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 Sollozzo View Post
    The Lakers-Clippers game just 14 days ago is really a perfect example of how denial of the gravity of a situation can be shared on every level:

    Donald Trump as President didn’t order the game cancelled

    Gavin Newsom as Governor didn’t order it cancelled

    Garcetti as Mayor didn’t order it cancelled

    Silver as Commissioner didn’t order it cancelled

    The players played and were focused on it being a big game

    ABC aired it just like any other big game

    The arena workers showed up. The fans showed up because that’s what fans do.

    Just *3* days later, the NBA and country were turned upside down with the Gobert news. But 3 days earlier, no one at any level was doing anything to prevent that game because it still seemed unfathomable to most that life could be turned upside down to this extent.
    I cant remember if the NHL canceled games before the NBA did. Or was the NBA first?

    Either way it is crazy to think that businesses in the United States were more pro-active with this issue than the government was. I also think it makes you wonder (I should rephrase it makes me wonder) if the NBA reacts the same way if a player does not test positive.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post

      Two points:

      1. I am going to have to disagree with you that no one saw this coming. See below tweets


      2. I am beyond lost of your defense of the POTUS. Was he in that briefing or was he not? Because if he was, then IMO, that means he knew about this before the “average” American and that gives him more than a week to take it seriously. If you are arguing he was not in that briefing, then I don’t know what to say (every article I have read to date says he was)
      There were some people in the world aware, especially the Chinese. What I'm saying is that this thing has unfolded over time and only until later did people realize it was a disaster. There were some people better informed and I'm sure that Burr, Loeffler and others may well have spent more time focusing on it and gathering more details. On Feb. 7th Burr talked it down. He probably said the same to Trump and others. Only on February 27th at a luncheon did it really blow up.

      So, just because some people in the world make statements that turn out to be accurate doesn't mean everyone in the world has caught on or even believe it, especially since NO ONE has lived through anything like this in the US.

      As for the briefing, are you talking about January 24th? Ask yourself if there may have been more conversations after that briefing not involving Trump that shed more light on the subject. The dude didn't sell his stock for 3 more weeks. The question is, what did the president know and when did he know it and you can't answer that question.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post

        I cant remember if the NHL canceled games before the NBA did. Or was the NBA first?

        Either way it is crazy to think that businesses in the United States were more pro-active with this issue than the government was. I also think it makes you wonder (I should rephrase it makes me wonder) if the NBA reacts the same way if a player does not test positive.
        I doubt the NBA would have reacted had Gobert not tested positive. The reality is, they are liable to thousands upon thousands of fans and they like their money. They shut it down because of money (as usual).

        Comment


        • If people supported each other and the POTUS and those making decisions, we might all be better off. No, I don't think Trump sat on it. If anything he was probably not informed well enough because the people wanted to protect their nest eggs. That's why Burr needs to be strung up.

          What did Burr learn between Feb 7th when he talked down the virus and Feb. 27th when he pulled out the bull horn? Who did he mislead to ensure he sold his stock high at the midpoint of that period on Feb 13th?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
            As for the briefing, are you talking about January 24th? Ask yourself if there may have been more conversations after that briefing not involving Trump that shed more light on the subject. The dude didn't sell his stock for 3 more weeks. The question is, what did the president know and when did he know it and you can't answer that question.
            You are I have different expectations of a President. I would expect for any POTUS to be looped into any further briefings. If you truly believe the POTUS was not briefed on this at least once a day (if not more often) for weeks...if not months...then I do not know what to say. I simply do not believe that

            Comment


            • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
              If people supported each other and the POTUS and those making decisions, we might all be better off. No, I don't think Trump sat on it. If anything he was probably not informed well enough because the people wanted to protect their nest eggs. That's why Burr needs to be strung up.

              What did Burr learn between Feb 7th when he talked down the virus and Feb. 27th when he pulled out the bull horn? Who did he mislead to ensure he sold his stock high at the midpoint of that period on Feb 13th?
              This post is kind of contradictory. One one hand you say we should support each other and support the POTUS. On the other hand you say our govt lied to us and put their self interest before the general public (which I think all of the country would agree with - at a minimum things look very bad for those who sold off stocks)

              Comment


              • Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post

                You are I have different expectations of a President. I would expect for any POTUS to be looped into any further briefings. If you truly believe the POTUS was not briefed on this at least once a day (if not more often) for weeks...if not months...then I do not know what to say. I simply do not believe that
                If it was obvious to all that it would be like the Spanish Flu (something Burr announced at the luncheon on Feb 27), why did he wait 3 weeks to sell his stock? Why would they not ALL take this very seriously at that time? What you seem to think is that they all knew a lot more than I think they knew on Jan 24th.

                Here is the Propublic article: https://www.propublica.org/article/s...ng-coronavirus

                Burr unloaded between $628,000 and $1.72 million of his holdings on Feb. 13 in 33 separate transactions, a significant portion of his total stock holdings. The sales came soon after he offered public assurances that the government was ready to battle the coronavirus.

                So, he probably lied because he essentially bailed out of the market. Do you really think he was sharing different information with Trump? Isn't it more likely he was talking it down because what if Trump announced it being an issue before Burr could sell?

