Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

The Wolf Game Begins, Returns and it's United

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

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

    I thought the setting and backstory given was cool, but noone ever went with it. I tried to set my posts up in theme, but not having as much time to be creative as I did over the summer hurt that. Maybe that could be one of the guidelines we set up when we put together the rules. I do have a setting for whenever I get to run the game, whenever that may be.

    Comment


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

      Yeah, I ran out of time to keep up with the stories too. It really IS the best part of TWG though, because without them it's fun, but almost more of a math game or something.

      I promise to bring my A game if we do one in the summer
      You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

      Comment


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

        I wonder how many people could be creative with working almost full time and having classes as well...
        Originally posted by Natston;n3510291
        I want the people to know that they still have 2 out of the 3 T.J.s working for them, and that ain't bad...

        Comment


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

          Originally posted by naturallystoned View Post
          I wonder how many people could be creative with working almost full time and having classes as well...
          I don't think anyone's critisizing you, natstoned. I think we're just saying that we all lacked the time to be creative and write side stories. As did you, and there's nothing wrong with that.
          Word on the street is he doesn't want your money, he only wants to please your ears...
          Bum in Berlin on Myspace

          Comment


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

            Originally posted by naturallystoned View Post
            I wonder how many people could be creative with working almost full time and having classes as well...
            I'm in this boat as well. ^^^

            Comment


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

              Originally posted by Raskolnikov View Post
              I don't think anyone's critisizing you, natstoned.
              Yeah. ^ Not how I meant it
              You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

              Comment


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

                Comment


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







                  Word on the street is he doesn't want your money, he only wants to please your ears...
                  Bum in Berlin on Myspace

                  Comment


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

                    Originally posted by naturallystoned View Post
                    I wonder how many people could be creative with working almost full time and having classes as well...
                    I've been quietly observing since my death. However, I will break from this to agree with others that I like the back stories and creativity in these games. That being said, Naturallystoned is not the reason for the lack of side stories here. We all began with stories and let them die out. These games always take on a life and a culture that is hard to change once it gets set.

                    For me, the stories were better last time, but the game play was better this time. I still have no clue who the wolves are. I tried to look as I was eaten, but the rat b***ards attacked me from behind!
                    "It's wanting to know that makes us matter."
                    -- Tom Stoppard, Arcadia

                    Comment


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

                      Originally posted by Fool View Post
                      Guys, its a very busy day and a very busy weekend for me (I've got conferences today till 10pm and Sunday all day, and my wedding anniversary is Saturday). I came on last night and saw that I was the swing vote and so I stayed up thinking about things. I think I've got something to say and a vote to cast but I know I don't write it all out. I'll try to get on late tonight and see if I can put it to words quickly. I know this game has been delayed a GREAT deal already, but I'm afraid I just don't have the time right now.
                      Btw - happy anniversary!
                      Word on the street is he doesn't want your money, he only wants to please your ears...
                      Bum in Berlin on Myspace

                      Comment


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

                        Dear Bro,

                        they say its always sunny in Philadelphia...
                        I wish I was there now...cause all we're dealing with is, murder, mayhem, and bloodshed!
                        I for one have finally am done with turning the other cheek when it comes to our town's vegetable freak Rasko. He has stolen my veggies from the garden for the last time to use it for his own pleasure. Only a wolf would have such sinful habits. For this reason as well as many others, I'm convinced that Rasko is a wolf.
                        In regards to other wolves....I'm as clueless as you are brother.

                        Have you been able to get in touch with Knight Rider or the A-Team to come and rescue me?

                        It's election time yet again...and I'm starting to wish I had casted my vote to myself...but didn't think it was right for me to nominate myself as one of the candidates....alas...therein lied my mistake.

                        Tell mother to continue her prayers for me....and won't you please come out to save me?!?!

                        -your brother,
                        BellisiMO

                        Comment


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

                          Thanks for waiting all. Here are my thoughts.

                          Originally posted by Anthem
                          Your track record is terrible [Rasko]. You've been wrong far more often than you've been right.

                          And yet those are my top three suspects as well.

                          I hereby nominate myself for mayor, and ask you to change your vote.

