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

Tony Stewart kills another driver (Kevin Ward jr.) with his car. Police involved

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

  • #46
    Re: Tony Stewart kills another driver (Kevin Ward jr.) with his car. Police involved

    Whatever happens I really doubt there's going to be a public statement from Stewart on it, beyond the one he already put out, for a long, long time

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Tony Stewart kills another driver (Kevin Ward jr.) with his car. Police involved

      stupid across the board. Don't get out of the car, Ward. Don't be an asshat, Tony. Sad, I doubt any real punishment comes from this though.
      #LanceEffect

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Tony Stewart kills another driver (Kevin Ward jr.) with his car. Police involved

        Originally posted by Bball View Post
        The debate will be if root cause is the act of Ward getting out of his car and walking towards the traffic or Tony blipping the throttle. Tony is going to have to explain that throttle action. I'm assuming he probably already has either explained it in some form, or denied he gassed it.

        If he said he didn't see the kid and didn't expect someone to be standing on the track there and just happened to blip the throttle in that corner to test his suspension after being in an accident then that's probably an end to any chance of criminal charges. If he says he saw the kid at the last minute and reflexes took over and he jerked the wheel and instinctively gassed it then that is probably an end to any chance of criminal charges (if video doesn't dispute that).

        OTOH, if he denies gassing it and the video (and/or other witnesses) shows definitively he did, or if he actually admitted to doing it to intimidate Ward but had no intent to hit him then he will be in potential trouble. Intent doesn't matter at all.

        Stewart's 'cooperation', while maybe the moral thing to do, will be frowned upon by his attorney I imagine.
        Question, everybody says they hear a throttle blip before the Ward gets run over. But honestly the video was taken from across the speedway. there are probably a dozen or so cars on the track. That throttle blip could have been from a car that was closer to the stands where the video was taken. If you have ever been do these kinds of tracks. The drivers don't typically have a caution flag cruise control on their engines. They have to keep the revs above a certain level to avoid stalling out. You'd hear plenty of cars blip the throttle to keep their engines over a certain level. Many of these cars are not very drivable at low speeds.

        I just remember my days at the Speed Drome in Indianapolis, and those cars would be revving their engine all the time under caution. Dirt Track racing is also about giving the fans a great time as well as winning. So they rev those engines and make all sorts of noise going around the track under caution.
        You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Tony Stewart kills another driver (Kevin Ward jr.) with his car. Police involved

          I've yet to see evidence that Tony Stewart did anything wrong. I must be blind.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Tony Stewart kills another driver (Kevin Ward jr.) with his car. Police involved

            Here is something new: http://powernationtv.com/post/fellow...lOrDt.facebook

            Embedded in the comments is the slow-mo video.around the 11 second mark, it seems like Ward jumped up and grabbed onto the car's wing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XvhrPu64Co

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Tony Stewart kills another driver (Kevin Ward jr.) with his car. Police involved

              Originally posted by Stryder View Post
              Here is something new: http://powernationtv.com/post/fellow...lOrDt.facebook

              Embedded in the comments is the slow-mo video.around the 11 second mark, it seems like Ward jumped up and grabbed onto the car's wing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XvhrPu64Co
              Looks like it could be a last gasp at avoidance and trying to pull himself up and away from the tire. Dunno.

              Also in the 'dunno' category initially I read someone saying Tony had a GoPro camera mounted on the car. Later I read a comment saying Tony always has a GoPro camera mounted on the car. Then I read the police saying Tony told the police he didn't have a camera.
              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


              • #52
                Re: Tony Stewart kills another driver (Kevin Ward jr.) with his car. Police involved

                Just read that the investigators now have a 2nd video from another angle

                Edit: Here's the link:

                http://deadspin.com/investigators-ha...%28Deadspin%29

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Tony Stewart kills another driver (Kevin Ward jr.) with his car. Police involved

                  Anyone else think this is getting ugly ??

                  http://espn.go.com/racing/nascar/sto...-kevin-ward-jr

                  No charges have been filed against Stewart, but they are still possible.

