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

Garbage from Colts-Packers thread

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

  • #31
    Re: Packers-Colts Thread

    Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
    This situation is far more complicated, for a number of factors, that don't belong on the public board.
    What could possibly be complicated about this?
    "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

    -Lance Stephenson

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Packers-Colts Thread

      I don't have him on ignore, but I skip every post I see by him or responding to him. Which unfortunately, ruins entire threads I'm interested in with people just arguing his ridiculous view points.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Packers-Colts Thread

        Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
        ... but if he's really ruining your time here to the point that you have to leave, the problem isn't really with him.
        It certainly is. At least on the Colts side. He bothers me way less on the Pacer forum. From my perspective, what do I have to gain by going to a forum that I can no longer carry on any discernible conversation about? Not that I don't want to talk about the Colts, but I can't without having each discussion just absolutely destroyed.
        Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 10-04-2012, 12:57 PM.
        There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Packers-Colts Thread

          Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
          This was my point.

          Use the ignore button and remember that it takes two (or more participants) for the thread to derail. If one guy is just talking to himself the thread and board are less likely to derail.
          Disagree. It takes one person to derail a thread. Especially if that one person continues to exhibit the same behavior in thread after thread. I really don't like when people claim that it takes two to tango or the problem somehow resides in people like myself. I come here to have civilized mature conversation, some fun ribbing here and there, but I've been doing the same thing for over 8 years here and a good 4-6 years before that on RATS before I migrated here at its inception... the issue isn't with me. And like I said, the Ignore button is a poor solution.

          I like this site; I wouldn't try to be a part of this community for damn near 15 years if I didn't find value in having a place where I can discuss two of my favorite things in a mature, civilized manner, as opposed to many other forums out there. It's people like Blu that I was inclined to move here from RATS in the first place. They take all the fun out of discussion.
          Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 10-04-2012, 01:00 PM.
          There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Packers-Colts Thread

            Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
            What could possibly be complicated about this?
            Exactly, and whatever complication is behind the scenes that doesn't belong in public... the repercussions of these "private complications" are most certainly public. And inexplicably, and unfortunately, it's us who are not in-the-know who are having to deal with it, and with zero explanation. Even with an explanation, there is nothing to justify why a person would come to these boards and conduct themselves the way he/she does.
            Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 10-04-2012, 12:58 PM.
            There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Packers-Colts Thread

              I've got an idea for when people quote OlBlu. Ignore their posts.

              You guys wonder why he trolls so much, when you take the hook, line, and sinker every time. Why would he stop? You're giving him the exact reaction he's looking for.

              You can't control other people, but you can control yourselves.

              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Packers-Colts Thread

                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                ...when you take the hook, line, and sinker every time...
                At some point you have to kick the person who's fishing on your property and ruining your lake out.

                And no, I'm not claiming PD is my property, I'm just making an analogy.
                Last edited by travmil; 10-04-2012, 01:45 PM.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Packers-Colts Thread

                  Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                  You expect him to get carried off on a stretcher huh? That is completely asinine. Luck has only been sacked 5 times, a huge part of this is due to pocket awareness which is constant regardless of how good the pass rusher is. So Luck is getting sacked about 1.7 times a game. Compare that to Mr. Rodgers on the other side the ball who is getting sacked about 4 times a game or your boy RGIII who is getting sacked almost 3 times a game.

                  Rodgers has been sacked more this season than any other QB in the NFL. And if there is one thing the Colts D is at least halfway decent it's rushing the QB.
                  See how easy that was everyone! Just point out the ridiculous of the post and move on.

                  I mean who really cares what Olblu thinks? He has proven himself woefully inept at anything football related time and time again.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Packers-Colts Thread

                    Sorry, but when a "Colts fan" comes on here and predicts our franchise starting quarterback will be carried out on a stretcher while a defender menaces him, I'm not gonna just sit there all "la la la pretty flowers".
                    There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Packers-Colts Thread

                      Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                      Sorry, but when a "Colts fan" comes on here and predicts our franchise starting quarterback will be carried out on a stretcher while a defender menaces him, I'm not gonna just sit there all "la la la pretty flowers".
                      Again just point out how ridiculous his post are and move on. Theres no need to get personal about it with him. He's an old guy with a lot more time to be bitter about Irsays/Peytons decision.

                      So basically know a lost cause and move on. Refute his point with Facts (cats) and just laugh at how pathetic his points really are.

                      Here is a fun fact. The Packers average less passing yards per game than the Colts and only average one more point per game.

                      With Greg Jennings out this game could be a lot closer than I orginally predicted.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Packers-Colts Thread

                        Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                        Sorry, but when a "Colts fan" comes on here and predicts our franchise starting quarterback will be carried out on a stretcher while a defender menaces him, I'm not gonna just sit there all "la la la pretty flowers".
                        If this was the first time this conversation took place, then I fully understand. Yet it's about the 15th time. There's always a reason to not sit there.
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Packers-Colts Thread

                          Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                          What could possibly be complicated about this?
                          Well, PM's with questions to one or more of the admins would have been a better approach. I'm not aware of any PM's.

                          I'm not going to spell out his defense strategy here, for obvious reasons. But the more y'all make it public the more support you are giving to a defense strategy and the less flexiblity you leave with us to deal with him. This isn't going to be tried in the court of public opinion. As you can see, we already addressed the stretcher comment above.

                          As admins, we aren't enjoying this - both his ability to irritate everyone within (generally) the rules of PD and the public lynch mob that has formed.
                          Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                          Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                          Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                          Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                          And life itself, rushing over me
                          Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                          Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Packers-Colts Thread

                            I think the reaction to OlBlu has been more detrimental than OlBlu himself. Threads wouldn't be ruined if people ignored what OlBlu was saying, or if they responded to him by arguing the merits of his posts.



                            We cut one of the greatest players in NFL history. While the overall consensus amongst Colts fans is that it was the right thing to do, you still can't expect every single fan to agree with it. OlBlu does seem to enjoy getting a reaction out of people, but he also seems willing to engage in rational discussion when posters don't fly off the handle.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Packers-Colts Thread

                              Lol you all act like public backlash is not to be expected. No offense, but this is America. If someone is pissing everyone off, you betcha people are gonna speak up. We have as much of a right to voice our opinions as the "problem" who's instigating the responses.

                              There's one way the backlash goes away. Sticking our heads in the sand isn't exactly gonna fly forever.

                              It's frustrating for one person to be allowed to express his opinion, while we're all told not to.

                              Look, I'll give this one more go in the Colts forum. I'll set my frustration aside for the time being and move on, talk football like I would like to do. When he posts his inflammatory but mostly meaningless thoughts, I'll keep my mouth shut, But if I see Blu post another "stretcher"-like comment, there's no guarantee I'll be inclined to keep my thoughts to myself.
                              Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 10-04-2012, 03:42 PM.
                              There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Packers-Colts Thread

                                Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                                Lol you all act like public backlash is not to be expected. No offense, but this is America. If someone is pissing everyone off, you betcha people are gonna speak up. We have as much of a right to voice our opinions as the butthole who's instigating the responses.

                                I never said that no one had a right to complain. I don't want to get into a rift with you over a single poster, because I love the input that you've been giving on the Colts/Luck in recent months, and I think that's far more important than our opinion of OlBlu. I'm just saying that as someone who reads this forum multiple times a day, I think the extreme reaction to Olblu has done more to derail threads than what Olblu himself says.

                                I know I'm just one person and my thoughts clearly aren't shared by the majority here. But he's just never really bothered me that much. I skim over what he says and respond to the posters who I feel like responding to.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X