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

Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes

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

  • #76
    Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes

    Originally posted by Arcadian View Post
    Doesn't it bother people that these aren't predictions which point towards human induced global warming but just events.

    It isn't a case where we see events happening and say, "oh yes this is happening in relationship to this model based our theory". Instead we get these events and say, "There is no rhyme or reason it is happening at this rate so it must be human activity."

    I do believe the world is getting warmer. I also have very little faith in the scientific community to design policy because I don't see any model out there predicting what will be affected or at what rate.

    You might have to face the facts that a model may not exist or ever exist.

    How do you replicate a world and its weather? YOu may say that by programs but programs will not account for everything becuase scientist can't take into account everything. THe world and its response to pollution is much harder to study than say a 100 X 20 mm petri dish full of cells.

    Just because something is difficult to study doesn't mean policies shouldn't be put in place to curb the effects of pollution on our world. The best steps into preventing the harmful affects of global warming is to provide a firm base for further research.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes

      If we can't predict it how can we fit it?

      I would be happier if we focused on solutions for enviromental problems that we do understand like cleaner air and the such.
      "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

      "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes

        Originally posted by Arcadian View Post
        If we can't predict it how can we fit it?

        I would be happier if we focused on solutions for enviromental problems that we do understand like cleaner air and the such.
        If everyone that thought global warming was bogus believed as you did, then we would probably be ok. As long as "cleaner air" included far less carbon dioxide. Unfortunately, most global warming deniers are just looking for excuses NOT to deal with our environmental mess.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes

          I don't think that it is bugus just inconclusive and am skeptical of most claims that say if we do this this will happen in regards to global warming.

          I think to enviromentalist would be much more successful with the general public if they made more modest claims.
          "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

          "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes

            If we wanted to, could we control the climate and force it to do similar things as ascribed to global warming?
            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


            • #81
              Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes

              Originally posted by Bball View Post
              If we wanted to, could we control the climate and force it to do similar things as ascribed to global warming?
              Well, we could dump billions of tons of carbon into the atmosphere and destroy huge swaths of the forests and oceans that filter CO2 out of the atmostphere. That would probably do the trick.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                I heard for over a year now that because of global warming hurricanes will get more numerous and more severe
                don't forget floods, droughts and other natural cataclysms..
                and we should be talking about the global climate change rather than global warming.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes

                  Originally posted by 3Ball View Post
                  Well, we could dump billions of tons of carbon into the atmosphere and destroy huge swaths of the forests and oceans that filter CO2 out of the atmostphere. That would probably do the trick.
                  change "carbon" into "carbon dioxide" and you have the current picture right there

                  btw, I may be somewhat lacking in this field, but.... oceans?

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes

                    IF only the seas would rise a 1 meter that would cause ENORMOUS problems around the globe.

                    I'm sorry, but I don't want to take the chance of this beying true. I rather take the safe road.

                    You people can talk easy there in the states with all due respect. You are one of the most polluting countries in the world (what was it a few years ago? Around 25%?) and because you seem to be to freaking lazy to do much, because it could cost you jobs my country could very well be flooded for a large part in the near future. But, ah well that's not your problem, offcourse.

                    Time to start looking at global interests here, not just those of the US.

                    And before someone starts about China and India as major pollutors. Yes, I know and realize that, but the US is already a highly developed nation and has the financial resources to do something about the risk that we are taking here.

                    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


                    • #85
                      Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes

                      Originally posted by Arcadian View Post
                      I don't think that it is bugus just inconclusive and am skeptical of most claims that say if we do this this will happen in regards to global warming.

