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

Pharmacy Gave Me Wrong Pills, Trip To Emergency Room

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

  • #16
    Re: Pharmacy Gave Me Wrong Pills, Trip To Emergency Room

    ^Absolutely...the idea the there are frivolous lawsuits all over the place is something of a myth...juries are actually quite hard on plaintiffs...

    this may or may not be a case that is likely to win, but it does not cost anything (except time) to consult with a lawyer...the error by the pharmacy seems to be significant to me...

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Pharmacy Gave Me Wrong Pills, Trip To Emergency Room

      I also am of the opinion that there are too many sue happy people out there....but there is a difference between this and someone spilling coffee on themselves or tripping on a crack in the sidewalk.

      I'd at least consult a lawyer.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Pharmacy Gave Me Wrong Pills, Trip To Emergency Room

        Originally posted by Merz View Post
        I also am of the opinion that there are too many sue happy people out there....but there is a difference between this and someone spilling coffee on themselves or tripping on a crack in the sidewalk.

        I'd at least consult a lawyer.
        lol...this is exactly what I mean...even the McDonalds coffee case wasn't as bad as it was made out: she was like this grandma that suffered third degree burns from the coffee, and the award was ultimately greatly reduced to something like $100K

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Pharmacy Gave Me Wrong Pills, Trip To Emergency Room

          Originally posted by dal9 View Post
          lol...this is exactly what I mean...even the McDonalds coffee case wasn't as bad as it was made out: she was like this grandma that suffered third degree burns from the coffee, and the award was ultimately greatly reduced to something like $100K
          I'm sorry, but 100k for spilling coffee on yourself is kind of ridiculous...is it not?

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Pharmacy Gave Me Wrong Pills, Trip To Emergency Room

            I heard that 100K was overturned, but that is neither here nor there.

            Please update us Hoop. And once again glad you are ok!

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Pharmacy Gave Me Wrong Pills, Trip To Emergency Room

              but anyway, my small point was there are sue happy people out there...whether they win or not doesn't matter. And I think you should actually have a case, Hoop.

              But yeah, no more thread dis-railing.

              Good luck with whatever you decide to do.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Pharmacy Gave Me Wrong Pills, Trip To Emergency Room

                Originally posted by dal9 View Post
                ^Absolutely...the idea the there are frivolous lawsuits all over the place is something of a myth...juries are actually quite hard on plaintiffs...

                this may or may not be a case that is likely to win, but it does not cost anything (except time) to consult with a lawyer...the error by the pharmacy seems to be significant to me...

                He'll win the case, but one of two things would likely happen. He'll win the case and be awarded very , very minimal damages, very little money. Or he'll win and after about 3 years of depositions, hearings, trials, appeals he might get some signicant money or very very little, but for sure his life will be interrupted.

                Almost all cases settle prior to trial but I would be shocked if the insurance company for the pharmacy pays much to settle this case. Now if the wrong meds caused significant longterm health problems, then you are looking at a huge case.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Pharmacy Gave Me Wrong Pills, Trip To Emergency Room

                  The McDonald's case is an interesting one. It's woven its way into being the poster child for frivolous lawsuits but that's probably undeserved.

                  The woman spent 7 days in the hospital and dealt with skin grafts for her 3rd degree burns. More importantly, it wasn't the first time McDonald's had dealt with this type of case so they were well aware of the issue but never addressed it in any way. Not even instructing their employees to warn customers the coffee was very hot or to put a warning on the cups, let alone to use larger cups with a lower fill line to minimize spill/splash potential. And at some point it was discovered McDonald's served some of the hottest coffee in the fast food business (if not the hottest).

                  In the past they'd simply settled the suits. If you're going to settle suits and not address any of the issues surrounding the reason for the suits, and no way try and mitigate future issues, then you should at least be prepared to continue settling suits. But for whatever reason, McDonalds balked at settling this case.

                  You have legitimate and serious injuries, a track record of this problem going unaddressed in the company, a sympathetic 82 year old woman, and you decide THIS is the case you're going to take to trial rather than settle?? IIRC McDonalds even refused to accept the suggestion of court ordered pre-trial mediation for a settle amount in the neighborhood of 200,000.00. ...An amount the plaintiff was likely to have accepted.

                  I don't know what the final award ended up being but don't let this case sway you to believe corporate America is overwhelmed with frivolous lawsuits.

                  And there's this 'thing' where people think it's wrong to sue. But when you've been wronged a lawsuit is exactly the system we have in this country to determine who is right and who is wrong and what the damages/award should be. Short of the lawsuit, you can try and negotiate things short of court but if the other side refuses to see things your way or compromise at all, a lawsuit is our only legal avenue... other than to stick our tail between our legs and turn away.
                  Last edited by Bball; 12-04-2011, 11:47 PM.
                  Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                  ------

                  "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                  -John Wooden

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Pharmacy Gave Me Wrong Pills, Trip To Emergency Room

                    IMO, the pharmacy, if it is a large chain, will likely settle out of court. If it's CVS, Walgreens, etc, I don't think they'd be chomping at the bit for this to possibly become a big deal. Suggesting that he could possibly have years of legal fees to pay seems sort of hard to believe to me.

