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

PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

    I thought you meant exstasy when you said "X." A side effect of coke is paranoia though. Usually people freak out when you start talking about them being on it. Just out of my personal experience with being around people on coke, it's a touchy subject, and it's certainly not something they bring up.

    Has anyone who was at the bar, even if it's an unnamed source, said they saw something similiar?

    If she was kicked out, then there would have been a scene. (they aren't going to kick you out just because you're saying you're on illegal drugs)

    Not only that, but there would be something in her purse with residue, more pills, or more coke.

    And the text messages.

    There would be more indicators, like sources at the bar or bar employee's, who would talk about this. I bet the media has hounded Kilroy employee's about this whole thing, trying to find out even the smallest details like what kind of drink she was ordering.

    Again anything is possible, but just knowing how I've seen people on those drugs and how they act I just question it.

    I'm not trying to claim like I'm in a circle of friends that use. My brother is a coke addict, and I've seen a few friends a few different times do coke. I'm pretty fimiliar with the effects, some are constant regardless of who, and I just think there would be more indicators out there.

    While coke and Xanax aren't "hard" to get, you still have to put forth the effort in tracking them down. There would be evidence of it multiple places.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

      Occam's razor.....
      And the simplest answer is that Trader Joe was right all along and the boyfriend did it. Statistically, he did it. He certainly had motive if she didn't call him like he was expecting, jealousy was building, and she was out with other guys partying.

      Speculation has been all over the map about how he would have been on camera if he was involved, how could've he have known where to find her, did the friends tell him of the confrontation and seeing her with another guy, was he in waiting hiding for her, etc.? Well, maybe that is over-complicating things.

      One of the threads I read said the boyfriend also lived in walking distance. Maybe he wasn't out searching for her in a rage trying to catch her that night or in hiding waiting for her like speculated if he was involved... Maybe she walked to his place after leaving Rosenbaum's at 4:30AM and went to him?

      Maybe just seeing her on his doorstep at 4:30AM, shoeless and wasted, was enough to 'tell' him what she'd been up to? A jealous and worried boyfriend could easily fill in some blanks here too (rightly or wrongly). Especially when she didn't call him earlier like he expected and now here she was, clearly after a night out of partying.

      Add in the possibility if drugs were involved he could know the source and who she was likely with to get them... the possibility that he had already heard about her with CR and the confrontation at Smallwood. Add in the possibility he knew about the Smallwood confrontation and her lying to him about it at his place and maybe you have a trigger to set him off. You don't even need these things to throw fuel on the fire because as I said, just her showing up wasted on his doorstep at 4:30AM might've been enough to start an argument that ends up tragically.

      The only thing that would throw cold water on that scenario is if there were video cameras around his place that should've caught this or if he lives much father away than the one post I read indicated.

      Wasn't there some talk that the way she left Rosenbaum's apartment (according to his statement) was not the way you'd expect if she was headed back to Smallwood? Maybe she wasn't headed back to Smallwood? Does anyone know if her reported direction of travel would've made more sense if walking to the boyfriend's place?

      JR could've been entirely truthful about saying he watched her leave... although it's possible if he and Wolfe were friends he might've known she was headed there and not Smallwood and lied to protect his friend from looking guilty (not necessarily because he knew he was guilty but possibly because if he told she was headed there it would automatically raise suspicions Wolfe's way and perhaps he truly believed Wolfe wouldn't be guilty and didn't want to unduly raise suspicions that direction). ...Or heck... maybe it was the opposite and he suspected Wolfe immediately but wanted to protect him.
      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


      • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

        I don't know. If there were multiple people involved, you would figure either someone would cave or they'd slip-up somewhere on one of their stories.

        Comment


        • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

          My money is still on random stranger. Or at least someone who kept an eye on the events from a distance and took advantage when an opportunity presented itself. Three people can only keep a secret if two of them are dead. In other words, there's no WAY on earth this many different individuals are involved in these events without SOMEONE knowing exactly what happened and spilling it, and I think that would have happened by now.

          Comment


          • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

            I don't think there are many people involved no matter what scenario ultimately proves to be true. Possibly as few as 1 and not likely more than 3. I don't think it would be that hard to keep a secret if talking meant you could go to prison. Especially with the intense focus that is on the case right now. A few years from now I could see someone needing to talk about things.... but right now self-preservation is what I'd see ruling the day.

            The random abduction scenario is always possible but it's just so statistically improbable, and likely made more improbable by the time period it would've had to have happened (assuming timelines are accurate).
            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


            • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

              Of course more than 1 person could be involved in this, there's not that much to get people to trip up on. Because NOTHING IS REALLY KNOWN. It's all conjecture at this point. They don't even really know when she disappeared. You can't trip people up unless you can set up a trap by knowing something they think you don't. The police don't know squat.


