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

Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

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

  • #61
    Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

    Kinda agree with both points, as a racer, but how do we prevent the nuclear arms race from consuming the little guys that we all love so much? (And are such an important part of the 500). Truthfully, I never had a problem with somebody winning by a lap or two. That tells me that somebody really did their homework.
    Last edited by DaveP63; 11-04-2011, 06:19 PM. Reason: clarity
    http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...nce-stephenson
    "But, first, let us now praise famous moments, because something happened Tuesday night in Indianapolis that you can watch a lifetime’s worth of professional basketball and never see again. There was a brief, and very decisive, and altogether unprecedented, outburst of genuine officiating, and it was directed at the best player in the world, and that, my dear young person, simply is not done."

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

      I would find it more interesting if you watched a race and all the cars were not exactly the same, like back in the days when I watched it growing up. Some of the most unique race cars ever made ran at indy.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

        Good to see Rahal Letterman back in the circuit fulltime with 2 rides and even "Special" Ed getting into the ownership game with his own fulltime ride. Not sure where that leaves Sarah, but with those two teams and Shank Racing entering the paddock, at least not everything is doom and gloom.
        "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

        "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

          At a minimum, look for SFR to do Indy. Hope she can get something together for a full time deal.
          http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...nce-stephenson
          "But, first, let us now praise famous moments, because something happened Tuesday night in Indianapolis that you can watch a lifetime’s worth of professional basketball and never see again. There was a brief, and very decisive, and altogether unprecedented, outburst of genuine officiating, and it was directed at the best player in the world, and that, my dear young person, simply is not done."

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

            I think SFR continues on the ovals for sure as they have in the past. Not sure who gets the seat though.
            "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

            "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

              My favorite quote:
              “So the car isn’t going as fast as we wanted or expected and we’re trying to identify why the theoretical world doesn’t match real world at the race track. At very high speeds, we have disparity in the data.”

              And that, boys and girls, is the difference between a theoretical engineer and a practical engineer. The practical engineer would get on a golf cart and go watch it going into the corner and go watch the middle of the corner and watch it get out and figure it out in about 5 minutes...

              http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/artic...peedway-issues
              http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...nce-stephenson
              "But, first, let us now praise famous moments, because something happened Tuesday night in Indianapolis that you can watch a lifetime’s worth of professional basketball and never see again. There was a brief, and very decisive, and altogether unprecedented, outburst of genuine officiating, and it was directed at the best player in the world, and that, my dear young person, simply is not done."

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

                I'm just trying to let this latest info seep in. First off, as far as I'm concerned it's another strike against this idea of spec cars somehow being good for racing and the sport as a whole.

                If the car truly has a problem, well now every team has a problem. If the cars were allowed to evolve substantially and alternate manufacturers show up with their own chassis then we might have an actual race for the pole and technological breakthrus making for some raceday drama.

                Without this spec stuff we could have grandfatheriing taking place... even with the spec stuff we could have grandfathering. With the current news, someone with last year's car might be feeling pretty good about their situation come May (if the spec rules didn't suddenly obsolete their car).

                The Indy500/Indycar is going to have a bubbling undercurrent issue as long as (if the rules allowed it) someone could take an early 1990's Indycar out of mothballs and easily put it on the pole at Indy and win the race going away versus any of the cars we've seen since the 2nd half of the 90's.... and now the new 'next generation' car too.

                Now that all said... If the idea is to make the cars harder to drive it sounds like that's exactly what they are. Up the HP to increase the speed and let the driver use the pedals to control the speed... he can use the brakes to play with weight transfer too for that matter.

                I'm still lost on an issue tho... I keep seeing that Dallara got the Indycar contract at least in part because they were the only one making a pitch for it who didn't require they be the exclusive chassis supplier. Well, if that is true then why were they awarded the contract to be the exclusive chassis manufacturer? It seems to me the ICONIC committee could've came away from the process by saying we've accepted Dallara's proposal plus, since Dallara is not requiring exclusivity, nor are we willing to grant exclusivity, and so we will accept the designs from the competing companies to be part of our rulebook as accepted chassis for the Indycar series as well ...should they want to build cars without exclusivity being granted.
                Last edited by Bball; 11-13-2011, 11:53 AM.
                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


                • #68
                  Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

                  I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt and say that the devil you know is better than the one you don't. Plus I think the prevailing sentiment was that developing that many chassis along with the engine packages would be too expensive. As it is now, the big teams can eat most of the development costs and the little guys can get handed a fairly sorted out package.
                  http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...nce-stephenson
                  "But, first, let us now praise famous moments, because something happened Tuesday night in Indianapolis that you can watch a lifetime’s worth of professional basketball and never see again. There was a brief, and very decisive, and altogether unprecedented, outburst of genuine officiating, and it was directed at the best player in the world, and that, my dear young person, simply is not done."

