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

COVID-19

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

  • Originally posted by Natston View Post

    In my personal opinion, Trump made a gaffe. Instead of swallowing his pride and admitting that he said something incorrect, he decided to play offense. So he says that it was intentional sarcasm to save face and to “own the libs”. This has been an ongoing theme with Donald J. Trump, and it makes it difficult to defend him. Not that I necessarily want to defend him, but I am trying to stay neutral and objective...
    I agree with all of this. The irony is his PR team could not keep up with what excuse they were going to run with. When it reality if he just said “yeah I misspoke, I am going on 10 minutes of sleep while leading a country” I think MOST people would have let it go.

    Instead, as you said, he took the offense strategy. Only problem was he has never used sarcasm (in his tweets or his briefing before) and him trying to “own the libs” in this case just made him worse.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

      You're voting for Biden, right? Just embrace him.

      Of course you might need to pull him off the latest woman he's groping.
      You serious right now? You want to play that card?

      Remember this gem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald...Hollywood_tape

      Comment


      • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
        So you really think CBS, ABC and NBC are not liberal? Show me links where they praise Trump. I will respond with what I can find with them criticizing him.
        I feel like you missed my point.

        My direct quote - “Yet I hear plenty of people say “everything is conservative except cable TV and newspaper”. Perception is in the eye of the beholder

        Note, I never said cable TV don't lean left (though I have heard and seen plenty of stories that praise many Presidents. Admittedly I have not watched much 60 minutes since Trump was elected but surely at least one story they have done is positive on him)

        OK, I may have a hard time finding that since so much of what I post is to defend against the liberal onslaught from dozens of news outlets, far more than Fox. But I am sure I posted somewhere that Fox used to be pretty fair and balanced with programs like Hannity and Colmes where they debated things on an even playing field. Unfortunately it is now just Hannity and I agree there is a lot of bias while also exposing left wing bias.
        Bolded for emphasis

        I'm fine with people disagreeing on everything except for the fact he is attacked viciously by the "reporters" and really on a day to day basis by MSM. This is the PRIME reason I will vote for him. The unfairness and extreme bias against him. I would vote for maybe half of the Democrats out there but-for the biased attacks on him throughout his first 3 years including the completely partisan impeachment.
        So you are fine with people as long as they agree with you and dont disagree with you. Got it.

        P.S. I dont think he is attacked daily and I think its comical to say he is “attacked viciously”

        So really, if the left had ever treated him fairly and nominated a half-way decent candidate, I wouldn't be voting for Trump in 2020. As it is, I know I will be voting for him and it has less to do with him and more to do with MSM.
        I don’t think this is true. I don’t know you personally, but going back and looking at old posts I don’t believe it. If I am wrong so be it.

        Either way it doesn’t matter and IMO Biden has the nomination all but locked up

        Comment


        • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
          Just to be crystal clear...if you recall. Most people in the GOP were not happy Trump was nominated. John Kasich in particular didn't attend multiple Trump gatherings. Many people and I think even Mitch McConnell originally expressed displeasure.

          The cold hard reality is that Trump and his cult followers had enough votes and took over the GOP. Most of the GOP are not pleased about that. It would be much like Bernie taking over the Democratic Party but the Dems would never allow it with their super delegate fix to their system. See, this is why many of us on the right would be pleased to see him impeached and removed and replaced with Mike Pence.

          Yet most of you (looking at you V, dal9, vapacerfan, etc) will either not read this post, understand it or admit it's true. You will lump everyone in as a cult follower when a lot of us just hate the MSM and the complete bias more than we dislike Trump. But go ahead with your narrative. I get it. It's easy to avoid the messy truths...
          Going back to address this post (I am going to skip the snarky “understand it” comment because there is plenty of my posts you have ignored when called out).

          If your point is that the “old GOP” has been hi-jacked by a reality TV star who was even shocked himself when he won and that has turned folks off....then guilty as charged. If your point was you are some moderate and you only support Trump because he is the POTUS any anyone who doesn’t is a “stupid lib” then yes, guilty as charged. Now if you want to actually be objective and use some logic you would see its possible to be a conversation and disagree with a conservative President. Especially when that President is more concerned with ratings than getting done.

