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

What defines a bandwagoner?

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

  • #16
    Re: What defines a bandwagoner?

    Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
    I disagree. I feel if you have the option to support your home town team, and instead choose to support a "better" team, it is indeed bandwagon. If you have no hometown team and pick a team then so be it, but if you choose to root against your hometown team then Yes, that is infact bandwagon.
    Well, you have every right to disagree. But I don't call it being bandwagon.

    That could possibly be front-running but that's quite different. A person is free to choose whatever team they like. They may like their style, they may like a player, they may have family in the team's area, heck they may even like the colors.

    A bandwagon fan is one who switches sides because the new side wins more than the old side. If you are a fan of any team for your whole life then you cannot possibly be bandwagon.
    Originally posted by IrishPacer
    Empty vessels make the most noise.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: What defines a bandwagoner?

      Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
      Well, you have every right to disagree. But I don't call it being bandwagon.

      That could possibly be front-running but that's quite different. A person is free to choose whatever team they like. They may like their style, they may like a player, they may have family in the team's area, heck they may even like the colors.

      A bandwagon fan is one who switches sides because the new side wins more than the old side. If you are a fan of any team for your whole life then you cannot possibly be bandwagon.
      I think you're right. Haha in that case you're just on a different wagon!
      Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: What defines a bandwagoner?

        I've been a lurker on this forum all year now and decided to voice my opinion on a topic that I feel is a big issue on this forum. They are a small minority, but certain Pacer fans have said some truly disgusting things about these so-called "bandwagoners."

        The mindset on this forum seems to be that everyone is a hardcore fan. That is far from the reality. Some people know next to nothing about basketball but still have a good time watching a game now and then anyway. And who are they likely to root for? Probably the team with the buzz, flashy moves, and rings. I certainly don't blame them. These fans are generally going to root for the Durants, Lebrons, and Kobes, and it isn't hard to understand where they are coming from in my opinion. I myself am a Laker fan *gasp*. I have spent all 23 of my years in Southern California and grew up watching Kobe and Shaq on TV. That said, I have watched more Pacers games this season than any other team's. I would be happy with them winning it all because I realize they have something special and I think they are a great group of guys. I know my nostalgia for the Lakers instills me with bias, but does that make me less of a real fan?

        Even though I always admire the Spurs' persistence and talent, I know they won't be the team most root for. I was cheering them on last year when most everyone I knew wanted the Thunder to come out on top in the WCF. The Spurs play fundamental basketball. They don't have celebrity personas. They don't get a lot of showtime on the highlight reels. I'm okay being in the minority and don't hate on anyone who roots for the popular club.

        In summary: Don't take it personally. The casual fans have their reasons. And you know what? A lot of these fans root for the local team "just because" too.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: What defines a bandwagoner?

          Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
          Is it bandwagon to grow up in Indiana, and choose to support the Lakers all your life?
          Absolutely.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: What defines a bandwagoner?

            I definite it as someone who switches teams all the time based on who is the favorite, or who has more wins, or more super stars. If someone is born in Indiana and chooses the lakers to support from the beginning and never changes that then I count them as a true fan. However someone that just started being a laker fan cuz Dwight and Nash then bandwagon. Also when Kobe retires and they switch teams to say the heat or something, bandwagon. People call me a bandwagon Yankees fan, but I've liked them since I was 8 years old.

            Or we could just put the term bandwagoner in the dictionary as Miami Heat fan.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: What defines a bandwagoner?

              The only sports team I love and root for that is from my home state is the Green Bay Packers.

              I could care less about the Bucks and the Brewers. I am a Pacers and an Angels fan.

              I chose those allegiances a LONG time ago (20+ years), and could explain if it were relevant, which it really isn't.

              I've been a fan of those teams in years they were Champions, legitimate contenders, average-at-best and lottery teams.

              My support has not been any greater or lesser depending on which of those situations one of my teams has been in that particular year.

              If anyone calls me a bandwagon fan of any of those teams, there would be words exchanged.

              Just because there is a local team where you grew up, does not make you beholden to root for them. If you like a different team for whatever reason, and hold that allegiance throughout the rest of your sports-fan life... You're not a bandwagon fan. You're a fan.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: What defines a bandwagoner?

                Originally posted by TMJ31 View Post
                The only sports team I love and root for that is from my home state is the Green Bay Packers.

                I could care less about the Bucks and the Brewers. I am a Pacers and an Angels fan.

                I chose those allegiances a LONG time ago (20+ years), and could explain if it were relevant, which it really isn't.

                I've been a fan of those teams in years they were Champions, legitimate contenders, average-at-best and lottery teams.

                My support has not been any greater or lesser depending on which of those situations one of my teams has been in that particular year.

