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

Headlights Vs. Driving Lights

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

  • #16
    Re: Headlights Vs. Driving Lights

    It's simple courtesy. If you are in the fast lane and someone comes up behind you - at your nearest convenience, move over to the slower lane until the people going faster than you want to go have passed by, THEN move back into the left lane to pass the people going slower than you, who should be in the right lanes in the first place. This should be true regardless of the relationship between the actual speeds of the drivers and the posted speed limit.

    If I'm going 15 miles an hour over the limit in the left lane, and someone comes up behind me going 25 miles an hour over, it is my responsibility BY LAW to move over to the right and let them go by, even if I have to slow down from my desired speed to do it.

    On a slightly related note, My three favorite traffic laws in California are:

    1) on freeways, the speed limit for vehicles with 3 or more axles, including trailers, have a speed limit 10 miles an hour below everyone else.

    2) If a freeway has 3 or more lanes going one direction, vehicles with 3 or more axles can ONLY use the two right lanes and are never permitted in any lanes on the left.

    3) if you are on a road with only one lane going in your direction of travel (like a 2 lane state highway) you must pull over or turn off the road if 5 or more cars are stacked behind you. If you're bottling up traffic, YOU get the ticket.
    Last edited by Los Angeles; 02-21-2010, 02:35 PM.
    “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

    “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Headlights Vs. Driving Lights

      What I don't get is the firm support of one law in the face of ignoring another one (the speed limit).

      It would seem that as long as a driver is going the speed limit, he doesn't owe anyone going fast anything. Particularly when the faster driver is already breaking the law.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Headlights Vs. Driving Lights

        Also, your solution to my example doesn't work, though that's probably due to a lack of clarification on my part.

        I often see this while driving to Indy on 70:

        There's several cars lined up in the right lane, when another car starts to pass them, but he/she is only going slightly faster than the line (probably around 5 mph faster than the law-abiding line).

        Then, when they are somewhere between 1/3 and 1/2 way past the line of law-abiders, a guy going 10+ over comes speeding up, starts to pass the line himself, and is now coming up on the butt of the 5-over guy.

        At this point, the 5-over guy cannot get back behind the chain of law-abiders. He can either ride it out at the speed he is already going while 10+ rides his butt, or he has to go even faster to speed up the passing process he already committed to doing.

        I don't think, at that point, 10+ has the right to be upset with 5 just because 5 doesn't want to speed any faster than he already is. I've been all three players in this example before, so I've seen it from all 3 sides myself.

        Sometimes I'm cruising at the limit in the right lane, sometimes I want to speed things up a bit and go 5 over, and sometimes I'm in a hurry and go 10 or so. When I've been the 10+ guy, I just have to back off of the 5 guy in that scenario until he clears the line, gets over, and at which point I'm free to speed back up.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Headlights Vs. Driving Lights

          In my previous post, I said at your nearest convenience. I still hold to that. instead of looking for a rule on the subject, just find a gap in the line of cars on your right within what you perceive to be a reasonable amount of time and get over. Shouldn't take more than a minute or two. If it's taking more than a minute or two, you need to slow down and get behind a law abider until the fastest traffic passes you. once they are past, you'll have all the time in the world to move back over and speed up to pass the law abiders.

          The issue here is that the concept of sharing the road means that everyone owes everyone else something. ALWAYS. And that CONFLICT on the road is extremely dangerous. Moving over and letting speeders pass is much safer for everyone compared to acting like a human blockade and preventing faster drivers from moving forward. If someone is driving dangerously, as in driving too fast, STAY AWAY FROM THEM. Parking yourself in the left lane and giving the person behind you the finger is the exact opposite of courteous, defensive driving. It is a form of road rage. It is dangerous, because people will swerve to get around you, you are compacting the space between cars as a line develops behind you and less room mean s more danger, too. It is inconsiderate of everyone. The unsafe person here is the one that feels it is within their rights to force other drivers to stay behind them. The fact that the people behind you are breaking the speeding rule does not give you the right to behave like a vigilante. Leave the act of controlling speeders to law enforcement and move over to let everyone pass.

          When you visit New York, Chicago or LA, you'll find out REALLY FAST that knowing the rules and driving just like you drive in Indiana is going to infuriate the drivers around you and they WILL let you have an earful. Knowing the rules is only part of the experience. Knowing the behavior and expectations of the other drivers and conforming to the local driving habits is the safer way to share the road. In Chicago, people roll through stop signs. If you stop and wait, you'll get rear-ended. Yes, you were more "within the rules", but that won't fix your bumper. In New York, merging works like a zipper, one from the left, one from the right, repeat and hit the gas. If you pause and let two or more cars from the other lane go consecutively, prepare for the horn-and-fist from the cars behind you. In Los Angeles, if someone is waiting at a crosswalk and you don't stop and wait for them to cross, hello rock through the window. Actually, that last one is a rule in California. Even on 4 lane commercial roads, even when there is no light at the intersection - all lanes of traffic have to stop for pedestrians at crosswalks. Out of towners roll straight through and often get a $500 ticket. Brutal.