          Since you wanted to call folks out by name I will do the same. Looking at you and Others who are about 100% guaranteed to defend Trump regardless of what he does. You may not want to admit it but you literally have an excuse lined up, and even when you 100% see he is wrong you say he is “brainstorming like geniuses do” among many other excuses.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post

            Quoting for emphasis.

            Its not a rally. Its a press briefing from the HIGHEST ELECTED POLITICAL OFFICE about a MEDICAL PANDEMIC. The fact he has made them rallies (and the fact you openly accept them as rallies) is a problem
            When I say they are rallies, it's only because the left starting saying that. In a way, I am mocking the left by calling it a rally. Fact is, he's hardly getting cheers from those in attendance, so in reality it's very, very far from a rally.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post

              Speaking of avoiding messy truths.

              Find me one post where I called you a cult follower and I will give you my next paycheck (hint: you cant and wont).
              Fair point. I agree.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post

                You serious right now? You want to play that card?

                Remember this gem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald...Hollywood_tape
                V started the embrace thing and all I'm saying is that he also needs to embrace his new guy (Biden). As for Trump's morals, they are trash. The issue though is that the left is just as bad. It's really hard to say which candidate is worse so you have to consider other aspects such as, shall I say, the ability to remember your own name.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post

                  I feel like you missed my point.

                  My direct quote - “Yet I hear plenty of people say “everything is conservative except cable TV and newspaper”. Perception is in the eye of the beholder

                  Note, I never said cable TV don't lean left (though I have heard and seen plenty of stories that praise many Presidents. Admittedly I have not watched much 60 minutes since Trump was elected but surely at least one story they have done is positive on him)
                  No, I think this is more a generational difference. ABC, NBC and CBS may be picked up with an antenna and have therefore been considered broadcast TV (over the air waves). They are available on cable but most people in my generation would not call those stations cable. CNN, MSNBC, Fox, etc. have always been cable. I don't believe any of them broadcast. My point is that not just cable TV but also the stations that broadcast are all liberal except FNC.


                  Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
                  So you are fine with people as long as they agree with you and dont disagree with you. Got it.

                  P.S. I dont think he is attacked daily and I think its comical to say he is “attacked viciously”
                  Do you even watch the rallies and how many of the "reporters" constantly ask gotcha questions to embarrass? Of course they constantly attack him. He almost has to throw some of them out.


                  Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
                  I don’t think this is true. I don’t know you personally, but going back and looking at old posts I don’t believe it. If I am wrong so be it.

                  Either way it doesn’t matter and IMO Biden has the nomination all but locked up
                  [/QUOTE]

                  There is no point going back to old posts because this is new. There has never been another president in the history of our nation (or at least since 1970) who has been attacked by the media to this extent and it's not just cable and broadcast TV. It's all over new media and the internet. Here is a sampling of Trump articles posted on Yahoo and Google. 95% attacking Trump and coming from multiple "news" organizations:

                  HuffPost
                  Republican Group Asks Americans A Critical Question In Scathing Anti-Trump Ad

                  Inside Edition CBS

                  Dr. Birx’s Face When the President Suggested Injecting Bleach Says It All

                  HuffPost Life
                  You Are Not Alone If You Don't Care About Work During The Coronavirus Pandemic

                  Associated Press
                  Fox didn't immediately challenge Trump's disinfectant remark

                  The Wrap
                  New York Times Deletes Tweet Saying ‘Some Experts’ Warn Against Ingesting Disinfectant

                  Associated Press
                  Trump approved of Georgia's plan to reopen before bashing it

                  HuffPost
                  Your Survival Of COVID-19 May Depend On How Much Your Governor Fears Trump

                  Associated Press
                  Senior official cited by Trump is subject of investigation

                  The Wrap
                  Trump’s Brief Coronavirus Briefing Sends #TrumpIsALaughingStock Trending


                  The Guardian
                  Debacle of Trump's coronavirus disinfectant comments could be tipping point

                  The Guardian
                  How a media-distracted Trump ended up derailing his own briefing

                  WNT
                  Trump calls his 'disinfectant' comment sarcasm

                  The Boston Globe
                  Say it loud, say it clear: Donald Trump needs to resign over his handling of the coronavirus

                  Comment


                  • OK vapacerfan. Just grabbed your posts from last night. All but 1 was anti Trump. Not expecting you to be neutral just pointing out that this negativity toward Trump is easily found and you are finding a ton of it.



