an almost too brief glimmer of red eyes in the distance. As their boat made its way to the shore of this new, distant land – they saw those eyes. The chilling, terrifying glint of red in an otherwise pitch black sea of trees. Dismissed as just a trick of the light, it should have been the first signal to all aboard that their journey should not have ended here.

    Months before, they had left their homes. While none knew much about any of the rest, they all had one thing in common – a need to escape where they had spent most of the lives. Whether because of persecution for crimes against humanity, like the one called “Gyron”, or because they were assumed to be some sort of witch, like the one who between fits of number counting called himself “newman8r”, they all had reason to seek a new life. Of course, none of them had bothered to realize that traveling halfway across the world with a ship of 18 guys and 2 asexual robots was a poor survival strategy, but who can fault them? They were desperate and alone.

    “Hello?!?”, shouted Hicks as the boat came onto shore. “Is anyone there? I need to find something called ‘the internet’.”

    “Did anyone else see that? What was it? Was it a sheep? God I hope it was a sheep. Does anyone else know what it’s like to be in love? Are there sheep here? Can a person really love a sheep? I really...” Suaveness’ incessant rambling was cut off by a sharp blow to the head. RoboKegboy and RoboDoug had been programmed to not only protect the villagers from outside threats, but threats to basic decency. Sheep-man love was certainly the latter.

    While Arcadian and Bellisimo unloaded the ship, the rest began to explore. They needed to find a suitable area to build their new community.

    “Wait a second”, said Since86 as he was but a few hundred yards from the shore. “We should build right here. It’s close to the water, close to our supplies, and it’s on high ground – we can make sure Robertmto doesn’t try to run off again.”

    So they built their small community on that quiet hill in this new land. They built a town square, a town store – and even a town brothel. They took turns dressing up as women and standing in the small window, beckoning one another into the.....well, that’s a story for a different day and a different forum.

    About 8 months after they landed, their lives changed forever – though few of them knew at the time....

    As Indy was walking to pick some fresh berries from the shrubbery outside of town, he saw that the gate was slightly ajar. He peaked around the gate – it should have never been open! RoboKegboy and RoboDoug should have been standing right outside! As he looked outside, he was shocked by what he saw. It was Pig Nash! Dressed like a schoolgirl, running around the meadow singing “I’m a little teapot!”

    This, of course, was perfectly normal. But what he saw at his feet horrified him so much that wet his adult cloth diaper. RoboKegboy and RoboDoug were ripped to shreds! Their torsos had enormous bite marks, bite marks big enough that it could not have simply been Raskolnikov on a drunken bender! There were patches of gray fur everywhere – fur that looked almost wolf-like. Could a pack of wolves have done this?

    As Indy turned around to close the gate and run and tell the others, he saw something carved in the gate. It looked like a message. It said – “We’re heeeeeeeeeeeere. PS – There’s a shortage of chairs. Yeah.”

    Indy ran and rang the town bell. Everyone gathered in the square, including Pig Nash in all his pigtailed glory. The Toxic Avenger was a little late to arrive, but this was of no surprise to anyone. Better that Toxic finish putting the lotion on his skin than getting the hose again!

    The townsfolk knew there was danger amongst them. Those eyes they had seen that first night – they never should have stayed here. Those weren’t some mere animal; they were werewolf eyes! They decided that while there was still some light out, they must vote to hang one of their compatriots.

    But who would they hang? They must vote, and quickly!
    Last edited by btowncolt; 06-17-2008, 11:59 AM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: The Wolf Game II: The Wolves Strike Back

      I vote intridcold. Got to be someone.
      "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

      "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: The Wolf Game II: The Wolves Strike Back

        it is every so hard to pick at random for the first wolf to die. Anyone feel like dying?

        Humans UNITE

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: The Wolf Game II: The Wolves Strike Back

          ******* it, why am I always just a regular human?

          I vote Hoop.
          Word on the street is he doesn't want your money, he only wants to please your ears...
          Bum in Berlin on Myspace

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: The Wolf Game II: The Wolves Strike Back

            Well i would defend myself, but I have nothing to go on. So shoot blindly...I mean wisely.

            Shade
            Last edited by Major Cold; 06-17-2008, 11:49 AM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: The Wolf Game II: The Wolves Strike Back

              I was going to vote randomly, seeing no other choice. But then Rasko uttered the most peculiar thing, "Why am I always just a regular human?" Foolish, or dangerous. Either way, an obvious tie-breaker for my otherwise chaotic choice of whom to hang. I vote for Rakolnikov.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: The Wolf Game II: The Wolves Strike Back

                Dear diary,

                My putt-putt business lost it's best customers today. RoboKegboy and RoboDoug both were attacked by creatures. Their records are unfathomable. Especially Robodoug's record on the 11th hole. No other human or android could bank off of the sheep's rectum like Robodoug (even though Suave just played hole 11 18 times to hit that continually).

                I have decided to add more to the first three holes. It is as easy as Shade's mother. Whom I have not seen in awhile.

                More Later,
                I

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: The Wolf Game II: The Wolves Strike Back

                  Four wolves? Agh.
                  The first vote is such a *****. I'll vote for Hicks.
                  You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: The Wolf Game II: The Wolves Strike Back

                    I change my vote to Hicks.
                    Word on the street is he doesn't want your money, he only wants to please your ears...
                    Bum in Berlin on Myspace

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: The Wolf Game II: The Wolves Strike Back

                      No wait, I see Soup voted Hicks already. I stick with Hoop in that case. Don't wanna go and make myself suspicious...
                      Word on the street is he doesn't want your money, he only wants to please your ears...
                      Bum in Berlin on Myspace

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: The Wolf Game II: The Wolves Strike Back

                        Cause I'm the taxman....yeahea I'm the taxman (a regular human taxman).
                        Word on the street is he doesn't want your money, he only wants to please your ears...
                        Bum in Berlin on Myspace

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: The Wolf Game II: The Wolves Strike Back

                          Rasko continues to suggest his guilt......

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: The Wolf Game II: The Wolves Strike Back

                            [OoC] This happened really fast... and technically it's my first time playing so bear with me... I'm still trying to get the hang of it...

                            Also Lotion? Just icky...[OoC]

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: The Wolf Game II: The Wolves Strike Back

                              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                              Rasko continues to suggest his guilt......
                              Yes, I'm a wolf, but I'm not after your meat, I'm after your money...
                              Word on the street is he doesn't want your money, he only wants to please your ears...
                              Bum in Berlin on Myspace

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X