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

Job Dilemma: How much time do you owe employers?

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

  • #16
    Re: Job Dilemma: How much time do you owe employers?

    Originally posted by jeffg-body View Post
    This can be a sticky situation. As a professional employment specialist myself it can do a world of harm by leaving a job so soon. If the next employer calls and verifies your work history it can bring up red flags to the new employer. It also looks bad on a resume when there is little job retention with the last employer. Some interviewers may understand the situation, but others may just pass your resume out to the trash can. If you have some good job retention at other jobs prior it would not have such a dramatic effect though.
    Simple - don't tell anyone you worked there in the first place. You put your important jobs (the ones that show you can do whatever job you are applying for) on a resume, not every job and especially not the temporary jobs.

    My clients don't care that I got paid to make powerpoint shows at the E! channel for a couple of months. That doesn't have anything to do with litigation, so I leave it out.
    “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

    “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Job Dilemma: How much time do you owe employers?

      Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
      Part of me wants to give pause and not post anything more. But I guess I'm compelled. The business owner / trainer anger we are hearing from Travmil and grace is ... well ... I just don't agree with it at all. Fact is, indentured servitude was outlawed in the 1860's. People quit jobs and move on. It's a part of working life ... I don't know, I just don't think its THAT big of a deal, unless you really leave someone hanging. Not enough people to work a shift at a hospital is one thing. Letting books stack up a little bit at the library is another thing entirely. So this should be judged on a case-by-case basis.

      As a person who often has to find help at a moment's notice, I can honestly say that I rather like having a rotation of new folks around. Training someone new just comes with the territory.

      Plus, while I admire the forthrightness of these thoughts, and appreciate that they are coming from a real place, we have to remember that these words have power. In this case, they have the power to make Kat think that she should give up looking for a job until she relocates. Judging from the first post, it doesn't sound like she's living off a trust fund here. She's living the recently out of school/going back to school life right now and those times can be hard.

      Kat, please, I BEG YOU, do everything you can to get the job, you will give them your time on the clock, and they will pay you a rate for that time. And that's the end of it. That's what employment is, and clinging to senses of owing your employer anything more can hold you down and hold you back. I know this first hand a few times over.

      A paycheck is way better than no paycheck.

      As long as you believe that this goes both ways than I guess there can be no argument.

      In other words the employer owes the employee nothing more than a paycheck and whatever benefits they have mutually agreed to and at the end of the day should be free to end the relationship when they choose as well then that is a fair playing field.


      Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Job Dilemma: How much time do you owe employers?

        dunno how things are on the state-side but over here all jobs come with atleast 30 days of probation where each party can hand in a notice to cancel the agreement in a day's advance.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Job Dilemma: How much time do you owe employers?

          I think you should take the job too, despite what I said about my dad above. In the end, you do have to look out for yourself. Just don't be surprised if you hear some unkind words when they find out you're leaving and knew all along your stay would be short.

          And LA, you should at least try to look at it from the perspective of the small business owner like my dad. He owns a dental laboratory, making all manner of false teeth. It's a very competitive skill based business. My dad has done it for over 40 years and is really highly regarded, especially in partials. It takes 6 months to a year to get someone comfortable with it. It's very much like an apprenticeship. When he finally gets a person who is good at it and is really starting to help, what do you think they do? They take the skill that he has transferred to them and go to a bigger better paying lab. My dad estimates that it takes between $4k and $5k to invest in someone and train them, and that's just in partials. He doesn't teach them dentures or crown and bridge unless they stay longer. My dad has tried everything from raising pay and benefits, to signing non-compete agreements and it doesn't work. All people see is $$ and most of the time don't even thank him for making their new career possible when they are leaving.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Job Dilemma: How much time do you owe employers?

            Indiana, like the rest of the United States, operates under at-will employment so an employer can fire an employee for pretty much any reason and get away with it. If you turn this question around and ask how much time does an employer owe an employee- well absolutely none at all under law.

            Now when you go beyond the law I understand that it could look bad but honestly this is something I believe most employers would understand. If you tell them the truth, which is that you moved, the truth is most stable, sane people don't move around the state every 2 months, I think this is common sense.

            As for not putting it on your resume, I dunno, I heard that can be sort of sticky actually, if the employer is doing a background check and sees that you paid taxes on a job that you didn't list on your resume. This is just hearsay on the internet that I have come across though.

            In lameman's terms, I think you should be alright.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Job Dilemma: How much time do you owe employers?

              Originally posted by travmil View Post
              And LA, you should at least try to look at it from the perspective of the small business owner like my dad. He owns a dental laboratory, making all manner of false teeth. It's a very competitive skill based business. My dad has done it for over 40 years and is really highly regarded, especially in partials. It takes 6 months to a year to get someone comfortable with it. It's very much like an apprenticeship. When he finally gets a person who is good at it and is really starting to help, what do you think they do? They take the skill that he has transferred to them and go to a bigger better paying lab. My dad estimates that it takes between $4k and $5k to invest in someone and train them, and that's just in partials. He doesn't teach them dentures or crown and bridge unless they stay longer. My dad has tried everything from raising pay and benefits, to signing non-compete agreements and it doesn't work. All people see is $$ and most of the time don't even thank him for making their new career possible when they are leaving.
              I work in a very similar situation. I am a small business owner who occupies a very tiny, highly skilled niche. So I completely understand what you are talking about.

