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 2010 PD Forum Awards! AWARDS HALFWAY DONE, WEEK 3 FINALS UP!

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

  • #46
    Re: The 2010 PD Forum Awards! (Nominations and Discussion)

    I agree Hoop. I'm gonna post something here in a few minutes collecting everything and where we go from here.
    Play Mafia!
    Twitter

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: The 2010 PD Forum Awards! (Nominations and Discussion)

      Pig Nash,

      Recommend you just make your best judgement on this year's categories. Once the categories are finalized, I'll put in my noms.
      “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


      • #48
        Re: The 2010 PD Forum Awards! (Nominations and Discussion)

        I have a pretty good idea about the categories now... my post is almost up.
        Play Mafia!
        Twitter

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: The 2010 PD Forum Awards! (Nominations and Discussion)

          OK! So things are starting to come together. Here are some things:

          The PD Forum Awards HoF:

          Kstat brought this up instead of naming awards after posters (other than the ABADays Citizenship Award which I'll get to later) we should a.) give them credit for the times the award was named for them, b.) put the original names back on the award, and c.) induct them into the PDFAHoF once they reach 5 wins. (I think this should be across categories and you are retired from winning either if you get inducted, you would still be eligible for other awards then.)

          Once inducted I think you should get a thread where you get someone to make a "speech" about how great/awesome/funny/smart/terrible you are and then you can thank people! It'll be fun.

          At the beginning of each future PDFA I would list the members of the HoF and multiple time award winners that are getting close to be inducted.

          This would of course mean MR and TBird could be nominated for their old awards. Any objections? What do TBird and MagicRat think (since they would lose their spots as the award namers)?

          Current Awards

          Pacers ToTY
          OT ToTY
          Most Humorous Poster
          Best Debator
          Best Non-American Poster
          Best Non-Pacer Fan
          Sunshiner of the Year
          Moderate Poster of the Year
          Darksider of the Year
          Post More Often
          Best Arm Chair Coach
          Rookie of the Year
          OTMVP
          MVP

          Some notes: please provide a link to the thread you are nominating, and due to lack of response OTPOY and Pacers Post of the Year are gonna retire this year, posters get credit for the posts that start a OTTOTY and PTOTY winner so unless anyone has any problems with that, these are the awards, except for...

          The ABADays Outstanding Citizen Award

          This is going to be an honorary award. I think we'd all like to recognize (as LA said) generosity, willingness to help others, and openness. I think this is both on the board or if you know someone on the board in person, in real life. If you have a poster you think is worthy of the award, send me your nominations in a PM. I'd like a.) the poster, b.) why you think they should win the award, c.) a story that illustrates your point with a link to the thread(s) (or if it's real life, any documentation about it would be great but that's not entirely necessary)

          Then I'll go through the entries and choose the best one (I will try to enlist a few people to help with this) and I'll post the winner along with the story and your case(s) for the poster at the end of the awards. Nominations will end at the end of June so we can go through them.

          Nominations and the voting process

          Nominations are going really well and I'm getting a lot of posters who you guys are recognizing, which is great. I'm going to leave this thread up through the end of the finals and you can continue to put names up for the different awards.

          We're starting a bit later than normal but they generally take about a month. I'm gonna do it over 5 weeks. Here's how the voting is gonna break down for this year's set.

          Week 1: I'm going to put up threads (up to 14 if every category has more than 3 nominees) with every nominee for votes to narrow down the fields. At the end of the week the top 3 (if there are ties for the third spot I'll extend it) vote getters for each category will go to the finals.

          Week 2 Finals: Most Humorous Poster, Best Debator, Best Non American Poster, Best Non Pacer Fan (I'll post at the beginning of the week and voting will go through the end of the week.)

          Week 3 Finals: Sunshiner, Darksider, and Moderate Poster of the Year, and the Post More Often Award

          Week 4 Finals: Pacers Thread of the Year, OTToTY, Best Arm Chair Coach, and Rookie of the Year

          Week 5 Finals: OTMVP and MVP (and The ABADays Oustanding Citizenship Award winner will be announced after)

          That's fairly extensive. Any questions?
          Play Mafia!
          Twitter

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: The 2010 PD Forum Awards! (Nominations and Discussion)

            was it this message board who didn't allow the mods receive votes in the awards or am i just confusing things now?

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: The 2010 PD Forum Awards! (Nominations and Discussion)

              that was an old rule. It's since been rescinded.

              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


              • #52
                Re: The 2010 PD Forum Awards! (Nominations and Discussion)

                I'm ok with everything that's decided, but, I'm flattered but also opposed to let one of the awards carry my name for the arguments that Kstat has already presented.

