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

George Floyd Protests and Riots

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post

    Out of curiosity, how many 3rd world countries have you lived in?

    Have you ever served in the Middle East or Afghanistan specifically?
    Out of curiosity? None.

    With that said, how many federally elected offices have you held? Why should you have an opinion on how to run the country if you have no experience doing that?

    The reality is, people form their opinion from experience and information. It helps to have experience. It can be better to have information. The old stats vs eye test thingy.

    If person A has some experience in some countries and arrives at a different assessment, it doesn't mean they are right. If anything, their views may well be skewed from their specific experience rather than looking at statistics such as homicide rates.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Eleazar View Post

      If you go look at the actual statistic they show there is no widespread systemic racism by the police in this nation. That does not mean you will not find individual instances of racism by police, or an individual department that is racist. Finding such examples, though, are not evidence of systemic racism. It is just examples of individual racism. For racism to be systemic it has to be pervasive in the system. As of 2020, the statistic do not show any pervasive racism by the police.
      This is a piece by Radley Balko (Washington Post, author of The Rise of the Warrior Cop, amongst others, also an IU alum). It refers to the large corpus of research that supports systemic racism in the criminal justice system. The definition in the introductory part is important - a system that produces racially disparate outcomes regardless of the intentions of the various individuals that work within it.

      https://leisureguy.wordpress.com/201...res-the-proof/
      I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

      -Emiliano Zapata

      Comment


      • Originally posted by D-BONE View Post

        This is a piece by Radley Balko (Washington Post, author of The Rise of the Warrior Cop, amongst others, also an IU alum). It refers to the large corpus of research that supports systemic racism in the criminal justice system. The definition in the introductory part is important - a system that produces racially disparate outcomes regardless of the intentions of the various individuals that work within it.

        https://leisureguy.wordpress.com/201...res-the-proof/
        This is a nice write-up. I agree with a fair amount of it. There is one paragraph I think is most interesting:

        I’ve had more than one retired police officer tell me that there is a running joke in law enforcement when it comes to racial profiling: It never happens . . . and it works. But the problem with trying to dismiss profiling concerns by noting that higher rates at which some minority groups commit certain crimes is that it overlooks the fact that huge percentages of black and Latino people have been pulled over, stopped on the street and generally harassed despite the fact that they have done nothing wrong. Stop and frisk data, for example, consistently show that about 3 percent of these encountersproduce any evidence of a crime. So 97 percent-plus of these people are getting punished solely because they belong to a group that statistically commits some crimes at a higher rate. That ought to bother us.

        I can see this being true. That is, generally speaking, minorities are stopped more often than they should be....EVEN if you account for a higher rate of crime among a particular minority group or area of town.

        That is, I can see cops doing that, essentially over-reacting to a population that...while they rightly believe commit more crimes....it is still an overreaction where they go overboard. That exacerbates issues with the relationship causing stuff like George Floyd to fight with them and then it just boils over and someone gets shot.

        At the end of the day, there is a lack of trust and a "circle your wagons" on both sides as cops protect their own and people refuse to work with cops and report crimes.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Eleazar View Post

          If you go look at the actual statistic they show there is no widespread systemic racism by the police in this nation. That does not mean you will not find individual instances of racism by police, or an individual department that is racist. Finding such examples, though, are not evidence of systemic racism. It is just examples of individual racism. For racism to be systemic it has to be pervasive in the system. As of 2020, the statistic do not show any pervasive racism by the police.
          https://www.businessinsider.com/us-s...hs-data-2020-6
          25 simple charts to show friends and family who aren't convinced racism is still a problem in America


          https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...bf9_story.html

          Why study after study shows that police disproportionately stop African American drivers and disproportionately search African American drivers after stopping them, even though they tend to find less contraband.

          A study published last month of nearly 100 million traffic stops by police departments nationwide found that black drivers were far more likely to be pulled over than white drivers. But, interestingly, the difference becomes smaller at night, when it’s harder for police to see the race of the driver. Coincidence? I think not.

          Meanwhile, black and Hispanic drivers “were searched about twice as often as stopped white drivers”— even though black and, to an even greater extent, Hispanic drivers were less likely than whites to be found with drugs.

