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

Gawd-Awful Halftime...Again

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

  • #16
    Re: Gawd-Awful Halftime...Again

    In all my years of watching Super Bowls, only one halftime show stuck out as memorable - U2 in 2002. Everything else was completely forgettable.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Gawd-Awful Halftime...Again

      Jay, I meant to mention this earlier.

      Remember a couple of days ago when Buck complimented you about your "best post ever" and you questioned whether "this team is built for the regular season" wasn't better?


      Tinsalita needs to be considered as another possibility!
      And I won't be here to see the day
      It all dries up and blows away
      I'd hang around just to see
      But they never had much use for me
      In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Gawd-Awful Halftime...Again

        Just listened to the first 30 seconds of the video. Ouch!

        Brutal.

        I sorta hope Buffett (one of my favorites) never gets tapped to do halftime. (Although he might be too young to qualify right now...)

        Although a 2 hour set in the parking lot before the game would be pretty cool...
        You're caught up in the Internet / you think it's such a great asset / but you're wrong, wrong, wrong
        All that fiber optic gear / still cannot take away the fear / like an island song

        - Jimmy Buffett

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Gawd-Awful Halftime...Again

          Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
          I think they should give the halftime show to the high school marching band national title winner. or the DCI World Champion, but I don't know how that could possibly work given the scheduling. the BoA champion should still be together and ready to go.
          I think that is a most excellent idea.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Gawd-Awful Halftime...Again

            And I won't be here to see the day
            It all dries up and blows away
            I'd hang around just to see
            But they never had much use for me
            In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Gawd-Awful Halftime...Again

              I did business during halftime....never watch it anyway.
              Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Gawd-Awful Halftime...Again

                Well, it was awful. Almost bad enough to divert one's mind from another disappointing perform during the night.

                Pete was faking the windmill power chords, slacking off on the solos, and came on stage looking exactly like what he has been accused of.

                Roger couldn't hit the notes. I noticed that the camera was wide during the climactic scream of "Won't Get Fooled Again." I wonder if that indicates a camera crew unfamiliar with the song, or evidence that the scream was pre-recorded and Daltrey wasn't even going to try very hard to lip-synch it.

                OK. I'm over it.
                And I won't be here to see the day
                It all dries up and blows away
                I'd hang around just to see
                But they never had much use for me
                In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Gawd-Awful Halftime...Again

                  It was BRU-TAL. Score another one for Putty.

                  The lighting was pretty cool. But the music was absolutely, utterly, and disgustingly TREACHEROUS (and I like The Who).

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Gawd-Awful Halftime...Again

                    I like a lot of The Who's music, but I thought that performance was beyond awful. I didn't think that Bruce was good last year either, but I'm not a fan of his anyway. These acts they are choosing are so old that they might as well trot out the Glen Miller Orchestra next year.

                    They need to change it up. Getting a country act in there would be a nice change. Of course I don't really trust them in that department either because Faith Hill is the lone bonafide country superstar that is involved with the NFL on a regular basis and what do they have her do? Sing a cheesy song to the tune of a Joan Jett rock song. Garth Brooks, Kenny Chesney, and Toby Keith, are just a few guys that have stage shows big enough to do a SB.

                    I LOVE the idea of having the high school marching band champion, or a college band would be great too. Some of the colleges do AMAZING stuff, very creative formations and complicated moves. Maybe they could have the band from the NCAA football champ school or something like that.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Gawd-Awful Halftime...Again

                      Originally posted by Bball View Post
                      The other thing I'd suggest is at least let the bands play and fail before giving the show a bad review...
                      Well... they did that too.
                      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                      And life itself, rushing over me
                      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Gawd-Awful Halftime...Again

                        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                        Jay, no one under the age of 30 cares one iota about Bruce. Sorry, but it's true.
                        That's not actually true. Yes, over-40 is definitely his main demographic, but there are lots of younger adults at the shows. (EDIT) And because he's playing an arena or a stadium, the raw number of young adults at his shows is probably greater than the raw number of young adults at shows of bands that are more popular now. If 1/4 of his show at the United Center is under the age of 40, then that's still a crowd of 6,500.

