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 Bball View Post

    The virus doesn't really have a mind of its own. The longer it's with us, the more data we gather and can better understand what is happening. Maybe some things happen in the middle of everything that we need some experience with, or hindsight, to understand better, but it'll be perfectly understandable at some point. Overall, it's doing exactly what we were told to expect if and ultimately once we lost containment.

    Mostly, it's on us, the citizens to better control what the virus does. We generally know if we do X or we do Y what that means the virus will do.
    If we do X or we do Y, no we don't know what the virus will do.

    Look at New Mexico. They have statewide travel restrictions and have seen virus cases rise 62% over the last 2 weeks. South Dakota doesn't have such restrictions and it's dropped 33% over the last 2 weeks. Is the proper conclusion to draw that there should be no restrictions?

    Perhaps in the lab or in a very controlled test we can "prove" things but in the real world it's all over the place.

    https://www.npr.org/sections/health-...rus-in-the-u-s

    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...tates-n1236157
    Last edited by BlueNGold; 11-27-2020, 11:47 AM.

    Comment


    • BTW, if you look at the two links above you can compare the restrictions in the various states with the incidence of cases. There is no correlation. If you exclude New York where it all started, there still isn't a correlation.

      One might look at North Dakota and conclude their recent mask mandate two weeks ago has led to their 16% drop....until they look at South Dakota which doesn't have a mask mandate and their number of cases dropped 33%.

      One might look at the west coast and their travel restrictions and conclude they are doing better than most of the country. That's accurate. But states like Utah, West Virginia, Oklahoma, Kentucky and Wyoming are doing as well or pretty close to it. But there may be a demographic/health difference where the people on the west coast may not be as vulnerable.

      Then you look at Germany which is god-like in the virus community. They are doing far worse than Sweden over the last month.
      Last edited by BlueNGold; 11-27-2020, 11:48 AM.

      Comment


      • No, those things can be explained. The answer is in the data. The data just needs to be gathered and looked at. We have a good idea how the virus works. We have less of an idea how people work. The virus isn't just laughing at us and doing what it wants, when it wants. If cases go down, there's a reason. If cases go up, there's a reason. It might not be immediately obvious to an outside observer without all of the data, or to someone trying to draw conclusions from incomplete data.

        Your answers could be as simple as more testing or less testing skewing the numbers. Or WHO is getting tested and when, for whatever reasons. It could be a culture of a state or region that was not taking the virus seriously, suddenly being forced to by restrictions and reality that is telling them it's time to take this seriously. It's not just whether they are wearing their masks or not... but whether they are taking social distancing seriously... or not. Has fatigue set in somewhere?

        Even looking at the calendar for events being held... or the end of events... Or the weather during the periods could be telling. Did a warm spell move people outdoors? Did a wet or unseasonably cold spell moving people indoors?

        The virus will do what a virus does, and that is look for hosts. If it's contagious enough, and we are willing to give it hosts, then we know, at least generally what will happen. We might not be as apt to know what variables people will put into play and what environmental or other factors will come into play with that.

        The data will tell us. What the data won't ever say is "Might as well ignore the virus. Nothing we do can slow it or stop 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


        • Not saying it is impossible to determine how to deal with the virus or what helps contain it. I question if the so-called experts are correct because the data does not seem to back up their claims if what they suggest is actually that effective at containing it. That is, to some degree they may be right but they are overstating how effective things like masks are in a confined space. That’s not to say they don’t help some. The point is that they make claims without noting the limited protection that masks really are.
          Last edited by BlueNGold; 11-28-2020, 04:10 AM.

          Comment


          • "so-called experts"... SMH...
            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
              "so-called experts"... SMH...
              The same "experts" told us not to wear masks early on, projected a total of 60K deaths and took 6 months to acknowledge the virus was aerosolized (when a tiny amount of common sense made that obvious).

              These are the same "experts" who have had decades to cure the common cold, cancer, heart disease and nearly every disease known to man but people keep dying of this stuff.

              Fact is, people get into science and, because that's their trade and it's supposedly some magical ability or knowledge, think they're smarter than every other person on the planet. Well, they're not.