                    Post #3719 - Negative about opening up Georgia

                    In GA, @KeishaBottoms: "I just received our new numbers, and our numbers are up 28.8% in positive tests since last week and deaths are up 37.23% since last week. We aren't trending downwards. There's no science or data that supports opening up our state." #AMRstaff

                    Post #3720 - Negative about Trump's disinfectant comment
                    Cleanup on aisle six from the press secretary who says the media took Trump’s disinfectant comments “out of context.”

                    Post #3721 - Negative about Trump's disinfectant comment
                    “The plan was to stress during the daily WH coronavirus briefing that disinfectants should be used on surfaces but then...the president took the briefing information on disinfectant and sunlight and appeared to do some ‘deductive reasoning’ that it could be injected into people.”

                    Post #3722 - Negative about Trump's disinfectant comment
                    Fake news. Maryland sends out emergency alert after receiving more than 100 calls on consuming disinfectant, governor's office says.

                    Post #3723 - Negative ridiculing Trump over disinfectant comment

                    Post #3724 - Negative ridiculing Trump and his supporters

                    My favorite part of the “Trump says dumb thing” news cycle is that his defenders come out of the woodwork to come up with the “smart” thing Trump actually meant, and then he *always* blows it up with an explanation that is even dumber than the first thing

                    Post #3725 - Negative attacking the federal government (directing at Trump) for confiscating PPE
                    A shipment of 1 million face masks en route to South Florida for firefighters was confiscated last week by the federal government, Miami-Dade’s top emergency management official said.

                    Post #3726 - Negative with Jake Tapper giving a chronology of the disinfectant comment as-if it was the only thing to report in the world.

                    Post #3727 - OK, here is a positive one about the possibility the mortality rate isn't all that high.

                    Post #3728 - Negative about disinfectant comment that was about 30 seconds of time total.

                    Post #3729 - Neutral.

                    Post #3730 - Negative about disinfectant comment, making claims that NYC had more incidents of people exposing themselves to Lysol and bleach.

                    Post #3731 - Negative disinfectant

                    Post #3732 - Negative about young people dying of strokes. Fair article, but still only negative.

                    Post #3733 - Negative implying that Trump is scaling back rallies due to disinfectant comment.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post

                      You serious right now? You want to play that card?

                      Remember this gem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald...Hollywood_tape
                      Literally what Biden did.
                      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post

                        Literally what Biden did.
                        It's not that Trump isn't scum of the earth. He is. But so is Hillary and Biden. It's all the other things you have to look at to make your choice.

                        What we know is that your boy Bernie may as well have gotten Covid-19 because he's never running again. I'm not wishing that on him or anyone, but he's done now and all you got is a man who couldn't tell you his own name and may well need to take the oath of office from an institution. Of course, he will lose so that's not happening.

                        Comment


                        • Now that Georgia and Florida are opening up, how long until we can announce they are winners or losers? Isn't two weeks enough time? I thought, once infected, it only takes about 5 days for the virus to start taking the person down.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post

                            You serious right now? You want to play that card?

                            Remember this gem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald...Hollywood_tape
                            Notice that Trump used the word "let," indicating consent. The media and its herd of unthinking followers always seem to leave that part out.

                            I wonder if Tara Reade "let" Creepy Joe grab her? It sure sounds like she didn't. But he did it anyway. It's too bad no one on the left cares.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Mr. Mass View Post

                              Notice that Trump used the word "let," indicating consent. The media and its herd of unthinking followers always seem to leave that part out.
                              Which means that DJT grabs pussy first and asks for consent later... That’s the best defense?
                              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


                              • Who wants to see maybe the sleaziest thing in American politics this year?

                                Remember that Larry King call-in with Tara Reade's mother, strongly hinting at Creepy Joe's sexual assault? Google and/or CNN has memory holed it from the Google Play store.

                                Go ahead, look for yourself:

                                Larry King Live: Season 3 - Google Play

                                Look for August 11, 1993. It was a Wednesday.

                                You can't find it, can you? No one can.

                                They removed it.

                                Anyone defending this absolutely evil level of corruption can go straight to hell.
                                Last edited by Mr. Mass; 04-25-2020, 08:46 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X