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

Murder suspect caught at Shawne Williams home

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

  • Re: Murder suspect caught at Shawne Williams home

    Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
    i suppose i should also mention i got a 7 on my SATs -- which i assume explains my capitalization issues.
    Don't you get 500 just for getting your name correct?

    Comment


    • Re: Murder suspect caught at Shawne Williams home

      Originally posted by Gyron View Post
      Don't you get 500 just for getting your name correct?
      never underestimate the difficulty of "middle initial" when you're standardized testing on peyote
      This is the darkest timeline.

      Comment


      • Re: Murder suspect caught at Shawne Williams home

        Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
        never underestimate the difficulty of "middle initial" when you're standardized testing on peyote
        Agreed.

        I could have sworn the answer to Question 17 in the math section was "a detailed watercolor of an indian buriel ground using my own bodily fluids." Turns out it was "B" all along.
        Read my Pacers blog:
        8points9seconds.com

        Follow my twitter:

        @8pts9secs

        Comment


        • Re: Murder suspect caught at Shawne Williams home

          Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
          i was always taught when in doubt, go with C.



          i'm astonished so many haven't already grace'd that dude.
          Just in case this is aimed at me, I ain't no dude.
          Last edited by Elgin56; 02-28-2008, 02:26 PM.

          Comment


          • Re: Murder suspect caught at Shawne Williams home

            Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
            I find this article relevant. As time goes on, it will be more and more difficult to sever ties with convicts. The world many of you live in, one where you would never associate with someone who has ever been convicted of a crime, is getting smaller and smaller.

            http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/us...hp&oref=slogin


            By ADAM LIPTAK
            Published: February 28, 2008
            For the first time in the nation’s history, more than one in 100 American adults is behind bars, according to a new report.


            Nationwide, the prison population grew by 25,000 last year, bringing it to almost 1.6 million. Another 723,000 people are in local jails. The number of American adults is about 230 million, meaning that one in every 99.1 adults is behind bars.

            Incarceration rates are even higher for some groups. One in 36 Hispanic adults is behind bars, based on Justice Department figures for 2006. One in 15 black adults is, too, as is one in nine black men between the ages of 20 and 34.

            The report, from the Pew Center on the States, also found that only one in 355 white women between the ages of 35 and 39 is behind bars, but that one in 100 black women is.

            The report’s methodology differed from that used by the Justice Department, which calculates the incarceration rate by using the total population rather than the adult population as the denominator. Using the department’s methodology, about one in 130 Americans is behind bars.

            Either way, said Susan Urahn, the center’s managing director, “we aren’t really getting the return in public safety from this level of incarceration.”

            “We tend to be a country in which incarceration is an easy response to crime,” Ms. Urahn continued. “Being tough on crime is an easy position to take, particularly if you have the money. And we did have the money in the ’80s and ’90s.”

            Now, with fewer resources available to the states, the report said, “prison costs are blowing a hole in state budgets.” On average, states spend almost 7 percent on their budgets on corrections, trailing only healthcare, education and transportation.

            In 2007, according to the National Association of State Budgeting Officers, states spent $44 billion in tax dollars on corrections. That is up from $10.6 billion in 1987, a 127 increase once adjusted for inflation. With money from bond issues and from the federal government included, total state spending on corrections last year was $49 billion. By 2011, the report said, states are on track to spend an additional $25 billion.

            It cost an average of $23,876 to imprison someone in 2005, the most recent year for which data is available. But state spending varies widely, from $45,000 a year for each inmate in Rhode Island to just $13,000 in Louisiana.

            The cost of medical care is growing by 10 percent annually, the report said, a rate that will accelerate as the prison population ages.

            About one in nine state government employees works in corrections, and some states are finding it hard to fill those jobs. California spent more than $500 million on overtime alone in 2006.

            The number of prisoners in California dropped by 4,000 last year, making Texas’s prison system the nation’s largest, at about 172,000 inmates. But the Texas legislature approved broad changes to the state’s corrections system, including expansions of drug treatment programs and drug courts and revisions to parole practices.

