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

Marvin Harrison caught with Guns again

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

  • #31
    Re: Marvin Harrison caught with Guns again

    Originally posted by Stryder View Post
    If it is a gun that is linked to a crime, Marvin will have to at least explain why he has possession of it, especially since, I believe, it is registered to another person. Most people don't carry around handguns that belong to someone else.
    That's not how the law works though. It's the prosectutions job to prove he had it in his possession when/if a crime was used with it. It's not their job to disprove it.

    That's why I said nothing will change. They need something to put not only A gun in his possession at those times, but THAT gun, in his possession.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Marvin Harrison caught with Guns again

      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
      That's not how the law works though. It's the prosectutions job to prove he had it in his possession when/if a crime was used with it. It's not their job to disprove it.

      That's why I said nothing will change. They need something to put not only A gun in his possession at those times, but THAT gun, in his possession.
      I am not saying anything about the last shooting and the law. He will have to answer why he had a gun in his car that wasn't registered to him and he didn't have a permit for it. That's all.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Marvin Harrison caught with Guns again

        He does have a permit to carry a firearm though. You don't need seperate permits to carry seperate weapons. It covers any firearm in his possession.

        He could merely state he was intending to buy it, or since they found it in the glove department, he could say he didn't know it was there and someone must have left it. I don't know if I read it here or not, but I do know I've heard that he told police he did have a permit, but didn't have a gun in the car with him. So the excuse that he didn't put it there, and didn't know it was there, would seemingly work. It might be too simple of an excuse, but again, it's not his job to prove/disprove anything.
        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Marvin Harrison caught with Guns again

          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
          He does have a permit to carry a firearm though. You don't need seperate permits to carry seperate weapons. It covers any firearm in his possession.

          He could merely state he was intending to buy it, or since they found it in the glove department, he could say he didn't know it was there and someone must have left it. I don't know if I read it here or not, but I do know I've heard that he told police he did have a permit, but didn't have a gun in the car with him. So the excuse that he didn't put it there, and didn't know it was there, would seemingly work. It might be too simple of an excuse, but again, it's not his job to prove/disprove anything.
          I don't know anything about gun laws. Does a single permit allow you to carry anyone's firearm? That's kinda strange, if you ask me.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Marvin Harrison caught with Guns again

            I just want to reiterate that we have no idea that this new gun is going to be connected to any crimes, much less a murder.

            But if it is I disagree with Since86 that it means nothing because the police can't put it in Marvin's hand at the time of the shooting.

            What will happen is the police will utilize other circumstantial evidence and create a theory of the crime that has the gun in Marvin's hand (we can tell by comments and the handling of this that they believe he is not wholly innocent). While technically you could say it's the prosecution's problem to put it in Marvin's hand and not Marvin's to prove himself innocent. If a murder that already has some tentacles connecting it to Marvin later finds Marvin with the murder weapon in his car, the connection is made. Marvin will have to prove (or convince) authorities or a jury that it's just a coincidence he has that weapon now and had no knowledge of the initial crime.

            Good luck with that.

            IMHO if that weapon is connected to that crime, this goes to court. And Marvin will have to not only untangle himself from the web saying he pulled the trigger, but also fighting accessory and/or conspiracy charges. And anyone else that gets pulled into this (such as the gun's real owner) will be offered deals if they testify against Marvin.

            At this point Marvin's best bet is to hope that gun is clean. If not, then he made the right move not answering any questions. The police WILL create a theory of the crime that has him involved. Anything he says will be fodder to help them fill in any blanks they might have or keep them from going to the wrong road with their theory. The tighter they make the theory of the crime the better the chance they get a conviction.
            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


            • #36
              Re: Marvin Harrison caught with Guns again

              And the best way to keep them guessing, is by not telling them anything.

              People get "caught" because they start making up stories, and then when one part of their story gets proven wrong, it all goes to crap. It always frustrates me watching procedurals when the defense clams up, but it's the smartest thing to do. Marvin doesn't need to answer anything. It's his legal right to STFU, and it's the smartest thing for him to do.

              I know it may sound like I'm defending him, I'm really not. If he is guilty of murder, he should be put down. I think that with all cases, and am not willing to discuss it here other than saying a statement of fact about my beliefs and not why I believe it.

              But a jury won't find him guilty on circumstantial evidence alone. We are talking about a crime riddled area of the city where people grow up, and stay. Everyone knows everyone. Everyone knows everyone else's problems, and who they have problems with. Dwight Dixon, the murder victim, had many problems in that area with different people. It's not any stretch of the imagination that someone else would kill him. Not one bit. They knew/know he had run ins with more people than Marvin, and **** really hit the fan with him after his infamous run in with Marvin.

              Which brings me to that point. The gun in the first shooting was determined to be a VERY unique gun. A gun type that Marvin happened to own. A gun that they found at the property site of the first shooting, and they still couldn't bring any charges against him. They determined that Marvin's gun was THE gun in that shooting, and he hasn't been arrested on anything resulting from it.

              You really think they're going to be able to bring charges on him from a gun found NOT registered to him, when they couldn't bring any when they found a gun actually used, registered to him, and found in his possession?

              I don't think so. They couldn't bring him up on charges because there were conflicting stories, from eyewitnesses and victims. Dwight Dixon even went back and said he saw Marvin with the gun in his hand, but due to his prior statements they couldn't be used.

              No one is going to roll over on Marvin now, so far after the fact. Even if they go to teh registered owner and say it's on him, unless he gives up Harrison, you still have to deal with the defense showing that it's a deal to get their defendant.

              There's a reason why statistics show successful homicide prosecution drops significantly after 48hrs. And this is the perfect example of why.

              Evidence gets lost, it gets hidden, people get their their stories straight, and too much time in general passes.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment

              Working...
              X