              Comment


              • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

                Just like Lauren's mother said too many people that are supposedly Lauren's friends are not cooperating fully like they should be. I used to think it was a stranger abduction but I don't anymore. I think the boyfriend might have had something to do with it. Has the boyfriend even talked with Lauren's parents? Kind of strange if he has not.

                Comment


                • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

                  But how do we know they aren't cooperating fully? If it were a random abduction and if they really did have nothing to do with it, then what else could they possibly say?

                  Did her mothers comments stem from the fact that she has good reason to believe the friends know something, or did she make them out of frustration/exhaustion/desperation?

                  Comment


                  • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

                    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                    But how do we know they aren't cooperating fully? If it were a random abduction and if they really did have nothing to do with it, then what else could they possibly say?

                    Did her mothers comments stem from the fact that she has good reason to believe the friends know something, or did she make them out of frustration/exhaustion/desperation?

                    Good point. I don't know what context she made that statement. I just read that in a news story today. The boyfriend bolted early for New York but I guess that's understandable with the press and all. It is tough when you don't have a body or a crime scene. Forensics are so good these days it is a shame they don't have anything to work with. If the boyfriend did do it though how would he dispose of a body at that hour and still have time to get back without anybody seeing him? It's not easy to get rid of a body where it wouldn't be discovered by now.

                    Comment


                    • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

                      Originally posted by presto123 View Post
                      Good point. I don't know what context she made that statement. I just read that in a news story today. The boyfriend bolted early for New York but I guess that's understandable with the press and all. It is tough when you don't have a body or a crime scene. Forensics are so good these days it is a shame they don't have anything to work with. If the boyfriend did do it though how would he dispose of a body at that hour and still have time to get back without anybody seeing him? It's not easy to get rid of a body where it wouldn't be discovered by now.
                      I wouldn't cross anyone off the list just because you think it would be hard to dispose of a body. For one thing, even if it was the random abduction scenario someone had to get her into a vehicle and away from the area without being seen. So clearly, loading a dead body into a vehicle and not being seen would even be easier.

                      Just believing in the random abduction theory itself only supports that it would've been possible for someone she knew to have loaded a lifeless body into a vehicle unseen instead of it having to be a random abduction.

                      Next thing to consider is what is really the window of opportunity to dispose of a body? It could've been several hours for some of the persons they are looking at. In the case of the BF he would've had up until he started making waves about her being missing. You only need a secluded spot, not the cover of darkness. If nobody is around it doesn't matter how bright the light is. Technically, any perp would've had that same timeframe (in hindsight) but few would've had the confidence someone wouldn't get curious and come looking for her before they could slip back home.

                      But even if you work with a much shorter timeframe it's fairly rural all around Bloomington. 15-30mins could get you to some very rural spots. A duffel bag, some weights, and a bridge could make for a very hard to find body. That timeframe gets you back in town while most people are still in bed.

                      Or put the body in a dumpster. In hindsight that might not sound like such a good idea but in the heat of the moment it might be the first thing that comes to mind. Plus, the person could still be thinking even if the body is found they won't connect it to them.... assuming they are hardly thinking at all. Maybe they were even expecting it to be found and had an alibi prepared. Then the dumpster gets dumped before anyone checks it.

                      This, of course, is assuming she's dead.

                      I would assume after the Purdue student went missing and was later found electrocuted in a building/room that he'd wandered into that Bloomington police and searchers were fairly thorough in eliminating that type of possibility here.

                      As for how much darkness the perp would've had... if the guys at the apartment complex had anything to do with it then the last time she's seen alive is a little before 3AM on video. After that, it's all their word on her condition and whereabouts until JR says she left at 4:30AM.

                      I'm just going to be really surprised if this proves to be a random abduction. It's certainly possible but statistically not likely and then with all this other drama going on that night in and around her life and it not to mean anything and her then be abducted by a stranger... at 4:30AM... on what would be a weekday morning.... That's just a tough one to buy for me.
                      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


                      • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

                        Good post Bball. You answered some of my questions. I don't really buy the abduction theory. Wonder if Bloomington Police have ever worked with psychics? I know the Bobo family in Tennessee thought about bringing in Carla Baron and was advised against it by law enforcement. Don't know how reliable the top ones are but it could lead to an unseen avenue to explore. I guess The Police will have to reach the desperate stage first huh?

                        Comment


                        • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

                          This is interesting. The H-T has published a "photosynth" of more than 200 photos retracing Lauren's last known whereabouts.

                          http://www.heraldtimesonline.com/pages/spierer_where

                          Comment


                          • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

                            You know, just because she died at ~4am, does not mean her body was disposed of at 4am, they could have waited til they sobered up or something like that.


                            Comment


                            • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

                              Didn't see bball had basically said the same thing.


                              Comment


                              • Re: PLEASE HELP FIND A FELLOW HOOSIER

                                BPD said today there will be no more press briefings. Sadly, this case is slowly but surely falling into "cold case" territory. We may never know what really happened.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X