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

Penn State accusations

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

  • Re: Penn State accusations

    This is why PSU needs the death penalty.

    Even after the scandal, they elect leaders of the Board of Trustees with views like these:

    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

    Comment


    • Re: Penn State accusations

      Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
      This is why PSU needs the death penalty.

      Even after the scandal, they elect leaders of the Board of Trustees with views like these:

      wow- talk about TOTAL denial! lubrano is seriously unreal with the hero worship.

      Comment


      • Re: Penn State accusations

        Originally posted by dal9 View Post
        http://espn.go.com/college-football/...ons-penn-state

        NCAA President Emmert seems serious about sanctions. Of course, talk is cheap.

        That said, the Penn State admins--or at least the BoT--shows signs of not "getting it" still--their attitude seems to invite sanctions, almost.
        Give it time, the West-End second floor of the NCAA headquarters is doing their due diligence on this before they strike.
        "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


        • Re: Penn State accusations

          Originally posted by Hicks View Post
          Why does the example need to including punishing innocent people? The damage is already done (by the guilty). They'd essentially be punishing the next generation of Penn State for the crimes of the previous one.
          This is true of any punishment of a NCAA sports team. Crean was punished for Sampsons wrong doing. Should we just give up punishing sports programs because some players and coaches will always be innocent?

          Let all the players transfer without penalty. And deliver the killing blow

          Comment


          • Re: Penn State accusations

            Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
            This is why PSU needs the death penalty.

            Even after the scandal, they elect leaders of the Board of Trustees with views like these:
            Originally posted by clownskull View Post
            wow- talk about TOTAL denial! lubrano is seriously unreal with the hero worship.
            Yeah, anyone on the fence about whether or not to punish the "innocent" university should be forced to watch this video.

            In light of everything, with what we know of the report, and that Paterno LIED to a grand jury, for which he would have faced charges were he still alive, to STILL have PSU officials with this attitude is beyond disgusting.

            Comment


            • Re: Penn State accusations

              I'm not usually on the "NCAA is evil" bandwagon, but if they don't act against PSU, it will be absurd. Cf:

              http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/17/op...e.html?_r=3&hp


              Originally posted by Joe Nocera, New York Times
              You just can’t make up a coincidence like this. On Thursday, the same day Louis Freeh, the former director of the F.B.I., issued his damning report about the cover-up of Jerry Sandusky’s sexual crimes by the Penn State hierarchy, the N.C.A.A. lowered the boom on — are you ready for this? — the California Institute of Technology.

              One of the world’s great engineering schools, Caltech is never going to be mistaken for Penn State as an athletic force. With fewer than 1,000 undergraduates, it is a Division III school, which means, among other things, that it doesn’t grant athletic scholarships. Its basketball team ekes out about five wins a season, and its baseball team, according to The Times, has lost 227 games in a row. At Caltech, unlike your typical athletic powerhouse, “student-athletes” truly are students.

              Part of being a student at Caltech means “shopping” for courses for the first three weeks of each trimester. Students are allowed to sample classes before they have to register for them. “During those three weeks,” read an N.C.A.A. press release issued on Thursday, “because they were not actually registered in some or all of the courses they are attending, some students were not enrolled on a full-time basis.” And part-time students, you see, are not allowed to play intercollegiate athletics. Between 2007 and 2010, according to the N.C.A.A., this happened with 30 athletes in 12 sports.

              It would be hard to imagine a more frivolous violation of the rules — or one that could do less harm to the integrity of college sports. What’s more, Caltech turned itself in after a new athletic director realized that the practice of shopping for classes probably violated N.C.A.A. rules. Yet the punishment imposed on the school was severe: three years of probation, a postseason ban in a dozen sports, the erasure of wins and individual records that were gained with ineligible athletes, and more. Indeed, Caltech was cited for “a lack of institutional control,” which is pretty much the worst thing you can be accused of in N.C.A.A.-speak.

              In the wake of the Freeh report, there has been a lot of speculation about what punishment the N.C.A.A. should impose on Penn State — and even whether the Sandusky scandal is within its purview. I’m in the camp that says the N.C.A.A. should throw the book at Penn State. The legal system will take care of whether others besides Sandusky deserve to go to prison for failing to report his predatory behavior. Penn State itself will almost surely finish the painful process of removing the halo from the head of its late coach, Joe Paterno, which the Freeh report has begun. But only the N.C.A.A. can impose the so-called death penalty, forcing Penn State to shut down its football program for a period of time. Yes, it would make a mess of television schedules, not to mention the rest of Penn State’s athletic teams — which rely on the revenue that football generates — but it’s the only way to send the right message.