          ● Why a study of police-shooting databases published by the National Academy of Sciences found that African American men were about 2 1/2 times more likely than white men to be killed by police. “Men of color face a non-trivial lifetime risk of being killed by police,” the authors wrote. For African American men, the lifetime risk of dying at the hands of police was 1 in 1,000.
          ....
          Why African Americans are far more likely to be arrested for petty crimes. A 2018 study exposed “profound racial disparity in the misdemeanor arrest rate for most — but not all — offense types.” The black arrest rate was at least twice as high as that for whites for disorderly conduct, drug possession, simple assault, theft, vagrancy and vandalism.

          A 2020 study of marijuana possession arrests by the American Civil Liberties Union concluded that even in an era of legalization and decriminalization, there were “stark racial disparities” in possession arrests, with a black person more than 3 1/2 times more likely to be arrested for possession than a white person, even though rates of usage are similar. The disparities exist “across the country, in every state, in counties large and small, urban and rural, wealthy and poor, and with large and small black populations.”

          This is just one aspect of a broader problem of racial disparities in our criminal justice system, from the use of cash bail and pretrial detention to jury selection to plea bargaining to sentencing to parole and pardons.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
            Out of curiosity? None.
            Cool. I just figured you must have been to lots of 2nd/3rd world countries the way you speak about them.
            PS. A lot of what you say doesn’t actually much up with 1st and 2nd hand experiences I have in Africa.



            With that said, how many federally elected offices have you held? Why should you have an opinion on how to run the country if you have no experience doing that?
            Apples and oranges

            The reality is, people form their opinion from experience and information. It helps to have experience. It can be better to have information. The old stats vs eye test thingy.

            If person A has some experience in some countries and arrives at a different assessment, it doesn't mean they are right. If anything, their views may well be skewed from their specific experience rather than looking at statistics such as homicide rates.
            Correct. By the same standards if person A has no experience and person B does, specifically in regards to a topic as specific as another country or culture, I will take the word on the person(s) who have real world experience

            looking at statistics such as homicide rates.
            There are three types of lies -- lies, damn lies, and statistics.” .

            While that is sarcasm there is more to life than simply looking at statistics. Like I said above, real world experience matters.

            PS. I have no clue why you referenced homicide rates. I am not sure what that has to do with quality of living in 2nd or 3rd world countries for the poor

            Comment


            • ...and this is why people are lining up to emigrate to the countries you have been to in Africa?

              A person in the US from the time they are born has had more opportunity to better their lives, including to visit Africa, than people living there. People emigrate to and/or pour money into Africa to help them. People emigrate from Africa to the US to help themselves.

              It is amazing how much the left discounts, disrespects and despises America.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                ...and this is why people are lining up to emigrate to the countries you have been to in Africa?
                Saying “poor people have it better in American than they do in other countries” is not the same as saying “people are lining up to get visas to go to Africa”. You will notice I never said the latter.

                It is amazing how much the left discounts, disrespects and despises America.
                I can only assume this is directed at me. Assuming my assumption is correct it is amazing how ignorant your comment is. If it is not I apologize.

                Comment


                • The entire line about the left hating America is just the old playbook of wrapping oneself in the flag and painting oneself as an uber-patriot. This is just an attempted end-around to appropriate the symbol of the flag/patriotism in order to shut down any questioning of the status quo.

                  However, since the flag stands for liberty, justice, equality, etc. for ALL, advocating for change that delivers those ideals to everyone is, in fact, the American thing to do.

                  Last edited by D-BONE; 06-27-2020, 08:22 AM.
                  I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                  -Emiliano Zapata

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

                    This is a nice write-up. I agree with a fair amount of it. There is one paragraph I think is most interesting:

                    I’ve had more than one retired police officer tell me that there is a running joke in law enforcement when it comes to racial profiling: It never happens . . . and it works. But the problem with trying to dismiss profiling concerns by noting that higher rates at which some minority groups commit certain crimes is that it overlooks the fact that huge percentages of black and Latino people have been pulled over, stopped on the street and generally harassed despite the fact that they have done nothing wrong. Stop and frisk data, for example, consistently show that about 3 percent of these encountersproduce any evidence of a crime. So 97 percent-plus of these people are getting punished solely because they belong to a group that statistically commits some crimes at a higher rate. That ought to bother us.

