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

The Wolf Game Begins, Returns and it's United

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

  • Re: The Wolf Game Begins, Returns and it's United

    What would be the point of having Karmakillaz in office? He can't make any decisions if he's not around. That means the majority vote would ALWAYS win, and it would be too easy for the wolves to manipulate that.

    Am I missing something?

    Comment


    • Re: The Wolf Game Begins, Returns and it's United

      Fool (as he's just been named as a new candidate for the mayors seat by Raskolnikov)
      That hardly seems fair. You suspect me not on what I've done but what others have done to me?

      Can we get a ruling on how hangings would work if Karmakillaz is voted mayor? Would we just go by whoever got the most votes? That doesn't seem like a good idea considering the number of wolves still left? (btw Mourning, NatStoned confirmed pages ago that there are 5 wolves not 4)

      I've no problem with Indy0731 as mayor, I've said before that I think he's human. I'll vote for him.

      Comment


      • Re: The Wolf Game Begins, Returns and it's United

        Originally posted by Shade View Post
        What would be the point of having Karmakillaz in office? He can't make any decisions if he's not around. That means the majority vote would ALWAYS win, and it would be too easy for the wolves to manipulate that.

        Am I missing something?
        Yes, you are missing the fact that he is the ONLY one we are 100% sure of not taking away that majority. A wolf mayor would only have to ignore a clear majority vote once to basically decide the game, because after that that the humans will have to vote almost 100% right in the following hangings. And even if we immediately hang that wolf mayor who would get into office then? Might also be a wolf!

        Karmakillaz like I explained above also might be one of the wolves himself. The wolves would be stupid to keep him alive as a mayor if he was human. So, IF he survives a turn then it means he's most likely a wolf, but a harmless one as he hasn't been one since the game started.

        ALSO another important thing to not forget is that even IF Karmakillaz is human ... he won't help us in anyway, so the wolves won't kill him if he isn't the mayor either, in numbers we as humans are up a little, in factuality we are almost equal in number. Remember only ONE majority vote would have to be ignored by a wolf mayor to basically win them the game, that's how close this is and that's why I want a mayor we are 100% sure of off not making that call for the wolves.

        Regards,

        Mourning
        2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

        2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

        2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

        Comment


        • Re: The Wolf Game Begins, Returns and it's United

          Originally posted by Mourning
          Yes, you are missing the fact that he is the ONLY one we are 100% sure of not taking away that majority. A wolf major would only have to ignore a clear majority vote once to basically decide the game, because after that that the humans will have to vote almost 100% right in the following hangings. And even if we immediately hang that wolf mayor who would get into office then? Might also be a wolf!

          Karmakillaz like I explained above also might be one of the wolves himself. The wolves would be stupid to keep him alive as a mayor if he was human. So, IF he survives a turn then it means he's most likely a wolf, but a harmless one as he hasn't been one since the game started.

          ALSO another important thing to not forget is that even IF Karmakillaz is human ... he won't help us in anyway, so the wolves won't kill him if he isn't the mayor either, in numbers we as humans are up a little, in factuality we are almost equal in number. Remember only ONE majority vote would have to be ignored by a wolf mayor to basically win them the game, that's how close this is and that's why I want a mayor we are 100% sure of off not making that call for the wolves.

          Regards,

          Mourning
          That completely negates the point of a mayor. The wolves would win EASILY. If the wolves all vote for the same human, it would be virtually impossible for the humans to win.

          I would take the title back before allowing that to happen.

          Comment


          • Re: The Wolf Game Begins, Returns and it's United

            Originally posted by Raskolnikov View Post
            As you can see, I didn't include Karma, because he just doesn't play in this game. If he were a wolf, I assume natstoned would've told us by now. So we're looking at 5 wolves vs. 7 humans. I will exclude the certain humans from this list.

            Anthem, Fool and I have proven their humanity according to the above rationale. Belli has also given away his vote to Ty in round 4 (but unfortunately changed it because of the "deadline"). That gives us another human.

            As for Shade, our former mayor, there are a lot of signs to show that he's human. First of all, he saved Anthem, a human. I know he killed the seer instead, but if he were a wolf, there was no reason at all for not following the majority vote and kill Anthem. Why risk the chance of becoming suspicious?