                I'm hereby taking my name off the list for nominees with regards to best non-American poster this year. I've always felt very, very honoured and grateful winning this award or becoming runner-up.

                But, I feel this year it's time someone else got the award and since I don't think I had a very "strong" year, there's definitely several who are more deserving IMHO. Even more so by withdrawing I wouldn't be "stealing" votes, because I've been long here or have posted a lot or am maybe more well-known, who should go to other posters.

                My nominees for this specific award this year are:
                Bellisimo, GO!!!, Sweabs and Cordobes.

                Regards,

                Mourning
                2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: The 2010 PD Forum Awards! (Nominations and Discussion)

                  Originally posted by Mourning View Post
                  I'm ok with everything that's decided, but, I'm flattered but also opposed to let one of the awards carry my name for the arguments that Kstat has already presented.

                  I'm hereby taking my name off the list for nominees with regards to best non-American poster this year. I've always felt very, very honoured and grateful winning this award or becoming runner-up.

                  But, I feel this year it's time someone else got the award and since I don't think I had a very "strong" year, there's definitely several who are more deserving IMHO. Even more so by withdrawing I wouldn't be "stealing" votes, because I've been long here or have posted a lot or am maybe more well-known, who should go to other posters.

                  My nominees for this specific award this year are:
                  Bellisimo, GO!!!, Sweabs and Cordobes.

                  Regards,

                  Mourning
                  Id request that you let the forum take your name off the ballot by letting them vote for you one more time. By the rules I set up, one more award puts you in the hall and retires you from the list.

                  You may not even win it this year for the reasons you mentioned, who knows?
                  Last edited by Kstat; 05-31-2010, 07:29 AM.

                  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


                  • #54
                    Re: The 2010 PD Forum Awards! (Nominations and Discussion)

                    i appreciate where you are coming from Mourning but I think if you indeed have an "off" year...pretty sure the voting would reflect that...so i don't think you should bow out of the awards unless of course you just don't want to take part in it altogether, cause at the end of the day, i don't think anyone is really forced in to participate with these things...all for fun and passing time in the end.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: The 2010 PD Forum Awards! (Nominations and Discussion)

                      One last thought - I think 3 wins in a single category should mean a place in the Hall of Fame. 5 just seems like too big of a hurdle.

                      I'll have a list of noms soon.
                      Last edited by Los Angeles; 05-31-2010, 09:55 PM.
                      “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


                      • #56
                        Re: The 2010 PD Forum Awards! (Nominations and Discussion)

                        Originally posted by bellisimo View Post
                        i appreciate where you are coming from Mourning but I think if you indeed have an "off" year...pretty sure the voting would reflect that...so i don't think you should bow out of the awards unless of course you just don't want to take part in it altogether, cause at the end of the day, i don't think anyone is really forced in to participate with these things...all for fun and passing time in the end.
                        Offcourse, it's all for fun and passing time. It's also nice for others to get their credit though, it has nothing to do with not wanting to take part in the Awards. The awards are some of the most fun-times of the year on this forum.

                        I like the idea of the HoF. But, isn't 5 a tad much if you compare this to the amount of competition and the level of quality that exists on this forum? Just asking.

                        I haven't made up my mind yet.
                        Last edited by Mourning; 05-31-2010, 10:39 AM. Reason: what LA said, basically.
                        2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                        2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                        2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: The 2010 PD Forum Awards! (Nominations and Discussion)

                          in the world of online forums - 5 years does indeed sound a bit much. we have a special thing going on here in PD with members that return regularly and stay with the board..but one must factor in that this is what it is...an online community...and 5 years is a lifetime in such situations. I too would say 3 years is enough for HoF...

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: The 2010 PD Forum Awards! (Nominations and Discussion)

                            Or 4 years

                            2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                            2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                            2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: The 2010 PD Forum Awards! (Nominations and Discussion)

                              Its a tough call. I want to make it difficult but not impossible. 4 wins in a single category or 5 wins total sound good?
                              Play Mafia!
                              Twitter

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: The 2010 PD Forum Awards! (Nominations and Discussion)

                                A lot of people here would be in the hall already if we lessened the number. I picked 5 for a specific reason. Nobody here qualifies yet, so we create a hall without having to grandfather anybody in. At the same time, over the next 3 years, we could induct a half-dozen.

                                And no, I don't think 5 is too much, for the reasons I stated. A number of posters are already nearing that threshold, and this forum is only 7 years old. by the time PD hits its 10th anniversary, I expect us to have at least five HoFers, probably more.

                                I also advise against putting members win the hall for total wins, because that would disqualify them from every single category. I don't think that would be right.
                                Last edited by Kstat; 05-31-2010, 11:21 AM.

                                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

                                Working...
                                X