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

My fellow Pacers Digest members.....

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

  • #31
    Re: My fellow Pacers Digest members.....

    Originally posted by VF21 View Post
    What's a QFT post?
    you quote the whole post and type QFT - "Quoted For Truth"

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: My fellow Pacers Digest members.....

      Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
      I'll accept part of the blame and try to do better in the future.

      I will no longer refer to any group as jock kissers or other such terms. I promise to be more civil and allow them to put a liplock on anyone's butt they want to. Uh, sorry...bad habit, but I can change I promise!

      Seriously, I'll be more polite.
      #@&$&# figures it would be a @!!&&$&% old timer causing the problems.
      The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: My fellow Pacers Digest members.....

        Originally posted by bellisimo View Post
        you quote the whole post and type QFT - "Quoted For Truth"
        So basically QFT is the 21st century version of "Word"?
        NBA basketball - taking my breath away since 1963.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: My fellow Pacers Digest members.....

          Originally posted by Harddrive7 View Post
          This all being said, I think that everyone should be treated the same on this board regardless of posts, knowledge, or lengths of their posts.
          That'd be nice but it's never going to happen. They have their favorites.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: My fellow Pacers Digest members.....

            Originally posted by Leisure Suit Larry
            That'd be nice but it's never going to happen. They have their favorites.
            Pacers Digest is like a private club. It has the right to be "chummy" and prefer certain styles and attitudes to others. It has the right to like some people more than others.

            You don't join the club unless you believe, in spite of the "clubbiness" of the club, that the leadership maintains an overall sense of justice and fairness to everyone who genuinely attempts to be a positive contributing member.

            While I have never been an insider, and while I've seen a few odd decisions here and there, I have always felt that basic fairness was at play and continue to trust that the mods will act in a competent way. I am glad they have the freedom, right, and flexibility to deal differently (more heavyhanded) with certain posters that hurt the culture of the board. This is a private club, not a constitutional republic.

            All that being said, I have my own theory as to why the board is in a slump. It is because we have no defining standard from which to strategize and opine.

            I joined this board when Larry Brown was coach, and his consistency in terms of what is expected from good coaching and good players allowed us as posters to point out inconsistencies and provide solutions.

            But today, how does it help to point out someone doesn't box out? Even if Rick read the board every day and suddenly realized this was happening, he, for some reason (cowardice, politics? I don't know) won't make the change despite the obvious. The same is true for certain players' oncourt defiance, rebellion against coaches, basic immaturity, and lack of many fundamentals that, back in the day, would have eventually cost you your minutes as a player. We can point out the problems these days, but what difference does it make?

            Therefore, I think we are reduced somewhat to a "law of the jungle" type situation where the discussion is no longer based on standards but on the players themselves. And the forum is reduced to lobbying for the different players. It reminds me of President Washington's farewell speech where he warned against dividing into political parties, since looking to a standard for self-governance would be replaced and reduced to simply positioning for your own self interest.

            I think this is a great board, and I think the mods do better than a moderate job. The board is in a slump, because standards and quality are slumping at Pacer nation.
            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: My fellow Pacers Digest members.....

              What's wrong with the forum lately? I would say people need to be tactful when posting.

              Basically people aren't using tact. tact (t²kt) n. 1. Acute sensitivity to what is proper and appropriate in dealing with others, including the ability to speak or act without offending.

              Telling someone; "You don't know what the hell your talking about!"
              isn't a tactful way to post even when true. You've made it personal and your choice of wording is bad. That offends people.

              A better way to say the same thing is to say, "I think your wrong." Then you need to give the reason you think the person is wrong or you haven't added anything to the discussion.

              However I do think it's okay to make a post that says, "I agree with what Peck/Hicks/Joe Blow said."

              Why? Because it adds your voice to what the poster you agreed with said.

              Hmm . . .

              (Hicks) What we need is a counter where we can indicate whether we agree or disagree with a post. Can something like that be added to the forum?

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: My fellow Pacers Digest members.....

                Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                or you haven't added anything to the discussion.
                I think that's part of the root problem.

                This board's history is about great discussion/ online conversation. But I'm not sure everyone contributes toward conversation anymore. One-line putdowns may have a time and place, but they are way too common on this board nowadays. If you're going to say something, don't just be prepared to back it up ... BACK IT UP with some substance and don't get all bent out of shape if someone disagrees.

                Discussion/ online conversation requires (1) contributions, and (2) treating people with respect, whether you agree with them or not.

                Yes, we all think we're right. But none of us are professional basketball analysts, coaches, management, etc. We should keep in mind that we are all just very interested, very emotionally attached fans with (strong) opinions, and treat each other as we'd want others to treat us.
                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                And life itself, rushing over me
                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: My fellow Pacers Digest members.....

