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 dal9 View Post
    The people running out buying out more gats due to covid are the types that will use any excuse to stock up anyway....
    You got that right. I know of a few. I think they bought a few more before they bought TP.

    Comment


    • While governor Kemp leads Georgia to glory, New York continues to be a death trap.



      Governor Cuomo's decision to force the elderly into nursing homes -- the absolute worse place to be -- will go down as one of the all-time worst moves in the history of governing. It is Cuomo -- not Trump -- who's to blame for the rising death toll. The man should be in prison for mass murder.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by PacerDude View Post

        You got that right. I know of a few. I think they bought a few more before they bought TP.
        Same people that bought a lot of guns during the Obama years because he was a “Muslim, socialist, Mussolini” type of guy that was going to take guns away from people while giving is sharia law.
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
          The latest news is that Pence isn't self isolating. He tested negative again today. Even if he was, why does that even matter? Some of you hope he gets it and is put on a vent, amirite?

          Even better in the left's perspective...they would love Trump to get the virus and die. No?
          It matters because he is the same buffoon that refuses to put a mask on because he is covered in jizuz blood maybe getting other people sick as well.

          This is like racist Millers wife refusing to cover her face next to people and now we found out she was positive this whole time.

          The whole White House is contaminated and this clowns act like everything is good to go.’
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • Nevermind Pence is going to be a White House tomorrow


            Vice President Mike Pence is not planning to enter self-quarantine after his press secretary tested positive for coronavirus last Friday. He plans to be at the White House on Monday, a Pence spokesperson says. cnn.it/3dCasIn
            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Mr. Mass View Post
              While governor Kemp leads Georgia to glory, New York continues to be a death trap.

              Governor Cuomo's decision to force the elderly into nursing homes -- the absolute worse place to be -- will go down as one of the all-time worst moves in the history of governing. It is Cuomo -- not Trump -- who's to blame for the rising death toll. The man should be in prison for mass murder.
              What happened in New York is typical liberal heavy-handed asinine non-sensical laws. Like the one that forced all nursing homes to accept Covid positive people. Had New York not had that asinine law, we may only have 2/3rds the number of deaths.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by dal9 View Post
                https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog...or-the-covid19

                We’ve discussed numerous times this question of, how deadly is COVID19? Or to put it more technically, what is the infection fatality rate (IFR) for the disease? What percentage of people who get infected die from it?

                /* snip */

                This gives us …

                21,478 / 2,428,000 = .88%
                14,482 / 1,671,000 = .87%

                If we used New York City’s combined number of confirmed and probable deaths, the rate would be 1.18%. That is likely closer to the ‘true’ number. But again, the point here was to see if the serology data and mortality data pointed to a similar rate in both jurisdictions.
                This is good logic but that's what happens when you send Covid positive people into the nursing homes.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

                  This is good logic but that's what happens when you send Covid positive people into the nursing homes.
                  not really. that was only an issue in nyc, and this is about the death rate, not the number of infections anyway.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by dal9 View Post

                    not really. that was only an issue in nyc, and this is about the death rate, not the number of infections anyway.
                    It's about both. It's the IFR which is deaths per infection.

                    1/3 of all covid deaths in the nation are in the nursing homes. 5300 of them are in New York. Cuomo has taken a beating over this: https://abc7ny.com/nursing-home-deat...-york/6168676/

                    Still, even if you chop that number down the IFR is still aroun 0.7% or so. If that translates across the country the number of deaths in 2020 should be expected to hit 250K.

                    Edit: thinking about this a bit more. Maybe the numbers will not be that bad. I know people 80 or older who have had the virus and live in nursing homes. I know of one person who might have died from it. What I'm saying is...I suspect the rate of infection in a confined space like a nursing home may well be much higher skewing all these numbers. This seems particularly true with 1/3 of all covid deaths coming from nursing homes. Which happen to be a place where many people die. IDK. I think most of this is noise and we should all pay attention to Georgia. That's my measuring stick.
                    Last edited by BlueNGold; 05-10-2020, 10:29 PM.

                    Comment


                    • When are we going to have an honest discussion about those 5G towers?
                      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


                      • Originally posted by Natston View Post
                        When are we going to have an honest discussion about those 5G towers?
                        Amateur. I already know the scoop about 6G.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by dal9 View Post

                          Amateur. I already know the scoop about 6G.
                          I was wondering why we couldn’t see the chemtrails anymore, so that does make a lot of sense.
                          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


                          • Originally posted by Natston View Post

                            I was wondering why we couldn’t see the chemtrails anymore, so that does make a lot of sense.
                            i can get you a deal on some chemtrail glasses (they made them not visible to the naked eye anymore)

                            Comment


                            • Few positive coronavirus antibodies tests among MLB employees

                              https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/...-mlb-employees

                              Sixty of the 5,754 people in a study of the Major League Baseball employee population tested positive for coronavirus antibodies, a rate lower than what similar studies run in California found, the studies' authors said Sunday.