                        I'm sure if Elvis was alive, and he went on tour, he would have huge sales. At some point in time, you've got to get back to the present and get the next generation excited about the halftime show.
                        I agree. I think The Who was an uninspiring choice from the get-go.

                        Their recent tours haven't exactly been well-received either.

                        And I like The Who, at least I like a lot of The Who's songs.
                        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                        And life itself, rushing over me
                        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Gawd-Awful Halftime...Again

                          Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                          Pete was faking the windmill power chords, slacking off on the solos, and came on stage looking exactly like what he has been accused of.
                          And just what would that be ??
                          Townshend was cautioned by the British police in 2003 as part of Operation Ore. Following a news leak that Townshend was among the subjects of the investigation, he publicly stated that on one occasion he had used a credit card to access a website advertising child pornography. Townshend, who had posted essays on his personal website in 2002 as part of his campaign against the widespread availability of child pornography on the internet, said that he had entered the site for research purposes and had not downloaded any images. A four-month police investigation, including forensic examination of all of his computers, established that Townshend was not in possession of any illegal downloaded images. Instead of pressing charges, the police elected to caution him, stating, "It is not a defence to access these images for research or out of curiosity. In a statement issued by his lawyer, Townshend said, "I accept that I was wrong to access this site, and that by doing so, I broke the law, and I have accepted the caution that the police have given me."
                          And FWIW:
                          Townshend has been an active champion of children’s charities. The debut of Pete Townshend’s stage version of Tommy took place at San Diego’s La Jolla Playhouse in July 1992. The show was earmarked as a benefit for the London-based Nordoff-Robbins Music Therapy Foundation, an organization which helps children with autism and mental retardation.

                          Townshend performed at a 1995 benefit organized by Paul Simon at Madison Square Garden's Paramount Theatre, for The Children’s Health Fund. The following year, Townshend performed at a benefit for the Bridge School Benefit, a California facility for children with severe speech and physical impairments with concerts organized by Neil Young each year. In 1997, Townshend established a relationship with Maryville Academy, a Chicago area children’s charity. Between 1997 and 2002, Townshend played five benefit shows for Maryville Academy, raising at least $1,600,000. His 1998 album A Benefit for Maryville Academy was made to support their activities and proceeds from the sales of his release were donated to them.

                          As a member of The Who, Pete Townshend has also performed a series of concerts, beginning in 2000, benefitting the Teenage Cancer Trust in the UK, raising several million pounds. In 2005, Townshend performed at New York’s Gotham Hall for Samsung’s Four Seasons of Hope, an annual children's charity fundraiser, and donated a smashed guitar to the the Pediatric Epilepsy Project.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Gawd-Awful Halftime...Again

                            I like the light show but can't say I was to impressed.... they should have just had a benefit corroboration of Artists and rasied money for Haiti...
                            Ya Think Ya Used Enough Dynamite there Butch...

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Gawd-Awful Halftime...Again

                              Originally posted by GO!!!!! View Post
                              I like the light show but can't say I was to impressed.... they should have just had a benefit corroboration of Artists and rasied money for Haiti...
                              It probably wouldn't make good theatre at the Super Bowl, but I'll take Dave Matthews and Neil Young collaborating on an old Hank Williams song over The Old Guys, Irrelavant But Still Alive Guys From The Who any time.
                              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                              And life itself, rushing over me
                              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Gawd-Awful Halftime...Again

                                Make mine accoustic.



                                How about each team in the SB selecting a marching band to represent them?


                                Hehehehhe imagine deciding between, IU, Purdue, ND, or some local HS band. Just think how much $$$ the SB Committee could save.
                                Last edited by indygeezer; 02-08-2010, 07:10 PM.
                                Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X