                If anyone calls me a bandwagon fan of any of those teams, there would be words exchanged.

                Why did you choose not to support the Bucks and Brewers? Why did you decide to support the Angels and Pacers?
                There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: What defines a bandwagoner?

                  Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
                  Why did you choose not to support the Bucks and Brewers? Why did you decide to support the Angels and Pacers?
                  I lived in California for a couple years when I was ~4-6 years old. I had relatives who were big Angels fans, and I got to see games.

                  My Dad used to be a paramedic and knew Gene Autry personally when he owned the Angels, I was told all kinds of cool stories.

                  It was something that came naturally to me.

                  I fell in love with the Pacers as a byproduct of Reggie Miller, who was a "So Cal" guy, which at the time I thought was really cool. He also went to UCLA, which again was really cool to me as a little kid.

                  When I was super young I was a Reggie fan first and a Pacers fan second, but obviously, as I matured a bit that quickly went away and now despite Reggie being long gone and in the Hall of Fame, I still live and die by the Pacers. Always have, always will.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: What defines a bandwagoner?

                    When you show up outside the arena with brand new Wal Mart jerseys, literally with the tags still attached to them.
                    "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


                    • #25
                      Re: What defines a bandwagoner?

                      Originally posted by Sandman21 View Post
                      When you show up outside the arena with brand new Wal Mart jerseys, literally with the tags still attached to them.

                      Right.

                      Like for example, someone who has been a casual basketball fan all their life, who watches ESPN and sees that Miami is on a 20+ win streak and suddenly goes:
                      "Hey wow, you know I've always kinda liked those guys. I hope they keep this up" and then proceeds to cheer like crazy all of a sudden for the Heat... Is a bandwagon fan.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: What defines a bandwagoner?

                        a bandwagon fan jumps on to whatever team is hot. i remember back in the 90's, there were plenty of people with jordan jerseys and bulls paraphernalia. today, not so much.
                        sure there are still too many bulls fans around the indy area but it isn't as bad as it used to be.
                        i would say most heat fans are likely bandwagon fans as they haven't been very good until about 7 years ago and i never heard much noise about them but when lebron came around- boom, you got a bunch of them right there.
                        some bandwagon fans are little more loyal as like with the lakers as they rarely have more than a season or 2 when they aren't contenders.
                        edit:
                        bandwagon fans do NOT stick with a team when it goes through years of rough and disappointing seasons.
                        there are several of us here who have been around for several years and remember all too well season after season where there was no realistic hope of doing anything but maybe make a playoffs and end up not even doing that and getting a middling pick and getting stuck in mediocrity. bandwagon fans don't stick around- they move on to whoever is the big deal today.
                        Last edited by clownskull; 03-15-2013, 11:52 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: What defines a bandwagoner?

                          When I was younger I cared a lot about being a true fan, and not a band wagoner, and I was probably annoyingly serious about it. The older you get the less you care about where teams are from and what it means to be a true fan, at least in my experience.

                          I guess I'm a bandwagon Heat fan now, whatever that means. I'll be a Heat fan until LeBron leaves and then I'll be a fan of whatever his next team is. I've obviously been a Pacer fan throughout. The only jersey I own is a Japanese soccer team.

                          I don't fault anyone for liking any team for any reason. We all have our reasons. Just because you were fortunate (or in some cases unfortunate) to be born in a state doesn't mean you exclusively own the right to like that team.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: What defines a bandwagoner?

                            This is the way I see it... If you grew up in a family where they supported a team then there is a very good chance you will do the same. If you were born and raised in Indiana, but your parents were Lakers fans, then I understand how that kid would become a Lakers fan.

                            If you are from Indiana and you never really had a favorite team and you see that a team is having highlights on Sportscenter every night and decide you are a fan of that team. You are a bandwagoner. If you go to every Pacer game where they are playing the Lakers, Heat, and Clippers and you have a jersey for each team and those jerseys have Bryant, James, and Griffin/Paul on the back. You are a bandwagoner.

                            Basically if you follow one team throughout your whole life and stick with them through the worst of times, you can't be called a bandwagoner. That's how I see it.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: What defines a bandwagoner?

                              Been from AZ my whole life, I started to watch basketball when the Suns played the Bulls in the Finals but had no real allegiance at the time. Next year I watched Reggie Miller, really love his game, and followed the Pacers since then. I thought for a minute I might stop following the Pacers after Reggie retired, and it was close a couple times during the JOB era, but I stuck by the team. Now I am a Pacers fan for life.
                              "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

                              ----------------- Reggie Miller

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: What defines a bandwagoner?

                                Why is being a bandwagoner bad?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X