                    I can see this being true. That is, generally speaking, minorities are stopped more often than they should be....EVEN if you account for a higher rate of crime among a particular minority group or area of town.

                    That is, I can see cops doing that, essentially over-reacting to a population that...while they rightly believe commit more crimes....it is still an overreaction where they go overboard. That exacerbates issues with the relationship causing stuff like George Floyd to fight with them and then it just boils over and someone gets shot.

                    At the end of the day, there is a lack of trust and a "circle your wagons" on both sides as cops protect their own and people refuse to work with cops and report crimes.
                    Yes, trust needs to be (re)built. That is a two way street. In fact, it's an all way street because it's not just about police and communities of color. It's about all of us simply having a positive attitude and supporting the opportunity for reform. But the more powerful, legitimized agencies need to show recognition and good faith of their role in the situation and take authentic first steps to create momentum for what will inevitably be a long-term process.
                    I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                    -Emiliano Zapata

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post

                      Saying “poor people have it better in American than they do in other countries” is not the same as saying “people are lining up to get visas to go to Africa”. You will notice I never said the latter.



                      I can only assume this is directed at me. Assuming my assumption is correct it is amazing how ignorant your comment is. If it is not I apologize.
                      It was directed at the left in this country. More specifically, the people who deface the Lincoln Memorial and want to tear down the Washington Monument and burn down our cities and create autonomous zones until they figure out they cannot handle that are the people I am talking about.

                      These are the same people who have been protesting America for years, burning the American flag and cursing America like Rev. Wright, Obama's minister of 20 years. That's right, the reverend said G. D. America and his congregation cheered. How is that not despising America?

                      It's not that America has a few warts to these people. It's not about fixing a few things. If it was, I would understand and support that. Because some change is needed. But they want to fundamentally change the nation.

                      "Progressivism" is just another name for fundamentally changing America and there are a lot of those nitwits running around right now like AOC and her radical sisters and others who hate America. If they didn't, they wouldn't want to completely overhaul it.

                      Just admit it. They hate America. They are coming out of the closet in droves.
                      Last edited by BlueNGold; 06-27-2020, 11:01 AM.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                        ...and this is why people are lining up to emigrate to the countries you have been to in Africa?

                        A person in the US from the time they are born has had more opportunity to better their lives, including to visit Africa, than people living there. People emigrate to and/or pour money into Africa to help them. People emigrate from Africa to the US to help themselves.

                        It is amazing how much the left discounts, disrespects and despises America.
                        You keep talking about a continent like everything is so similar, grab a book or two my guy and stop watching fox news.
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post

                          You keep talking about a continent like everything is so similar, grab a book or two my guy and stop watching fox news.
                          Says the guy that doesn't believe in capitalism, the economic system that made the US the most powerful country in the history of the world.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

                            It was directed at the left in this country. More specifically, the people who deface the Lincoln Memorial and want to tear down the Washington Monument and burn down our cities and create autonomous zones until they figure out they cannot handle that are the people I am talking about.

                            These are the same people who have been protesting America for years, burning the American flag and cursing America like Rev. Wright, Obama's minister of 20 years. That's right, the reverend said G. D. America and his congregation cheered. How is that not despising America?

                            It's not that America has a few warts to these people. It's not about fixing a few things. If it was, I would understand and support that. Because some change is needed. But they want to fundamentally change the nation.

                            "Progressivism" is just another name for fundamentally changing America and there are a lot of those nitwits running around right now like AOC and her radical sisters and others who hate America. If they didn't, they wouldn't want to completely overhaul it.

                            Just admit it. They hate America. They are coming out of the closet in droves.
                            Oh, the ones who were told to "go back where they came from" even though they are U.S. citizens?

                            So these defacers are "the left"? Rev. Wright is "the left"? "The left" is purely the most extremist actions one can fish out of the entire progressive community?
                            I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                            -Emiliano Zapata

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

                              Says the guy that doesn't believe in capitalism, the economic system that made the US the most powerful country in the history of the world.
                              Your talking points are a the reason why people out of the US make fun of americans, having it good for so long has made an entire generation very ignorant (boomers), so ignorant they ended up choosing the king of the buffoons to represent them.
                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X