                  I'm a new poster, (a couple of weeks), and I think its is very admirable that admin. makes an effort to keep this message board under control by clearly and tactfully presenting the rules and desires of the creators of Pacers Digest. I have liked what I've read thus far in posts. It seems most are objective, while some do get a little aggressive and personal. Nobody likes to be put down. Even though I don't like some of our players I would try not to say anything to any of you about them that I would'nt say to them if I met them. Is it kind, necessary, and true? I don't always go by that rule but I try to most often.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: My fellow Pacers Digest members.....

                    I have no problem with the forum. I view it as an organism that constantly changes as new people join and assert themselves. The only reason it's more negative than usual is because it reflects the Pacers performance. And like the CPK's last year, I have no problem with the fans of players, either. Everyone has a reason for being here, and it's not my place to find fault with that, besides wondering why anyone would possibly admit to being a fan of any of our players, that is.

                    As for me not posting, while I do enjoy the forum, I don't enjoy the Pacers anymore, and I doubt I will until major changes are made. Therefore, I don't have much to say, besides QFT's and snarky one-liners, of course.
                    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: My fellow Pacers Digest members.....

                      I've only seen one game this season (when I went durning Christmas break) so that's been the main reason I haven't posted so much.

                      I would say the board has become more reactionary and fairly repetative. If that's what you want to post go ahead but reading through threads about who lost us the game and who should get traded makes me less excited about the board.
                      "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


                      • #41
                        Re: My fellow Pacers Digest members.....

                        I don't agree that the forum has suffered becuase the Pacers as a team has struggled. In fact for years I've always said that the forum was better - more interesting when the team is struggling than when the team is winning. During the 61 win season I thought the forum got a little boring with all the winning. I started a thread about that back then and many agreed with me that things were more interesting after a loss. So I don't think we can say the forum is suffering because the Pacers aren't any good. Sounds like a cop out to me.


                        I also want to say something about the different types of threads. The game thread lends itself to one liners and over-reactions to what just happened in the court and it doesn't lend itself to in depth analysis. This is obvious and we all can agree. But I wonder if the one post game thread is also falling into the same trap. Seems like half the posters discuss the game and the other half rip the opinions of those discussing the game. (I'm thinking out loud here) I wonder if we went back to the way it used to be with 3 or 4 post game threads if that might alleviate this problem.

                        Edit: just an aside, please delete if this isn't the thread for this. One problem I have is when posters make bold and controversial statements but don't back it up with anything. Statements like Rick should be fired, or Rick is a horrible coach - I don't have a problem with the statement - but if you are going to say something like that - don't just say. "Rick should be fired" and leave it at that. Explain why you believe that. If I'm going to make a statement like J.O. should be traded I better explain why in some detail. The more substantial a statement you make the more explanation is needed

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: My fellow Pacers Digest members.....

                          I agree with UB, its boring to talk when its all sunshine, but when its going downhill its a good way to argue with others and get egos raised. As much as you shouldn't probably do it, you know you want to see that car wreck or embarrasing/painful event as it gives you something to talk about.
                          "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

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

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: My fellow Pacers Digest members.....

                            Well no offense to the mods on this board, but they are part of the problem. Poster A indirectly insults somebody, it gets deleted. Poster B indirectly insults somebody in the same way, and NOTHING.

                            With this kind of shoddy moderation what do you expect to happen other than the board to get out of control.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: My fellow Pacers Digest members.....

                              Originally posted by Arcadian View Post
                              I've only seen one game this season (when I went durning Christmas break) so that's been the main reason I haven't posted so much.
                              Same here, and I didn't even get to watch the entire game. Perhaps the lack of national coverage for the Pacers is hurting the boards. I know that this is the first post I've made for a long time now simply because I don't want to formulate opinions on anything I can't see firsthand. I can only conclude so much from box-scores and highlights and so I've just been lurking all season.

                              Is this true for other non-Indiana residents too?

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: My fellow Pacers Digest members.....

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post


                                I also want to say something about the different types of threads. The game thread lends itself to one liners and over-reactions to what just happened in the court and it doesn't lend itself to in depth analysis. This is obvious and we all can agree. But I wonder if the one post game thread is also falling into the same trap. Seems like half the posters discuss the game and the other half rip the opinions of those discussing the game. (I'm thinking out loud here) I wonder if we went back to the way it used to be with 3 or 4 post game threads if that might alleviate this problem.
                                QFT


                                Hah.... no but really, I was going to say something like this, but just was too lazy to type it all up.

                                I'm going to go ahead and say that I, as a PD poster/reader, was spoiled by that season a few years back where we got long, in-depth Odd Thoughts postings on a game-by-game basis. And that's a compliment to Peck, not some desperate plea for more frequent Odd Thoughts postings.... okay, well maybe it was alsoa little bit desperate plea.

                                Anyway, that's always been my favorite part of PD. The discussion Peck would provoke within those threads was PD at its finest, IMO.

                                This shouldn't really read as a complaint, btw... I don't check out the forum as often nowadays to really know what might need changing, or whatever. I'm just kinda rambling, I guess, and I'll stop.
                                You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X