                      I think to enviromentalist would be much more successful with the general public if they made more modest claims.

                      if by "claims" you're reffering to some yellow press and stuff, then maybe, but generally the facts are rather obvious. besides, this is a polytical matter, so obviously it is being used (or not used) in the polytical games. just as we are doomed to use oil products for some time to come due to the current polytical cituation, it's naive to think that the Global leaders would really want to deal with Global climate change. Kyoto protocol is a huge step forward, but countries like US still ignore it.. hardly surprisingly too - Bush caring about nature would be somewhat strange, mildly speaking.. anyways, I expect this to reemerge whenever we will be ready to get rid of oil products. even if you go to biofuel, that is the same gasoline, but not made out of oil, but out of wood and various crops, you reduce the ammount of CO2 automatically, because it would be generated anyways in a simmilar amount, whereas by using oil products we "release" CO2, which would be lying there under the surface and would never be created. at least some people say so today I heard that in Germany 30% of all trucks use biofuel already.
                      anyways, I think that we are not only ready to use more biofuel (not to satisfy all needs, but signifficantly more), but we should aslo be ready to move to a whole new means of fuel. the only thing stopping that is the polytical will, or the will of the corporations. companies like Shell like to advertise themselves as pioneers of new energy, but some people think that they simply buy promising alternative fuel companies and kill their projects. some major car compaly can produce an experimental car runing on hydrogen or something (to gather some additional publicity), but who cares about it, when all you have are gas stations.
                      yeah, I'm strongly in favour of Kyoto protocol (simply because it put the nature above economical interests - on paper at least), but I'm sceptical about plans that reach out to as long as 100 years into the future. we should get rid of oil products one way or the other in 50 years at the very most, imho. when we do, the emmisions of CO2 will go down dramatically anyways (if we still have any natural forests left in Latin America by that time, that is but hopefully we'll be able to grow forests much faster in the future. or even "filter" air without green matter alltogether)

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes

                        Originally posted by Kestas View Post
                        don't forget floods, droughts and other natural cataclysms..
                        and we should be talking about the global climate change rather than global warming.
                        Except, with the exception of coastal flooding, an increase in violent weather should not occur due to global warming - the reverse actually.
                        The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes

                          Originally posted by Kestas View Post
                          Kyoto protocol is a huge step forward, but countries like US still ignore it.. hardly surprisingly too - Bush caring about nature would be somewhat strange, mildly speaking.. anyways,
                          LOL - the Kyoto treaty is one of the world's great hoaxes.

                          It's nice that countries signed it. But 13 of the 15 EU countries that signed have increased, not decreased their emissions. Canada's emissions are up 20% and Japan - where the treaty was developed - has no idea how it will be able to reduce emissions to the target. The EU's Environmental Agency predicts that the EU's emissions will be 7% over 1990 levels - not 5.2% below.

                          In fact, member countries are falling all over themselves in figuring out how to avoid Kyoto - part of that may have been when the ICCF said that by meeting the targets the UK's GDP would fall by more than 1% (with a loss of 200,000 jobs) by 2010 - and it's worse for other countries like Spain which would see a 3% GDP drop and lose 800,000 jobs.

                          Kyoto isn't working - and doesn't look like it's going to. Right now the Gang of Six strategy seems much more promising.
                          The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes

                            Originally posted by Mourning View Post
                            IF only the seas would rise a 1 meter that would cause ENORMOUS problems around the globe.

                            I'm sorry, but I don't want to take the chance of this being true. I rather take the safe road.
                            Well I think life begins at the time of conception, so I don't want to take the chance of this being true. I'd rather take the safe road, so we need to stop all abortions right now.

                            Let's take the safe approach, afterall we are talking about human life right now, not 30 or 40 years from now. Abortion is immediate

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes

                              Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
                              Except, with the exception of coastal flooding, an increase in violent weather should not occur due to global warming - the reverse actually.
                              well, why does your statement contradicts with all I know about this subject? maybe I'll have to read more, ... (but what?)

                              in Europe there have been huge floods and droughts every single year recently. for example central Europe has been flooded due to extreme rains for two summers in a row in 2004 and 2005 if I remember correctly. in Lithuania, where I live, weather has been dryer than normal for at least five years now - therefore the regime of the rivers and lakes has been falling. I don't know, this looks to me exactly like what was predicted by those analysing climate change.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Where are all the global warming fueled hurricanes

                                Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
                                LOL - the Kyoto treaty is one of the world's great hoaxes.
                                ok, I'm just an observer, so I can't check your numbers, obviously. and if they're correct, then I believe, there should be a logical explanation that you're not aware off.
                                overall I would be surprised if American press (that I presume you read the most) would write anything good about Kyoto as your governament is so against it. well, let's say I'm sceptical about your arguments. They do not change my opinion.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X