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 Gamble1 View Post

    Couple of obvious points missed here. The most striking to me is the fact that the study only addresses filtration for the wearer. In the work place it is 2 mask system. So finer particles have 2 mask to penetrate to infect you.

    The major premise of mask wearing is for the infected to infect less. That from the beginning was the major debate of the viral transmission from presymtomatic and asymptomatic populations. Once evidence became clear that these people are major drivers of virus transmission mask wearing was then highly promoted by the health departments.

    Second point is the real world examples which models should address is that empirical data suggest that mask wearing decreases infections. This is seen in schools with school age children above 10 years old since they can carry a viral load similar to an adult. If aerosol transmission was the major driver for infections then these kids would transmit more virus to teachers and students alike since they no doubt would be wearing a mask all day and not washing them everyday.

    Most people do not believe that aersol transmission is the major player. It is a player but these things are hard to separate but logically you would assume that these smaller particles would find their way deep into the lungs and the infection would be worse. This is not what is being reported for most adults.

    So again try to look at these studies with an open mind. This study has major limitations and only addresses a very narrow scope that does not mesh with what is being seen in the real world.
    To address your two points, I will start with the first. Most people are not infected. So if their study is true that applies to say ~90-95% of the population at a single moment in time. Also, the "dirty mask rule" still holds true for infected people. The virus that gets caught by a dirty mask from the prior day doesn't all stay in that mask. The particles are small enough to get blown out through the mask or dislodged from it and blown around it. So even in the case of an infected person, a dirty mask may well worse. And some of the virus on their mask isn't even theirs and could make them sicker. I think you know this virus can stay alive more than a day on fabric.

    As for the school age children including teens, are you saying that they carry the same viral load as sick people? I can see that for older teens who DO become sick. But what about those that quickly fight off the virus? I cannot imagine they are big spreaders of it. I really doubt that but I'm open to a link indicating that's true.

    But assuming that's true, kids around them are not nearly as susceptible to spreading it further. It's not an environment conducive to spreading it. Also, teachers are of working age and probably average in their 30's. Many retire early and do other careers. Beyond that, those who have been working in schools have been exposed to all kinds viruses and probably have super immunity from years of being around the little monsters. So they are not at high risk either. They are also social distanced from the students and probably practice that religiously....kids come and go from classroom to classroom and there is probably good circulation in schools. So it's really not a situation where people are going to get that sick. So most people in schools are young, they are social distancing and I seriously question that many are carrying much of a viral load considering this thing rarely makes them sick wheezing and coughing everywhere.

    Last edited by BlueNGold; 01-05-2021, 08:23 AM.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

      To address your two points, I will start with the first. Most people are not infected. So if their study is true that applies to say ~90-95% of the population at a single moment in time. Also, the "dirty mask rule" still holds true for infected people. The virus that gets caught by a dirty mask from the prior day doesn't all stay in that mask. The particles are small enough to get blown out through the mask or dislodged from it and blown around it. So even in the case of an infected person, a dirty mask may well worse. And some of the virus on their mask isn't even theirs and could make them sicker. I think you know this virus can stay alive more than a day on fabric.

      As for the school age children including teens, are you saying that they carry the same viral load as sick people? I can see that for older teens who DO become sick. But what about those that quickly fight off the virus? I cannot imagine they are big spreaders of it. I really doubt that but I'm open to a link indicating that's true.

      But assuming that's true, kids around them are not nearly as susceptible to spreading it further. It's not an environment conducive to spreading it. Also, teachers are of working age and probably average in their 30's. Many retire early and do other careers. Beyond that, those who have been working in schools have been exposed to all kinds viruses and probably have super immunity from years of being around the little monsters. So they are not at high risk either. They are also social distanced from the students and probably practice that religiously....kids come and go from classroom to classroom and there is probably good circulation in schools. So it's really not a situation where people are going to get that sick. So most people in schools are young, they are social distancing and I seriously question that many are carrying much of a viral load considering this thing rarely makes them sick wheezing and coughing everywhere.
      So how long does the virus stay on a fabric and can infect someone? The virus can be detected via pcr but culturing it off of fabric is actually difficult and most people do not believe that these contaminated materials are the main mode of transmission. So for instance they can go into hospitals and detect the virus on surfaces but they can not easily culture it which is the way we measure if it is alive or not.