                Here's the deal. We've all heard about SARS, MERS and H1N1. None of them had this impact. The fact is, people didn't expect it. Nobody in America. I actually don't think full information is shared and in fact it's totally unlikely because the dude sold so much of his portfolio. Of course he's not going to fully disclose to anyone including Trump if he's actually guilty which I am sure he is.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post

                  This post is kind of contradictory. One one hand you say we should support each other and support the POTUS. On the other hand you say our govt lied to us and put their self interest before the general public (which I think all of the country would agree with - at a minimum things look very bad for those who sold off stocks)
                  I think Burr lied. That doesn't mean Trump lied.

                  Edit: I'm surprised you got several thumbs up because it was not contradictory. The assumption everyone seems to be making is that Trump was fully informed of everything Burr knew about it for a full month. That's highly unlikely and not even close to a contradiction.
                  Last edited by BlueNGold; 03-22-2020, 05:40 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

                    I think Burr lied. That doesn't mean Trump lied.
                    Is ok to disagree with dear leader once in a while no lighting is hitting you.
                    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                    Comment


                    • I'm fine if people want to call Trump an idiot for bloviating, exaggerating and even underestimating. But to say he is lying you have to come with more. I do think he underestimated but I don't think he had full information. Once he did, he came around.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                        I'm fine if people want to call Trump an idiot for bloviating, exaggerating and even underestimating. But to say he is lying you have to come with more. I do think he underestimated but I don't think he had full information. Once he did, he came around.
                        He is the president of the f**** country he is the guy that gets that info first, stop with this bs.
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post

                          I wish we all had the inside information those Congress people that sold their stocks had, they obviously knew this thing was going to s*** they are videos and everything of one of them telling his donors about how this was going to be worse than Ebola and everything.

                          Fact is the state department and top officials knew this for a long time.
                          If you didn't have that information, you only have yourself to blame. There was a lot of information coming out of China that was public for all to find, that made this easy to see coming. China and the WHO were both criminally downplaying the seriousness of this virus, so a lot of people and governments missed the signs.

                          To cover a few topics that go back a few pages:

                          1. Naming the Virus
                          If the Chinese Communist Party was not trying to blame other countries and use this virus as a political tool I would have no problem with avoiding a name associated with China. Since they are trying to push narratives to deflect the origin of the virus to other countries and making this virus a political tool, I have no issue at all with making sure history remembers that they are the reason this pandemic happened. That they had the opportunity to stop the epidemic from turning into a pandemic and chose not to.

                          2. Mandatory Stay-at-Home Orders
                          These are severely horrible ideas. Not only are they probably illegal within the US, they are at best a short term fix. In the best case scenario they slow down the spread for a month, until you lift the ban, and the virus starts spreading again. Worst case scenario you destroy your economy and kill millions of people through starvation and malnutrition by causing a great depression.The truth is this virus will only be slowed/stopped through herd immunity, and vaccines are too far away to be a realistic hope. Until then you need to keep your economy going, while not putting too many people at risk. We are currently doing a pretty good job of this. The measures we have put in place right now will go a long way to slowing the spread to a manageable level. In the mean time we need to find a drug or drugs that are able to safely treat the disease, to get people healthy quickly, and reduce the amount of deaths. Once we have a good treatment, we can slowly relax the situation as herd immunity increases. Going as far as mandatory stay-at-home orders is very short-sighted and probably illegal.

                          3. Testing and Chloroquine
                          While once it became obvious this virus was a thing in the US the US has reacted very well. Our initial response was not very good though. We did the right thing with the travel ban, but our testing was abysmal. As well, even though I put most of the blame on the Chinese government for this pandemic, that does not mean the doctors were not doing great work. They were aware of the benefits of using chloroquine as far back as early to mid February, and published a paper on it. Instead of having chloroquine ready for trials as soon as it became an issue in the West, most of the West just ignored this. I understand that Chinese medicine is not the most trustworthy, but this was a known safe drug that was already available. There was no reason to not be prepared to start using it almost immediately.


                          This virus is worse than the flu, but it isn't so bad you need to panic over it (people are acting like it kills at the same rate as SARS or MERS). It is still safe to go out on a walk around the neighborhood. The biggest issue with this virus is overwhelming the hospitals. As long as we avoid that we will be fine. The death count will be low. Evidence suggests we should soon have some good treatments for the virus. Once that comes on line everything will be alright.

                          A recent study from Italy indicates that 99% of people who died had a pre-existing condition and an average age of 79 years. In this way it is pretty similar to the flu, just it kills at a higher rate. There is also the suggestion that Italy's mortality rate is inflated due to how they are deciding who to test and who not to test.

                          Comment


                          • One thing I think we all do...and we're wrong to do it is this. If the other party is in control of the White House, anything and everything that goes wrong is assumed to be known and the fault of the President. You could say the buck stops with the President and I can respect that. But under no circumstances does Trump know everything that is going on with 100 million different things.

                            One might even say he doesn't get along with his people so of course they are not briefing him very well. Maybe then I will get some agreement from some of you.

                            Comment


                            • Timeline for everything that happened, the buffoon knew and covered it up


                              https://twitter.com/politidope/statu...080197121?s=21
                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                                One thing I think we all do...and we're wrong to do it is this. If the other party is in control of the White House, anything and everything that goes wrong is assumed to be known and the fault of the President. You could say the buck stops with the President and I can respect that. But under no circumstances does Trump know everything that is going on with 100 million different things.

                                One might even say he doesn't get along with his people so of course they are not briefing him very well. Maybe then I will get some agreement from some of you.
                                If he is as incompetent as you make him sound to be he needs to resign now.
                                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X