            “Our violent offenders, we lock them up for a very long time — rapists, murderers, child molestors,” said John Whitmire, a Democratic state senator from Houston and the chairman of the state senate’s criminal justice committee. “The problem was that we weren’t smart about nonviolent offenders. The legislature finally caught up with the public.”

            He gave an example.

            “We have 5,500 D.W.I offenders in prison,” he said, including people caught driving under the influence who had not been in an accident. “They’re in the general population. As serious as drinking and driving is, we should segregate them and give them treatment.”

            The Pew report recommended diverting nonviolent offenders away from prison and using punishments short of reincarceration for minor or technical violations of probation or parole. It also urged states to consider earlier release of some prisoners.

            Before the recent changes in Texas, Mr. Whitmire said, “we were recycling nonviolent offenders.”


            So your point is that there are a lot of people in jail and we should not hold it against Williams for associating with a f^&^&ng murderer? Nice try, but no ciiigarr.

            Comment


            • Re: Murder suspect caught at Shawne Williams home

              Originally posted by Elgin56 View Post
              Just in case this is aimed at me, I ain't no dude.
              Same here.

              Comment


              • Re: Murder suspect caught at Shawne Williams home

                I'm going back to the Politics board, it is less dangerous over there.
                Last edited by Elgin56; 02-28-2008, 02:45 PM.

                Comment


                • Re: Murder suspect caught at Shawne Williams home

                  Latest release:

                  http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...TS04/802280535

                  By Jon Murray and Kevin O'Neal

                  "Bohannon was driving a Dodge truck registered to Williams when he was arrested, the report said."

                  "Mr. Williams did not invite this individual to either visit or stay at his home. ... It would be entirely inaccurate to assert in any way that Shawne assisted the person who is now in custody."

                  --


                  ....except for letting him drive or use a car registered in his name????????

                  Comment


                  • Re: Murder suspect caught at Shawne Williams home

                    Originally posted by Speed View Post
                    Latest release:

                    http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...TS04/802280535

                    By Jon Murray and Kevin O'Neal

                    "Bohannon was driving a Dodge truck registered to Williams when he was arrested, the report said."

                    "Mr. Williams did not invite this individual to either visit or stay at his home. ... It would be entirely inaccurate to assert in any way that Shawne assisted the person who is now in custody."

                    --


                    ....except for letting him drive or use a car registered in his name????????

                    If the Pacer's management think that the average Joe can't see through this BS, they are dumber than I thought. You would think that they would have learned that covering up for players is why they are in deeeep trouble with their fan base. Oh, I understand that some will say it is the losing that has driven the fans away, but they are as clueles as Bird and Donnie are.


                    Raise your hand if you believe that the average person would not be in big trouble with the law for having a wanted murderer driving your car and "allegedly" staying with you at your house.
                    Last edited by Elgin56; 02-28-2008, 02:58 PM.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Murder suspect caught at Shawne Williams home

                      Originally posted by Speed View Post
                      Latest release:

                      http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...TS04/802280535

                      By Jon Murray and Kevin O'Neal

                      "Bohannon was driving a Dodge truck registered to Williams when he was arrested, the report said."

                      "Mr. Williams did not invite this individual to either visit or stay at his home. ... It would be entirely inaccurate to assert in any way that Shawne assisted the person who is now in custody."

                      --


                      ....except for letting him drive or use a car registered in his name????????
                      I'm assuming they meant KNOWINGLY assisted the person who is now in custody.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Murder suspect caught at Shawne Williams home

                        Perhaps last fall the guy was staying with SW and was shown where the keys to the cars are kept. So now as he's trippin' thru on his way to his hideout he says..."I need me some wheels and I know just where to get them." And so perhaps a little B & E gets him a ride, only the IMPD has been tipped that the guy is on the run and to be watching for him. Then at halftime SW is informed as to what has happend and is excused to go talk with the law.