      Second and third bolded part yes and yes. The CDC has reported this already and take the time and read their articles.

      Again you are hung up on aresolized particles since it fits your narrative. In reality limiting aersolized particles and particles above 5 microns has a measurable effect on infection rates. If you reduce particles large and small particles you limit the net particles being transmitted.

      In the real world it is the total amount of virus transmitted and sure mask filtration matters on both ends of transmission and infection. Mask limit but do not eliminate transmission.

      If aersolized particles were highly infectious and were the major driver of infections then wearing an N95 would not protect you since 5% of aersolized particles are still getting threw the mask. In a hospital setting you would see every doctor getting it who are treating these patients everyday. You do not see that happening.

      I have no doubt that aersolized particles are infectious but I do not believe that they are more infectious than particles that are 5 to 100 microns in size. I think they are less infectious in fact based on the data that has been reported to date.

      If you think about this it sort of makes sense. The virus is .1 micron in size on average. So a 5 micron droplet has at most 50 virus particles in it and is probably less considering you need room for water molecules and such. That means a 50 micron droplet contains 500 virus particles or 10 times more.

      You basically are only concerned on the smallest of particles but in reality they contain the fewest. If they were the major players here then distance in doors would not matter and no surgical mask would matter. The recommendations of 6 feet apart would not matter but the empirical data does imply that distance matters and since that does matter this means that size of the water droplet matters in both transmission and infection.
      Last edited by Gamble1; 01-05-2021, 09:46 AM.

      Comment


      • Did the US set an officlal record for Covid deaths yesterday? I was following it as being a possibility, and then the news shifted to the DC riot.
        Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

        ------

        "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

        -John Wooden

        Comment


        • https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...navirus-deaths

          US suffers record daily coronavirus deaths
          The 24-hour toll reached 3,865 on Wednesday, the worst figure anywhere in the world during the Covid pandemic
          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

          ------

          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

          -John Wooden

          Comment


          • Talked to a lady at they gym saying her daughters were afraid of getting the vaccine since they thought it make cause infertility. Apparently there are hacks out their thinking this vaccine can interact with a placental protein. By hacks I mean bloggers and discredited Mds.

            The similarity or lack there of between the spike protein and this placental protein are no where near close enough for this to be plausible. It boggles my mind why people push these idiotic theories.

            If you hear this please shut down these arguments with common sense. If people did develop an autoimmune disease then it would happen with all covid infections including 4 previous strains of these viruses that have been circulating for a very long time. This simply doesn't happen and nothing suggest it would happen with these vaccines.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
              Talked to a lady at they gym saying her daughters were afraid of getting the vaccine since they thought it make cause infertility. Apparently there are hacks out their thinking this vaccine can interact with a placental protein. By hacks I mean bloggers and discredited Mds.

              The similarity or lack there of between the spike protein and this placental protein are no where near close enough for this to be plausible. It boggles my mind why people push these idiotic theories.

              If you hear this please shut down these arguments with common sense. If people did develop an autoimmune disease then it would happen with all covid infections including 4 previous strains of these viruses that have been circulating for a very long time. This simply doesn't happen and nothing suggest it would happen with these vaccines.
              "Shutting people down" typically doesn't work that well. You might suggest a different approach. You may well be right but the method is bound to fail you.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

                "Shutting people down" typically doesn't work that well. You might suggest a different approach. You may well be right but the method is bound to fail you.
                Lol. You know what I mean. Use a straight forward argument that the common cold aka other coronavirus infections do not cause women to be infertile. Hence the vaccine to this spike protein won't cause people to become infertile.

                Funny you are sensitive to the language I used. I figured you of all people would understand this.

                Comment


                • Sweden has been under Germany with the 7 day rolling average since December 18th. That means as the deaths mount into the winter, they are doing considerably better now. They are also way under other western countries.