              I agree that it sucks to act as a talent farm for your competition.

              Here's an untapped resource for your dad: He should look to hire young people out of university metalsmithing and jewelry programs. These kids use all the same tools (with a different purpose, of course) they are used to working with valuable materials, and the are largely hungry artists ready for a job.

              Interestingly enough, in my industry, the talent farm works the opposite direction: the big companies introduce new people into the field, those people grow and do all the work and eventually realize that the company is not adding value to their services but are taking 2/3 of the money. After only a few years, those people have formed enough client relationships to start their own shop. This happens over and over and over.
              “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

              “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Job Dilemma: How much time do you owe employers?

                Originally posted by travmil View Post
                I think you should take the job too, despite what I said about my dad above. In the end, you do have to look out for yourself. Just don't be surprised if you hear some unkind words when they find out you're leaving and knew all along your stay would be short.

                And LA, you should at least try to look at it from the perspective of the small business owner like my dad. He owns a dental laboratory, making all manner of false teeth. It's a very competitive skill based business. My dad has done it for over 40 years and is really highly regarded, especially in partials. It takes 6 months to a year to get someone comfortable with it. It's very much like an apprenticeship. When he finally gets a person who is good at it and is really starting to help, what do you think they do? They take the skill that he has transferred to them and go to a bigger better paying lab. My dad estimates that it takes between $4k and $5k to invest in someone and train them, and that's just in partials. He doesn't teach them dentures or crown and bridge unless they stay longer. My dad has tried everything from raising pay and benefits, to signing non-compete agreements and it doesn't work. All people see is $$ and most of the time don't even thank him for making their new career possible when they are leaving.
                I agree with your sentiments, but these situations are apples and oranges to me.

                Obviously it is screwy with all the skills involved in the position you are mentioning, but here we're talking about a library attendant position, which Doris down the street could probably learn the ins and outs of in a week or less.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Job Dilemma: How much time do you owe employers?

                  I gave 2 weeks notice once and was fired on the spot.
                  Last job -- 30 minutes notice.
                  Don't thank me, I'll kill ya.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Job Dilemma: How much time do you owe employers?

                    Originally posted by Knucklehead Warrior View Post
                    I gave 2 weeks notice once and was fired on the spot.
                    Last job -- 30 minutes notice.
                    In my industry - where so much confidential information is floating around - the moment you even whisper that you're looking to leave, you're out. I mean literally shown the door within minutes. OK, Buh Bye, See Ya Later!

                    I love being a contractor. I hold up my end, you hold up yours and when the job is over, I'm going surfing. Call me if you need me, but only if you have a budget.
                    “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                    “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Job Dilemma: How much time do you owe employers?

                      Originally posted by grace View Post
                      Not that I'd ever agree with Shade, but I'd admit I could only stay for 2 months. Speaking as someone who has had to orient people for a job I'd be flippin' honked off if I'd trained someone and then the person quit 2 months later.

                      BTW, my boss says you should give a month's notice before quitting.
                      A month? He/she is entitled to his/her opinion but 2 weeks is pretty much the standard.

                      A person has to look out for themselves and not worry about the feelings of the trainer/orientation person. I mean c'mon.

                      I guess I just look at it differently having seen my last two companies just pull jobs out from under people with little to no warning. When management decides they need to cut costs and eradicate positions, they sure don't stop and say "well how are we going to make these employees feel?". They just do it.

                      So it is a two way street. Loyalty is dead.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Job Dilemma: How much time do you owe employers?

                        At the "Big Five" accounting firm I worked for, our contract stated that we should give one week's notice for every year of employment with the firm.

                        The idea is that a director with ten years experience takes longer to transition his/ her client load to somebody new than a first or second year analyst/ associate.

                        But if you're going to a competitor, they can somehow make that transition instantaneous as you are shown the door right away.

                        Keep in mind the difference between professional/ career jobs and part-time clerical jobs. If Kat were talking about the job for her career (as opposed to a temporary job with a pending moving to Bloomington to further her career) the answers would be much different.
                        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                        And life itself, rushing over me
                        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Job Dilemma: How much time do you owe employers?

                          I'd think nothing of someone quitting a job of this type after 4-6 weeks if a better job, change of life, whatever was to come along...

                          I'd be pretty pissed if someone took a job KNOWING they were gone in 4-6 weeks and didn't tell me.

                          You would not get a good reference from me if I found out the circumstances of your departure meant you had to have known you were short term when you took the job.

                          On the other side of the coin, unless I couldn't put food on the table any other way, I couldn't face myself in the mirror thinking I more or less 'stole' that job from someone who needed it more and was willing to be dedicated to it. At least that scenario is what my inner voice would be telling me I did.
                          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                          ------

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

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Job Dilemma: How much time do you owe employers?

                            What if the company that hires you has plans to re-locate in 2 months but because the ink isn't dried on the paperwork thay can't discuss it?

                            Would that be fair to you as a new hire?

                            I would say, no. They should let you know what they know up front, just as you should be honest during your interview.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X