            Now I'd like to ask all of you humans, who have me, Shade and Anthem on their wolves lists (if there are any): Why? Don't you agree with the above rationale? It seems to me that it's pure logic and nothing but logic.
            Can't believe I missed this before...

            You are saying you are sure Anthem is a human, but only on the basis of giving up his vote to Tyrion. I don't recall Tyrion putting Anthem on many if ANY of his lists as suspects, so yes, IF I were a wolf I would very likely give my vote to Tyrion aswell, especially if atleas on or two other wolves weren't on Ty's list either. That's an extremely safe way to give up your vote and taking away suspicion on yourself.

            Further, does anybody realize that IF Anthem is a wolf that his life got saved by our Mayor, Shade at that time, who a lot of people are not sure about either. He might have been a wolf and saved a fellow wolf right there, by ignoring a CLEAR majority and hanging an innocent one in his place, worse by hanging our seer . But, right he MUST be human .

            Raskolnikov is so sure of Anthem beying human that he since the beginning hasn't voted against him, not even when Anthem had a large majority stacked up against him? Why? What was that based upon? I also would like to point out that they voted the same in round two of this game, BOTH on me.

            Regards,

            Mourning
            2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

            2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

            2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

            Comment


            • Re: The Wolf Game Begins, Returns and it's United

              Originally posted by Shade View Post
              That completely negates the point of a mayor. The wolves would win EASILY. If the wolves all vote for the same human, it would be virtually impossible for the humans to win.

              I would take the title back before allowing that to happen.
              Do you think so? I don't aggree. I think most people would put out a vote in principle waiting to see who votes in principal for whom before the deadline. I think THAT is what would make a LOT of things clear.

              IF we do elect a wolfmayor we are dead NOW. You do consider that possibility do you? I mean ... no disrespect, but for all I know you could be a wolf, better I suspect you are (by killing the seer and saving Anthem in one turn and then later stepping down when it gets too hot under your feet), IF we are going to give all our authority to a mayor who we can not be 100% sure of then it could be game over before we elect a mayor that just doesn't do anything and by doing that gives as a second chance.

              Regards,

              Mourning
              2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

              2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

              2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

              Comment


              • Re: The Wolf Game Begins, Returns and it's United

                Originally posted by Shade

                I would take the title back before allowing that to happen.
                Who says you can do that? As far as I'm concerned your special powers in this game ended when you left office, same with Rasko, if he doesn't like who gets voted mayor he can't just pop up and say "Nope, take backs. I'm mayor again!"

                That being said, I agree with you that leaving it up to just a simple majority means hoping the humans all act together, which I don't know why anyone would assume that's going to happen (seeing as there are no groups larger than 3 or so that believe the same people are wolves).

                Comment


                • Re: The Wolf Game Begins, Returns and it's United

                  Originally posted by Fool View Post
                  That hardly seems fair. You suspect me not on what I've done but what others have done to me?
                  Originally posted by Fool View Post
                  I came on and saw what had happened last night but didn't post anything as I thought I'd think on things a while.

                  I've never been a Rasko supporter and I know there are a few here that are confident he's a human but I am not one of them. At this point though, I've seen the support for Rasko's suspects and I guess I'm willing to give it a shot. I would not have chosen Rasko for mayor but there are a couple others I would have considered worse office holders.

                  I vote for Mourning.
                  Ok, fair enough, Fool, but don't say the above is a strong justification for sending me to the gallows then either, because a large part of giving support to Rasko's list could also very well have been wolves, no? .

                  Regards,

                  Mourning
                  2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                  2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                  2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                  Comment


                  • Re: The Wolf Game Begins, Returns and it's United

                    True enough. Not many of anybody's suspicions seem made of strong material.

                    Comment


                    • Re: The Wolf Game Begins, Returns and it's United

                      Originally posted by Fool View Post
                      That being said, I agree with you that leaving it up to just a simple majority means hoping the humans all act together, which I don't know why anyone would assume that's going to happen (seeing as there are no groups larger than 3 or so that believe the same people are wolves).
                      That's true. I can't deny that. I still think it's better then guessing we won't appoint a wolf into office, but not beying sure about it . Not beying sure about it and accidentally moving one into that position means "game over" virtually instantly.

