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

  • It was the highest "ever" spike in gun sales in the history of the US. That makes it relevant when liberals a) say that guns kill and b) use scare tactics to make this situation even worse all to take down Trump.

    Instead, they ignore what they should be perceiving as more gun deaths. They don't mind scaring people even if it results in more gun deaths (not what I believe but what they believe)...just as long as it serves their higher narrative of taking down Trump.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

      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.
      One state is your measuring stick? Seems pretty narrow of a view really considering that a big chuck of your hope lies on weather patterns and death rates.

      Again it really doesn't matter where we look if experts say this is bad we should believe them. If more kids die of this or have long term health problems you can kiss the reopening plans good bye.

      The data will direct the decision and death rates are the most extreme position to take as a parent, grand parent or just as a citizen in general. More data needs to be gathered on the long term impact especially for people in there 20s and 30s.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
        Few positive coronavirus antibodies tests among MLB employees

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





        On the other hand, BnG estimates that 50% of the US had it, so I don't know who to believe. But seriously, this shows how disproportionate the impact of this will be: those who can work from home (like presumably most MLB employees) will be largely spared, whereas health/service blue collar workers will take the hit.

        Comment


        • Be wary of believing anyone just because they're labeled an "expert." Thus far 95% of the alleged coronavirus experts have been total duds; a pathetic combination of incompetence and corruption.

          Instead of blindly believing "experts," instead believe the evidence, which says Sweden's strategy is the best balance between protecting lives short term and long term. That's what Georgia's doing, and so far the results have been better than even the most optimistic person could have imagined.

          YouTube: Why Lockdowns Are The Wrong Policy - Swedish Expert Prof. Johan Giesecke - UnHerd



          Professor Johan Giesecke, one of the world’s most senior epidemiologists, advisor to the Swedish Government (he hired Anders Tegnell who is currently directing Swedish strategy), the first Chief Scientist of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, and an advisor to the director general of the WHO, lays out with typically Swedish bluntness why he thinks:
          • UK policy on lockdown and other European countries are not evidence-based .
          • The correct policy is to protect the old and the frail only.
          • This will eventually lead to herd immunity as a “by-product.”
          • The initial UK response, before the “180 degree U-turn”, was better.
          • The Imperial College paper was “not very good” and he has never seen an unpublished paper have so much policy impact.
          • The paper was very much too pessimistic.
          • Any such models are a dubious basis for public policy anyway.
          • The flattening of the curve is due to the most vulnerable dying first as much as the lockdown.
          • The results will eventually be similar for all countries.
          • Covid-19 is a “mild disease” and similar to the flu, and it was the novelty of the disease that scared people.
          • The actual fatality rate of Covid-19 is the region of 0.1%.
          • At least 50% of the population of both the UK and Sweden will be shown to have already had the disease when mass antibody testing becomes available.

          Comment


          • ^you already posted this a while back, when it wasn't just the real dead-enders who were touting sweden's approach

            edit: sweden is 10th in deaths per capita, and that's including countries like andorra, san marino and sint-maarten ahead of them...

            https://www.nationalreview.com/the-m...dish-approach/
            Last edited by dal9; 05-11-2020, 11:43 AM.

            Comment


            • Here's my question for the reopening denialists: what if Georgia's numbers continue looking good through the end of May? What numbers (infections/deaths), and what time length, would it take for you to seriously reconsider your opposition to states reopening?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Mr. Mass View Post
                Here's my question for the reopening denialists: what if Georgia's numbers continue looking good through the end of May? What numbers (infections/deaths), and what time length, would it take for you to seriously reconsider your opposition to states reopening?
                I'm good with reopening state if you and BNG get out of your basements and show us a picture of you two working and doing something for society other than s*** posting in qanon reddit while collecting government checks from home.
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                Comment


                • (Full disclosure I have not read the whole article yet, just had it FWD to me and was told it is a interesting read)
                  In the early days of the pandemic, the U.S. government turned down an offer to manufacture millions of N95 masks in America

                  https://www.washingtonpost.com/inves...691_story.html

                  Comment


                  • Orange clown government two months ago:


                    "we need to shut down the government, 2000 dying daily is too much we need to fix this"


                    a month ago:

                    "here is trillions of dollars to rich people including 500 billions of untraceable money that the orange clown can give to his family and golf clubs if he wants to"


                    Orange clown's government now:

                    "well we can't shut down the government any longer we expect 3000 to die daily, there is nothing we can do"



                    They never cared about people dying.


                    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                    Comment


                    • ^it's more that trump's ADD *** just got bored with it like he does with everything

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
                        (Full disclosure I have not read the whole article yet, just had it FWD to me and was told it is a interesting read)
                        In the early days of the pandemic, the U.S. government turned down an offer to manufacture millions of N95 masks in America

                        https://www.washingtonpost.com/inves...691_story.html
                        That article is damming evidence that someone somewhere dropped the ball. It is honest to say that the process of getting government business is often times slow and it also sounds liken someone didn't like dealing with the owner and it also is probably true that HHS didn't have the money at the time. However 3 months later and we are still not using this line? Either there is more to the story and his is wanting a kings ransom or someone messed up badly. I don't care that the supply line is starting to get fixed (a little) we are still going to need high volumes of this going forward.

                        Maybe they ought to have Fox and Friends read this aloud on one of their shows that we all know he watches. He might feel inclined to intervene then.

                        I'm not upset about the time in January that they didn't do it, but by March they should have had him funded and underway barring something that is not being said here.


                        Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Peck View Post

                          That article is damming evidence that someone somewhere dropped the ball. It is honest to say that the process of getting government business is often times slow and it also sounds liken someone didn't like dealing with the owner and it also is probably true that HHS didn't have the money at the time. However 3 months later and we are still not using this line? Either there is more to the story and his is wanting a kings ransom or someone messed up badly. I don't care that the supply line is starting to get fixed (a little) we are still going to need high volumes of this going forward.

                          Maybe they ought to have Fox and Friends read this aloud on one of their shows that we all know he watches. He might feel inclined to intervene then.

                          I'm not upset about the time in January that they didn't do it, but by March they should have had him funded and underway barring something that is not being said here.
                          Donors it's all about the donors, somebody somewhere is making a killing right now.
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • This is what happens when you have a conspiracy theory clown in charge


                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • plenty people coming up out of their basements...

                              https://twitter.com/nick__puckett/st...41624389955584








                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X