              That message is this: no university should ever be as beholden to its football program as Penn State was. At other big-time sports schools, there are all kinds of daily hypocrisies that people avert their eyes from in the name of college football or men’s basketball. Sadly, we accept these hypocrisies as the price to be paid for the money college sports generates and the entertainment it provides.

              Continued at link

              http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/17/op...e.html?_r=3&hp

              Comment


              • Re: Penn State accusations

                Actually the pain has just begun for Penn State. The Department of Education is going to come onto campus and pull every record they can find for campus crime. Not only will possible sex offenses be under review, but the following as well (Robbery, Aggravated Assault, Burglary, Motor Vehicle theft, Arson, and of course other sub catergories for weapons, alcohol, and drug violations. Simply they're going to get hammered as I suspect there will be other stats not reported correctly. The media has it wrong with 27,000 for each violation, actually it's 27,500. Also Penn can be hit 27,500 for each year it was not reported correctly on their stats and there are several sub categories. For instance there is a total crime stat and then there is a sub category for location stat (on-campus, in a residence hall, public property, etc). There is a daily crime/incident log where there should have been an entry about the crime. So the fine isn't going to be a simple one time hit for $27,500 dollars even if they don't take away the financial aid. I'm sure the DOE doesn't want to see PState close down, but they are going to put a world of hurt on them for sure.

                P.S. The reason I have some knowledge on this is because I'm the Clery compliance person for a campus. I've been to several Clery schools including Chicago, Indy, and a three day course in Philly PA. There will be no excuses because campus officials know all about the requirements for Clery.
                You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                Comment


                • Re: Penn State accusations

                  Originally posted by dal9 View Post
                  I'm not usually on the "NCAA is evil" bandwagon, but if they don't act against PSU, it will be absurd. Cf:

                  http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/17/op...e.html?_r=3&hp
                  that seems pretty consistent with the ncaa. big name money makers get warnings or small penalties and come down on the little guy.
                  i can't help but wonder what would happen if they REALLY tried to stop cheating/corruption in football and hoops.
                  i suspect the entire sec minus ketucky would get the death penalty in football and kentucky would get the axe in hoops.
                  of course there is cheating and corruption elsewhere in other conferences but frankly, i don't think the ncaa is interested in running an honest show, i think they operate it like dave stern and aim for the most profitable operation.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Penn State accusations

                    Just because you aren't hearing about it doesn't mean the NCAA Enforcement department isn't already investigating...
                    "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


                    • Re: Penn State accusations

                      Well... We all knew what a Cougar was (older woman prowling for younger men)... Now we know what a Nittany Lion is....

                      Too soon?
                      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: Penn State accusations

                        Actually, it's too old.
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Penn State accusations

                          When I was told IU had petitioned the league for Penn State to be removed from the Big Ten a year ago, I didn't think much of it. I figured it wouldn't really lead anywhere. Perhaps I was wrong:

                          http://www.indystar.com/article/2012...t|Indianapolis Sports

                          Originally posted by IndyStar
                          Big Ten's response to Penn State scandal 'could' include booting Nittany Lions from league

                          Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany and a committee of school presidents would have the power to fire coaches in a plan being considered by the league, the Chronicle of Higher Education reported today.

                          The child sexual assault scandal at Penn State prompted an 18-page proposal obtained by the Chronicle. A source described only as a "Big Ten leader" said one idea the league "could consider" is kicking Penn State out of the conference.

                          The story said the Big Ten does not have a contingency schedule ready if Penn State's football program receives the NCAA's "death penalty," which removes a team from competition for at least a full season.
                          "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                          -Lance Stephenson

                          Comment


                          • Re: Penn State accusations

                            Statue has been removed.

                            NCAA schedules a press conference on Monday morning to discuss "unprecedented penalties".

                            According to Twitter reports.

                            http://m.cbsnews.com/fullstory.rbml?...videofeed=null
                            Last edited by Stryder; 07-22-2012, 09:28 AM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Penn State accusations

                              Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                              When I was told IU had petitioned the league for Penn State to be removed from the Big Ten a year ago, I didn't think much of it. I figured it wouldn't really lead anywhere. Perhaps I was wrong:

                              http://www.indystar.com/article/2012...t|Indianapolis Sports
                              I think they should be removed from the Big Ten let whoever wants them sign them. The NCAA is not going to do anything.....

                              Comment


                              • Re: Penn State accusations

                                "FUN FACT: The forklift that Penn State used to get rid of the Paterno statue is the same one Notre Dame used to get rid of Charlie Weis"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X