                      The new mayor just ignores the vote and then in the night they kill a human. What's the score then? Even if we as humans then have a one man advantage and kill the wolf mayor who do we appoint then? I listed extensively also the tactical reasons for WHY raising Karmakillaz to the mayor's seat would be a very good move. The longer he lives the more sure we can be he's one of the wolves is one of the reasons.

                      Regards,

                      Mourning
                      2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                      2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                      2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                      Comment


                      • Re: The Wolf Game Begins, Returns and it's United

                        Originally posted by Mourning View Post
                        Do you think so? I don't aggree. I think most people would put out a vote in principle waiting to see who votes in principal for whom before the deadline. I think THAT is what would make a LOT of things clear.

                        IF we do elect a wolfmayor we are dead NOW. You do consider that possibility do you? I mean ... no disrespect, but for all I know you could be a wolf, better I suspect you are (by killing the seer and saving Anthem in one turn and then later stepping down when it gets too hot under your feet), IF we are going to give all our authority to a mayor who we can not be 100% sure of then it could be game over before we elect a mayor that just doesn't do anything and by doing that gives as a second chance.

                        Regards,

                        Mourning
                        I only stepped down because virtually EVERYBODY wanted me to.

                        And I feel much safer with Rasko than with the alternatives that have been mentioned.

                        It would be very easy for one wolf to see who the other votes for, then all the other wolves follow suit. The humans' votes are likely to be somewhat scrambled, and with the numbers nearly even now, the wolves would win every majority vote. Then the game would end without a single wolf being killed. That would suck beyond belief.

                        Comment


                        • Re: The Wolf Game Begins, Returns and it's United

                          Originally posted by Fool View Post
                          Who says you can do that? As far as I'm concerned your special powers in this game ended when you left office, same with Rasko, if he doesn't like who gets voted mayor he can't just pop up and say "Nope, take backs. I'm mayor again!"

                          That being said, I agree with you that leaving it up to just a simple majority means hoping the humans all act together, which I don't know why anyone would assume that's going to happen (seeing as there are no groups larger than 3 or so that believe the same people are wolves).
                          It's not just "take backs." My successor is dead.

                          Comment


                          • Re: The Wolf Game Begins, Returns and it's United

                            Originally posted by Shade View Post
                            I only stepped down because virtually EVERYBODY wanted me to.

                            And I feel much safer with Rasko than with the alternatives that have been mentioned.

                            It would be very easy for one wolf to see who the other votes for, then all the other wolves follow suit. The humans' votes are likely to be somewhat scrambled, and with the numbers nearly even now, the wolves would win every majority vote. Then the game would end without a single wolf being killed. That would suck beyond belief.
                            Let me ask you: where is your proof that Raskolnikov is as innocent as you seem to be claiming? What has he done, besides giving up his vote to Tyrion on whoms list he himself wasn't even mentioned and I don't recall Anthem (who I also think is a wolf) beying on Tyrion's lists either. That's a pretty safe risk to take I would say.

                            Whatelse has he done besides throwing theory after theory out here? None of which btw has proven correctly so far. Why are you so sure he's human? I don't get it at all.

                            Also if our new mayor is a wolf it's also game over, big chance it's over even earlier than in my proposal.

                            Regards,

                            Mourning
                            2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                            2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                            2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                            Comment


                            • Re: The Wolf Game Begins, Returns and it's United

                              Really anbody who thinks I'm a wolf is gonna be in for a severe disappointment unless of course they are wolves themselves are just trying to get my head in a noose. Really I believe the wolves already have complete control of the game at this point.

                              Rasky if you think I was being "aggressive" I apologize, but you would be saying the same thing if someone you thought was a wolf was randomly given the most power in the game.


                              Comment


                              • Re: The Wolf Game Begins, Returns and it's United

                                I really find it very funny the stick together like glue mentality that Shade, Anthem, and Rasky have. I mean I have not had strong bonds with anyone really, but I have followed my gut. I find it very interesting that Rasky is now a part of such a strong alliance even though he chastised us on voting as a group early in the game. I think only a group of wolves would stick together so closely.


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X