              True story. I took an advanced organic chemistry course at IUPUI some time ago. The intent was to get into patent law. Out of a couple hundred up to 300 people in the class, I ranked 2nd. They ain't that 'mart.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

                The same "experts" told us not to wear masks early on, projected a total of 60K deaths and took 6 months to acknowledge the virus was aerosolized (when a tiny amount of common sense made that obvious).

                These are the same "experts" who have had decades to cure the common cold, cancer, heart disease and nearly every disease known to man but people keep dying of this stuff.

                Fact is, people get into science and, because that's their trade and it's supposedly some magical ability or knowledge, think they're smarter than every other person on the planet. Well, they're not.

                True story. I took an advanced organic chemistry course at IUPUI some time ago. The intent was to get into patent law. Out of a couple hundred up to 300 people in the class, I ranked 2nd. They ain't that 'mart.
                "Experts..."
                Vs
                Dunning Kruger...
                The product of limited knowledge and a diet of propaganda.
                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


                • "Experts" in Germany have now seen 4 straight days of the most deaths since the pandemic began. They are averaging about 400 deaths a day. As a result, they continue to climb spots (2 more in the last few days) in the deaths per capita ranking. Keep in mind they are perfect. They not only have done everything right vs this virus, they hate Donald Trump.

                  Sweden, meanwhile has been averaging about 30 a day for about a month. They are about 1/8 of the size of Germany so adjusted they are dying at about a 60% rate compared to Germany. Not as good as they were doing awhile ago.

                  France seems worse off. Hovering around 500-600 a day in deaths.

                  Poland is also at around 500-600 deaths a day.







                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Bball View Post

                    "Experts..."
                    Vs
                    Dunning Kruger...
                    The product of limited knowledge and a diet of propaganda.
                    I am just serving up facts. Admittedly my lab partner in that class was a chemist by trade so the lab portion of my grade didn't hurt me any...

                    Comment


                    • Cancer and other diseases are not the same as the common cold (flu shot?).....

                      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                      Fact is, people get into science and, because that's their trade and it's supposedly some magical ability or knowledge, think they're smarter than every other person on the planet. Well, they're not.
                      This thread has proved scientists are not the only ones....

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
                        Cancer and other diseases are not the same as the common cold (flu shot?).....



                        This thread has proved scientists are not the only ones....
                        OK, all I am asking is that people think for themselves rather than blindly follow the lab coats around when it come to this virus. Look around the US and you have very different laws and I don’t think they have resulted in much difference even though the “experts”make claims they are so certain of how to deal with this virus and that it would make a huevdifference.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                          True story. I took an advanced organic chemistry course at IUPUI some time ago. The intent was to get into patent law. Out of a couple hundred up to 300 people in the class, I ranked 2nd. They ain't that 'mart.
                          Also a true story. I took a business law class my sophomore year of college. I was ranked in the top 3% (only 65 students but whatever - why let facts get in the way of a good story)

                          I totally plan on auditioning for a job in the supreme court next week

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post

                            Also a true story. I took a business law class my sophomore year of college. I was ranked in the top 3% (only 65 students but whatever - why let facts get in the way of a good story)

                            I totally plan on auditioning for a job in the supreme court next week
                            Good luck with that. Trump wouldn't nominate a liberal so you might want to wait until January 21st.

                            With that said, I bet you got the math wrong. Probably bottom 3%...

                            Comment


                            • Wait...are you admitting he lost the election?

                              I’m afraid you haven’t got the latest set of talking points!

                              Comment


                              • AFP News Agency

                                @AFP
                                ?
                                Nov 26, 2020

                                Replying to @AFP
                                Take a vaccine developed in haste? Never again, says Meissa Chebbi, who, like hundreds of other Swedes suffered debilitating narcolepsy after a mass vaccination campaign against the 2009-2010 swine flu pandemic. The experience has shaken confidence http://u.afp.com/3FrU

                                AFP News Agency

                                @AFP
                                VIDEO:

                                Take a vaccine developed in haste? Never again, says Meissa Chebbi, who like hundreds of other Swedes suffered debilitating narcolepsy after a vaccination campaign against the 2009-10 swine flu pandemic. The experience has shaken confidence in future Covid-19 vaccines

                                5:50 PM ? Nov 26, 2020


                                Last edited by vapacersfan; 11-29-2020, 11:26 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X