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

                    Looks like SFR is going to run two cars next year, looks like full funding is possible. Drivers TBD!!!
                    http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...nce-stephenson
                    "But, first, let us now praise famous moments, because something happened Tuesday night in Indianapolis that you can watch a lifetime’s worth of professional basketball and never see again. There was a brief, and very decisive, and altogether unprecedented, outburst of genuine officiating, and it was directed at the best player in the world, and that, my dear young person, simply is not done."

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

                      If the 2012 Dallara doesn't get sorted out and ends up in running sub 220 speeds for Indy qualifying... I really fear for the future of the sport. I don't even know that the sport can not take a hit if the car is only capable of matching recent qualifying speeds. With the tests having it hit 208-216MPH at IMS, and Indy being the halo event with all the eyes... this is really the best (and maybe last) last chance to reconnect and find new interest in the sport.

                      This has the potential of "Epic Fail" swirling around it right now.
                      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


                      • #71
                        Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

                        Reports are they are working hard on sorting the balance issues. HVM is signed up with Lotus/Judd. Probably won't get on track until January.
                        http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...nce-stephenson
                        "But, first, let us now praise famous moments, because something happened Tuesday night in Indianapolis that you can watch a lifetime’s worth of professional basketball and never see again. There was a brief, and very decisive, and altogether unprecedented, outburst of genuine officiating, and it was directed at the best player in the world, and that, my dear young person, simply is not done."

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

                          “I think the CFD model [Dallara’s] done is a bit too rudimentary, and it has bitten them in the end,” said one prominent IndyCar engineer with extensive CFD experience, who, along with another current IndyCar race engineer, voiced the same concern.

                          “They’ve out-smarted themselves. Look at the aerodynamics on the Formula One car they delivered for HRT. That thing was barely suitable for that series, and if you look at the [DW12], they’ve also come up woefully short. You can’t dabble in these things. I’ll just put it this way: every rudimentary Indy car CFD model I’ve seen has said the rear of the car needs more weight bias than it actually requires. When you see that data returned, it should be a prompt to spend more time on [improving] your model, not to go off and start making a car based off that weight distribution figure. I’ll bet you [taking] a shortcut on the model has set this entire chain of problems in motion.”
                          Although the exact power figure being used in road course testing is unknown, it’s believed that manufacturers are right in the 600-650 hp range—close to the naturally-aspirated units that were used through 2011.

                          With a significant jump in downforce, similar weight, comparable power and a fundamental change in how that power is delivered, something as routine as spinning the tires out of tight corners has reportedly been a challenge with the turbo-powered DW12s.

                          The mothballed 3.5-liter atmospheric Honda V8s offered instant torque, acceleration, and forced its users to be mindful of aggressive throttle inputs. So far in testing, the 2.2-liter turbos (Honda uses a single Borg Warner turbo while Chevrolet and Lotus use twin BW units) have been incredibly responsive, with drivers applauding the lack of turbo lag, but the small-displacement engines, compared to their predecessor, offer minimal amounts of initial torque.

                          Simply put, stomping on the throttle in slow corners, at present, is met with nice and tidy acceleration. The “be afraid…be very afraid of touching the throttle” sideways moments drivers and fans were hoping for is nowhere to be found.


                          http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/artic...lopment-issues
                          Last edited by Bball; 11-29-2011, 11:33 PM.
                          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


                          • #73
                            Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

                            INDYCAR: Barnhart Removed From Race Control; Angstadt Departs

                            http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/artic...angstadt-fired
                            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


                            • #74
                              Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

                              Maybe Barnhart can be re-assigned to the Yellow Shirt crew? Wait... that won't work... Couldn't you see him controlling pedestrian traffic at the Gasoline Alley crossing....

                              He'd space the line out so much the first people to cross would already be making a lap thru the infield and returning before the end of the line even got across the walkway.

                              Some people would be allowed to walk across at any time but others would be randomly stopped, even with no cars rolling in Gasoline Alley.

                              He'd start the line with golf carts coming thru narrowly missing pedestrians.

                              Random people would be pulled out of line and sent to the back when he accuses them of blocking.
                              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


                              • #75
                                Re: Indycar 2011- Lots to contemplate

                                He'll probably be tasked with a focus on driver safety.
                                "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                                "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X