                          Originally posted by Anthem

                          Rasko's been wrong a lot, but in this round he's noticed something that I noticed as well... SIG, Ken, and bellisimo form something of a power block. I personally think they're all wolves. Which means that if SIG gets elected as mayor, we are all toast. He has three votes, which means I need four. There's only 8 players left in the game, so I need every vote out there. A vote for anybody else is the Perot/Nader effect... it may be a better vote in theory, but it's likely to lose the election for the party that's "less bad."
                          Here's the thing Anthem. You and Shade have voted along with Rasko so often in this game that voting for you is pretty much voting for him and there's just no way I can do that (vote for Rasko). Everyone he's wanted to hang has been human and the one wolf we found, he was no where near. You three always seem to let on that you've all found the same little tidbit to latch on to that's lead you each seperately to the same conclusion (so far that conclusion has always been to hang a human). Maybe it has always been true and you three have just been incredibly unlucky. But maybe its been a lie that's worked so well so far, that you've never had to change it. But can you be that obviously together and still be the wolves? It seems insane for the wovles to be that obvious. But then again, Pig Nash played the whole game with a picture of a werewolf as his avatar. That seems pretty obvious. And Shade started this game out as mayor and then went against a majority vote for hanging Anthem and instead hung a human and we all agreed that either it was a mistake only a human could make or the most obviously bad move a wolf could make.

                          And then there's that post by NatStoned. Maybe it does mean that there are only 3 wolves. If so, then it seems to me that they have to be all in one of the 2 groups that's formed up immediately after Indy was eaten. Either Shade/Anthem/Rasko or SiG/Ken/bellisimo. Anthem said that not voting for one of the 2 groups that have formed is "a vote for Nader" in effect letting the wolves win the vote because that vote does't help the humans. But if there are only 3 wolves, then the wolves are the ones who need to get at least one human on their side in order not to be out voted. Its also the case that unlike a real election, players in this game can change their vote after its been cast in one direction (so not voting with the right group isn't as perilous, since you can change that vote). And if the wolves are still out numbered, then they are the one's with less freedom to change their vote.

                          Also, if there are 4 wolves other than Karma, why haven't we lost already? Since Karma's not playing, that leaves 4 humans and 4 wolves. The wolves can't be out voted, so doesn't that mean they've won? This point alone makes me think there are only 3 wolves left.

                          So here's what I think. If there are 3 wolves, then one of the groups is entirely full of wolves, and needs either Mourning or I to vote in their direction so as not to be out voted. If there are 4 wolves then either Mourning's a wolf or I'm a wolf. I'm human, and even though I think Rasko is most probably a wolf, I'm not nearly as confident in labeling all 3 of either side wolves (aside from the fact that it appears one group has to be all wolves).

                          So I'm voting for myself, as I am the only person I have complete confidence in. However, this vote comes with a stipulation. If no one changes their vote, then my vote is changed to SiG. At this point, there is no way I'm allowing a wolf (no matter what group they are in) to take office.

                          Mourning, you and I were the only one's not to jump to a side as soon as Indy was eaten. If you're human and you think you can confidently decipher which group is entirely wolves, then continue on as you are and God help us. If you are human and you aren't sure, then vote for me. Voting for me leaves the count 3-3-2. It leaves the wolves one vote shy and incapable of making a wolf mayor (no matter who the wolves are).

                          Comment


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

                            Fool, that's a fair post. And I don't suspect you of being a wolf (not much, anyway), even though I have (in general) not liked your reasoning. I'll be honest, I'm rapidly losing interest in this game. It's just gone on too long.

                            Here's my proposal, tell me what you guys think.

                            Several people suspect that Shade, Rasko, and I are all wolves. I know I'm not a wolf, and I don't think they are either. If one of us is randomly chosen to hang, and that person turns out to be a human, can we still beat the wolves? Or is it too tight at this point?
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment


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

                              I've said before that, since I'm convinced that Anthem, Shade, Mourning, Fool and I are the humans, I have no problem with casting my vote for one of these 5. I might as well stick with that theory now.

                              I change my vote to Fool and ask Anthem, Shade and Mourning to do the same.

                              I hope we can reach a consensus this time.
                              Word on the street is he doesn't want your money, he only wants to please your ears...
                              Bum in Berlin on Myspace

                              Comment


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

                                Dear goodness, can we just elect a mayor already? It's been almost a week!

                                I'm staying with my vote for Anthem.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X