                              "I was expecting a larger number," said Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, a professor of medicine at Stanford University, which ran the study. "It shows the value of doing the science as opposed to guessing."

                              The results of the study, which was held in mid-April, revealed a prevalence of COVID-19 antibodies in the MLB employee population of 0.7 percent -- a number adjusted to reflect testing accuracy. The survey showed that about 70% of those who tested positive for COVID-19 antibodies had been asymptomatic.

                              After volunteering to participate, MLB was chosen by Stanford to join the study, which will have no bearing on the league's ability to return to play as it prepares to offer a proposal to the players' association this week that will outline a plan to do so.

                              Twenty-six of MLB's 30 teams participated in the study, which sent out 10,000 test kits. Because of stay-at-home orders and other logistical complications, 5,754 of the tests, in which participants use a pin prick to draw blood and received almost immediate results, were completed. A total of 5,603 completed the tests and filled out a survey that accompanied it.

                              Men comprised 60% of the population and white people 80% -- numbers that don't necessarily reflect the nation and make extrapolating the findings problematic. Similarly, Bhattacharya said, the prevalence of white-collar workers among the MLB population could account for a prevalence rate lower than those found in different samples with tests done in Santa Clara County in Northern California and Los Angeles County in Southern California.

                              "There's a socioeconomic gradient where poorer populations are facing COVID infections at higher rates," Bhattacharya said.

                              Among those with COVID-19 antibodies in the MLB study, in the two weeks prior to the test:
                              • 2.7% had a fever
                              • 14% had a headache
                              • 8% had a cough (compared to 9% among those who tested negative)
                              • 0.9% had lost a sense of taste and smell

                              Bhattacharya said the study has not been peer-reviewed but that he plans to upload it to a preprint server for criticism as well as a medical journal to peer review.

                              While the Santa Clara study drew criticism from some medical professionals and mathematicians for its use of statistics, Bhattacharya said the increased number of antibodies tests done nationwide has enhanced his confidence in the test's sensitivity and specificity, both of which are vital for accurate results. While the prevalence of the study is 0.7%, the adjusted prevalence, which accounts for error, is between 0.28% and 1.15%, according to the authors.

                              "This is science working," Bhattacharya said. "You put your hypothesis forward. You put your work forward. Your peers evaluate it critically. I think we've done a very good job of learning from our fellow scientists."

                              Added Dr. Daniel Eichner, who runs the Sports Medicine Research and Testing Laboratory that helped arrange the study with MLB: "Being at the forefront of anything, if you're the first, people are going to come back and say why didn't you do this or that. ... If anything, it's been shown to be more robust."

                              The interest in the MLB study -- which is the largest coronavirus-related antibodies study in the United States -- prompted Bhattacharya to release it before a peer review.

                              "I've never gotten so many emails in my life about the results of a study before," he said. "There was a huge amount of public interest. I felt a responsibility not to wait."

                              Study participants took pictures of their results and sent them in along with the survey. Poor image quality and file problems made 136 of the results unverifiable. Those 136 were classified as negative results, according to the study.

                              The number of players involved in the study is unclear. The authors did not ask a question regarding the player population. The Arizona Diamondbacks returned the most samples, with 362, and four teams did not participate.

                              The results, Eichner said, is "a very solid nationwide study" that "will help contribute to making public health policy." He and Bhattacharya praised the league for its ability to gather such a large sample in a short window of time.

                              Between the MLB study, the California studies and one Bhattacharya plans to run in Mumbai, the hope is that seroprevalence studies -- or those that illustrate the number of those with COVID-19 antibodies -- help give a better understanding of the coronavirus.

                              "It's very clear," Bhattacharya said, "that the epidemic is still in the early stages throughout the country."



                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                                It is not off topic at all.
                                Yes it is

                                The virus led to the highest ever spike in gun sales: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52189349
                                So have previous elections and previous political events. In short, some folks will use anything as an excuse to purchase [another] weapon.

                                Many, many people in this country will tell you that guns kill people.
                                IMO they are just as extreme as the folks who run out to buy more guns.

                                If they are right about that, that means more death.
                                Do you agree they are right?

                                Yet if the nation didn't lock down and freak out over it, people might not buy as many weapons.
                                This only works if people did not rush out after previous political events and after previous elections.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X