                        Could happen
                        Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Murder suspect caught at Shawne Williams home

                          Originally posted by Elgin56 View Post
                          So your point is that there are a lot of people in jail and we should not hold it against Williams for associating with a f^&^&ng murderer? Nice try, but no ciiigarr.

                          The only point you've been making all along Elgin56 is that you're adept
                          at jumping to conclusions without having all the facts.

                          So, just to be equally ridiculous, I am going to likewise jump to some
                          conclusions as follow:

                          1.) How did the cops know where to find this guy, and when? Simple.
                          They had been tailing him all along. They had a GPS tracking device
                          mounted under his vehicle even before any of this happened.

                          2.) Was Shawne associating with him? No, Shawne was getting ready for
                          a game and wasn't even home. He didn't even know this guy was coming
                          to town.

                          3.) Why did this guy go to Shawne's place? Because it was a place he
                          knew of out of state to flee to after having shot and killed somebody.

                          4.) Why was he driving Shawne's vehicle? Having found Shawne to not to
                          be home, stole the vehicle so he could ditch his, since he knew the cops
                          would be after him.

                          5.) What would have happened had Shawne been home when he got there?
                          He would have held Shawn at gunpoint and demanded lots of money and
                          his vehicle, then tied up or shot Shawne before trying to further his
                          escape.

                          Now, have I successfully jumped to as many conclusions without having
                          the facts as you have??

                          Comment


                          • Re: Murder suspect caught at Shawne Williams home

                            Originally posted by Elgin56 View Post
                            If the Pacer's management think that the average Joe can't see through this BS, they are dumber than I thought. You would think that they would have learned that covering up for players is why they are in deeeep trouble with their fan base. Oh, I understand that some will say it is the losing that has driven the fans away, but they are as clueles as Bird and Donnie are.

                            I'm starting to worry about aiding and abetting for Shawne, honestly. I mean if a guy wanted for Murder uses your car, while hiding out 2 states away, under an alias. I would say you would have to answer some questions. Did he steal the car, did he often use the car? Seriously, if I loaned my car to a guy wanted for murder, I'd be sitting in a cell right now, I bet.

                            Nice work, by the way, that the Indy police let him go all they way through the court system with a fake name and ID. Nice work fellas. I feel my money for that speeding ticket and taxes has went to good use!! Bitter, maybe

                            Comment


                            • Re: Murder suspect caught at Shawne Williams home

                              Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
                              Perhaps last fall the guy was staying with SW and was shown where the keys to the cars are kept. So now as he's trippin' thru on his way to his hideout he says...I need me some wheels and I knowjust where to get them. And so perhaps a little B & E gets him a ride only the IMPD has been tipped that the guy is on the run and to be watching for him.



                              Could happen

                              Yep, and I am going to win the lottery today.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Murder suspect caught at Shawne Williams home

                                Originally posted by RamBo_Lamar View Post
                                The only point you've been making all along Elgin56 is that you're adept
                                at jumping to conclusions without having all the facts.

                                So, just to be equally ridiculous, I am going to likewise jump to some
                                conclusions as follow:

                                1.) How did the cops know where to find this guy, and when? Simple.
                                They had been tailing him all along. They had a GPS tracking device
                                mounted under his vehicle even before any of this happened.

                                2.) Was Shawne associating with him? No, Shawne was getting ready for
                                a game and wasn't even home. He didn't even know this guy was coming
                                to town.

                                3.) Why did this guy go to Shawne's place? Because it was a place he
                                knew of out of state to flee to after having shot and killed somebody.

                                4.) Why was he driving Shawne's vehicle? Having found Shawne to not to
                                be home, stole the vehicle so he could ditch his, since he knew the cops
                                would be after him.

                                5.) What would have happened had Shawne been home when he got there?
                                He would have held Shawn at gunpoint and demanded lots of money and
                                his vehicle, then tied up or shot Shawne before trying to further his
                                escape.

                                Now, have I successfully jumped to as many conclusions without having
                                the facts as you have??

                                Well, if it walks like, I am not even going to finish that, it might be too deep for you to understand.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X