                  Ward Sr. also addressed that in his interview with the newspaper, saying: "The one person that knows what happened that night is possibly facing 10 years in prison. Is he going to say what he done?"

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Tony Stewart kills another driver (Kevin Ward jr.) with his car. Police involved

                    http://www.racer.com/latest-stories/...l=&limitstart=
                    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


                    • #55
                      Re: Tony Stewart kills another driver (Kevin Ward jr.) with his car. Police involved

                      I still maintain there will be no criminal charges, but Tony Stewart, the race track, and others are in for a world of hurt in the civil litigation world...

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Tony Stewart kills another driver (Kevin Ward jr.) with his car. Police involved

                        If this somehow does go to some sort of trial. I doubt there would be any race car driver out there willing to testify as an expert witness against Tony Stewart. If you were a race car driver would you want your actions on the track in the middle of a race open for legal interpretation because of the ruling in this case? Slipper slopes!
                        You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Tony Stewart kills another driver (Kevin Ward jr.) with his car. Police involved

                          Originally posted by Stryder View Post
                          I still maintain there will be no criminal charges, but Tony Stewart, the race track, and others are in for a world of hurt in the civil litigation world...
                          The burden of proof is going to be lower, but now that another driver has come out and said he thought Tony did everything he could to avoid hitting Ward, I still think Tony is found not guilty. Now the track on the other hand......
                          "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


                          • #58
                            Re: Tony Stewart kills another driver (Kevin Ward jr.) with his car. Police involved

                            Originally posted by Stryder View Post
                            I still maintain there will be no criminal charges, but Tony Stewart, the race track, and others are in for a world of hurt in the civil litigation world...
                            Stewart will get sued, no doubt. And he will settle for a number of reasons, not the least of which will be to not risk saying anything that would ultimately lead to criminal charges or simply be used for someone's agenda in the future. Doesn't matter what he'd say, someone could twist it for an agenda and the risk would far outweigh the reward IMO.

                            I'm not sure about the track being sued. The most likely thing I could see the track sued for in this case, lighting, would go against the lawsuit against the bigger fish (Stewart). How could you sue Stewart for a wrongful death type charge and then sue the track saying the lighting wasn't sufficient for the safety of the competitors and track crew? You'd be admitting or arguing that Stewart couldn't see him which would be counter to any suit against Stewart. I can think of a couple of other angles for a lawsuit against the track but I think they'd be non-starters and not get past the motion phase considering Ward left his vehicle.

                            What Stewart did and did not say immediately after the accident will determine criminal charges. How those line up with the videos will be important. As a hypothetical, if Stewart told investigators he didn't see Ward and a video shows him flipping him off as he approached Ward then everything else Stewart has said in his defense would go into an entirely different place. OTOH, if he says he didn't see him, was taken by surprise and quickly turned the wheel and instinctively blipped the throttle... and the video (or witnesses) have nothing to contradict that, then he's pretty much in the clear criminally. And there are several other scenarios that I can't see how anyone could dispute them if there's nothing on video to contradict it.

                            But that said, I've seen plenty of people saying the drivers sign waivers so that overrides anything else.... or Stewart tried to intimidate him but he had no intent to hit him so without intent there can be no criminal charges. Anyone believing that is living in fantasyland. Intent is not necessary and the waivers can't override the law.
                            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


                            • #59
                              Re: Tony Stewart kills another driver (Kevin Ward jr.) with his car. Police involved

                              For me I don't care how dumb this kid was for venturing on the track. There is no doubt that Tony made no effort to miss this kid. Regardless of intent, Tony Stewart hit Ward. Ward did not walk into the car.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Tony Stewart kills another driver (Kevin Ward jr.) with his car. Police involved

                                Although I just heard on the radio that Ward attempted to grab the fin of Stewart's car as Stewart was driving by. Maybe this isn't as cut and dry as I first thought. No matter what this is tragic.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X