                  See this is just January 7th and the US hit a record with deaths. Let's just say that right now is a good time to have your numbers better than other countries because it's simply more deadly in the winter like most viruses.

                  Doesn't mean they had the best plan. It means their plan is looking better every day. And no they don't have widespread use of masks...only rush hour on weekdays on public transporation for people 16 or older. Yeh, masks...smh.

                  https://ourworldindata.org/coronavir...ickerSort=desc

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                    Sweden has been under Germany with the 7 day rolling average since December 18th. That means as the deaths mount into the winter, they are doing considerably better now. They are also way under other western countries.

                    See this is just January 7th and the US hit a record with deaths. Let's just say that right now is a good time to have your numbers better than other countries because it's simply more deadly in the winter like most viruses.

                    Doesn't mean they had the best plan. It means their plan is looking better every day. And no they don't have widespread use of masks...only rush hour on weekdays on public transporation for people 16 or older. Yeh, masks...smh.

                    https://ourworldindata.org/coronavir...ickerSort=desc
                    Yep they are over 450 deaths per million over Germany with a vaccine on the horizon.

                    Still looks like a stupid approach to me but I guess I look beyond 7 day rolling averages.

                    https://ourworldindata.org/coronavir...ickerSort=desc

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post

                      Lol. You know what I mean. Use a straight forward argument that the common cold aka other coronavirus infections do not cause women to be infertile. Hence the vaccine to this spike protein won't cause people to become infertile.

                      Funny you are sensitive to the language I used. I figured you of all people would understand this.
                      I have no dog in this fight but don't you consider what claims people make whether or not the "experts" have recorded in Excel?

                      I will take any statements made and evaluate them fairly without taking the "professions opinion" and drown out claims.

                      This doesn't mean I buy them. It means I will listen.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post

                        Yep they are over 450 deaths per million over Germany with a vaccine on the horizon.

                        Still looks like a stupid approach to me but I guess I look beyond 7 day rolling averages.

                        https://ourworldindata.org/coronavir...ickerSort=desc
                        It may have been. But what I know right now is that Sweden's approach is doing well now in comparison and the vaccine isn't going to save us this winter. Basically, it boils down to how bad it gets over the next 3 to 4 months.

                        Sweden has been dropping for a long time and Germany has been rising in death per capita now for awhile. Germany was in the 70's or 80's compared to the rest of the world and have risen to #46.

                        This definitely doesn't mean Sweden made good decisions early. They may have it worse in the end in total. But I do think it indicates mask use isn't saving many people which is really my point.

                        See, back in April when people were dropping like flies, hardly anyone was wearing a mask. The issue with Sweden is they were completely ignoring the disease and it bit them. They respect social distancing and certain other measures. They've never bought into masks and I still don't see them helping....even if I do wear them.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

                          I have no dog in this fight but don't you consider what claims people make whether or not the "experts" have recorded in Excel?

                          I will take any statements made and evaluate them fairly without taking the "professions opinion" and drown out claims.

                          This doesn't mean I buy them. It means I will listen.
                          Yeah.. I do not care one way or another. Your opinion has no weight or merit to me.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

                            "Shutting people down" typically doesn't work that well. You might suggest a different approach. You may well be right but the method is bound to fail you.
                            Gullible, stupid, propaganda believing people are going to believe what they want to believe. The benefit in 'shutting them down' is that people who might've been inclined to believe them because they drop their stupidity into conservations as if it's simply "known facts", see that they are FOS.

                            At a certain point, all you can do is lead a horse to water. Nobody can make you drink it.

                            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                            ------

                            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                            -John Wooden

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Bball View Post

                              Gullible, stupid, propaganda believing people are going to believe what they want to believe. The benefit in 'shutting them down' is that people who might've been inclined to believe them because they drop their stupidity into conservations as if it's simply "known facts", see that they are FOS.

                              At a certain point, all you can do is lead a horse to water. Nobody can make you drink it.
                              All I am saying is that the approach does not work. It actually backfires. But you are free to believe you can "shut people down" if you want. It just leads to bigger Trump rallies.

                              Comment


                              • Putting my reply in the other thread...
                                Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                                ------

                                "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                                -John Wooden

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X