                    Not to mention. do we really need to have "long term health effects" to for it to be a big issues in this country now? Not to put words in Hoop's mouth, but based on his story he seemed to have been at least quite concerned that he could be having a heart attack. If he doesn't speak up, then who might be next? If there is a careless/reckless person working that pharmacy, how long til someone doesn't get lucky like Hoop did? (Comparatively speaking of course, a trip to the ER is never fun and believe you might be having a heart attack would certainly make it even worse)

                    Sorry, but IMO, this is EXACTLY the sort of thing I wouldn't hesitate suing for.
                    Last edited by Trader Joe; 12-05-2011, 12:55 AM.


                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Pharmacy Gave Me Wrong Pills, Trip To Emergency Room

                      Doing a little GOogle research shows that between 2 and 5% of perscriptions are believed to be filled incorrectly.

                      Then there was this site.

                      http://www.injurylawyersofmidland.co...-errors-injury
                      Last edited by indygeezer; 12-05-2011, 06:29 AM.
                      Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Pharmacy Gave Me Wrong Pills, Trip To Emergency Room

                        I do agree with UB to a point. This probably doesn't have a huge, windfall, payday at the end of the rainbow. Especially if you're thinking 6 or 7 figures. I also question this:

                        Or he'll win and after about 3 years of depositions, hearings, trials, appeals he might get some signicant money or very very little, but for sure his life will be interrupted.
                        In 3 years time how much time will the plaintiff actually have invested in all that? Not very much. I suppose if you don't have 3 or 4 afternoons and maybe a full day for a trial that might never happen to invest in the case over the course of a few years then this could be problematic but I have my doubts there's much more time to be invested than that for the plaintiff.

                        Also, you need a bulldog for an atty who is interested in seeing the right thing done first and foremost and who also isn't totally focused totally on the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. That way they will fight for you even if it looks like the other side is going to stonewall you.

                        But, the point I made earlier is also the point he made... You could've died... but you didn't. You'd be inline for a big payday of you would've died... unfortunately the legal system doesn't get as concerned since you didn't die. So something in between you could've died and it all worked out is your damages. Someone like UB on the insurance company's side would be saying "It all worked out and everyone is fine" while your attorney and his expert will be saying the pharmacy and you are both lucky you aren't dead and that was a likely outcome of this mistake. The rest will be for the judge and jury to sort out.

                        But an attorney or two will be able to tell you where that needle between the two extremes will likely land.

                        There's no doubt the pharmacy owes your medical bills. Whether they owe anything for the worry and threat to your life is the question.
                        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


                        • #27
                          Re: Pharmacy Gave Me Wrong Pills, Trip To Emergency Room

                          Whatever you decide to do, do it soon. The mistake that was made was likely made because the pharmacy had the wrong pills in the wrong location. Meaning that you are not likely to be the only patient they have given the wrong pills to.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Pharmacy Gave Me Wrong Pills, Trip To Emergency Room

                            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                            IMO, the pharmacy, if it is a large chain, will likely settle out of court. If it's CVS, Walgreens, etc, I don't think they'd be chomping at the bit for this to possibly become a big deal. Suggesting that he could possibly have years of legal fees to pay seems sort of hard to believe to me.
                            my point about the long drawn out legal process - that is what it would take to get a big payday. I mean you might get 10 - 15K out of court - sure, but you don't need a lawyer for that. But if you are looking for anything above I would guess $20,000 you are going to have to go the distance with something like this. If I were handling this case based upon what I know I would say OK we'll pay your meds, doctors visit ER and 10K to settle for pain and suffering. But like I say you don't need a lawyer for that.

                            The question is do you want money or not? Or do you just want to make this public so it lessens the chance of it happening again. Any settlement is confidential so if you settle and then disclose it to the media or any public venue you will forfeit your settlement.

                            Honest;ly if you were my son, brother, friend, which you are. I would contact the local pharmacy explain what happened, contact their regional/national office explain what happened. Explain you want your meds paid for, explain it was a scary event, but luckily I am OK (they will request the medical reports if you try to claim longterm problems) maybe ask for 15-20K. but like I say if you do that you won't be able to go to the press.......

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Pharmacy Gave Me Wrong Pills, Trip To Emergency Room

                              Although I posted the link to a lawyer, I don't believe in consumer lawsuit I guess because I can see how we all pay for them in the end.

                              Not a believer in 'pain and suffering" unless say your family had called in the clergy and the family was a'gatherin'.
                              Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Pharmacy Gave Me Wrong Pills, Trip To Emergency Room

                                Originally posted by dal9 View Post
                                ^Absolutely...the idea the there are frivolous lawsuits all over the place is something of a myth...juries are actually quite hard on plaintiffs...
                                I work personal auto/home insurance, and I can assure you that you're not on target. Most cases don't ever see the inside of a court room, and the insurance companies just settle because it's cheaper for them to do so.

                                Lawyers have staff that go up to the police department every single morning and collect all the new police reports, read through them, and then send out letters asking about representations to the people who weren't at fault.

                                If you're rear-ended, you'll have a couple of different letters from lawyers within a matter of days.
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X