          But everywhere, I mean everywhere in our country, slower traffic should move right to let faster traffic pass them on the left. Regardless of what the speed limit is. Staying in the left lane and - even worse - tapping your brakes (AGH!) is a horrible decision and extremely dangerous.
          “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

          “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Headlights Vs. Driving Lights

            Why isn't it on the speeders to just slow down and back off, as opposed to being accommodated? What happened to their courtesy? What happened to their cooperation? What happened to their sense of safety? What happened to their responsibility?

            Also, in my scenario there are no gaps large enough to safely merge. You either go all the way back, or all the way ahead, of the line, or you're stuck in the left lane. What then?

            I want to point out that I have never said anything about tapping the breaks or giving the finger.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Headlights Vs. Driving Lights

              You're assuming the faster drivers are speeding. Speeding has nothing to do with the concept I'm talking about. Speeding is a red herring to the discussion.

              Also, if you turn on your signal, someone will give you space to move over. This is another example of courteous driving.
              Last edited by Los Angeles; 02-21-2010, 04:18 PM.
              “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

              “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Headlights Vs. Driving Lights

                Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
                You're assuming the faster drivers are speeding. Speeding has nothing to do with the concept I'm talking about. Speeding is a red herring to the discussion.
                Then I think we're in agreement when we're both under the assumption that the faster drivers are not speeding.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Headlights Vs. Driving Lights

                  I think so, too for the most part.

                  The idea is "slower traffic move right". There are signs all over the place to remind everyone to do this. Where people get it wrong is when they think that they don't have to follow this rule because the other people are doing something wrong. "They were talking on their cell phone in the movie theater, so I started singing at the top of my lungs until they stopped".

                  EDIT: in other words, two wrongs don't make a right. The right thing for you to do is move over whether the person behind you is speeding or not.
                  “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                  “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Headlights Vs. Driving Lights

                    Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
                    Also, if you turn on your signal, someone will give you space to move over. This is another example of courteous driving.
                    So, 2 cars have to be inconvienced to accomodate the one guy that wants to go faster ?? Not in my book. If I'm going over the limit and passing cars, you're just going to have to wait until I'm done passing to get by me. I'm not slowing down, merging into the line I'm passing just to let someone else by. Nope.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Headlights Vs. Driving Lights

                      The problem is parking and NEVER moving over. If you're going to be moving over shortly, then great, you're in compliance. If you have no intention of moving over, or if that line of slower traffic seems endless, then a merge IS the correct thing to do.
                      “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                      “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Headlights Vs. Driving Lights

                        Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                        I've found that when some A-hole is tailgating you an easy solution is to turn on your hazard lights, that almost always backs them off. They think WTF is this guy's deal. Lots of people tailgate with out even knowing it, so the hazard lights immediately get their attention, Tapping your brakes can get you rear ended.
                        It's okay if I get rearended, especially in Indiana.

                        I can stop in the middle of the road for a turtle crossing it, and if you rearend me it's your fault. You are supposed to be in control of your vehicle at ALL TIMES.

                        You rearending me will get me a new bumper, and whatever damage is done, fixed.

                        I'm not a person to fake an injury to get money out of a crash, but there are a lot of people out there that will. So not only would you provide them with new body work you would be lining their pocket with cash all while you pay more in insurance premiums.
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Headlights Vs. Driving Lights

                          Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
                          If I'm going 15 miles an hour over the limit in the left lane, and someone comes up behind me going 25 miles an hour over, it is my responsibility BY LAW to move over to the right and let them go by, even if I have to slow down from my desired speed to do it.
                          Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
                          You're assuming the faster drivers are speeding. Speeding has nothing to do with the concept I'm talking about. Speeding is a red herring to the discussion.

                          Also, if you turn on your signal, someone will give you space to move over. This is another example of courteous driving.

                          Ummmm.....I'm a little late to the convo, so I might be missing something here, but to me this is a direct contradiction.

                          I don't care what state I'm in. If I'm doing the speed limit(which I won't be), or actually going over the speed limit (which I will be) then you have zero room for argument about riding my ***.

                          If you don't like the speed I'm going, then take it up with the State. Not me.

                          Courteous driving is having respect for those around you. Not having respect for how fast you want to drive regardless of the situation.

                          I've driven in both Atlanta and Chicago. You will never convince me driving the way they do is safer, regardless if I follow the norms of those cities.

                          It's dangerous and it's reckless.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Headlights Vs. Driving Lights

                            I agree with like 95% of what LA's saying - but isn't the guy who's going like 30mph over the speed limit doing his own part to increase overall "road rage?" I know it ticks me off when I see someone whiz past me like he's a IndyCar on the raceway. (I stick to the right lane, speed limit.)

                            Also, I don't know how many times I've heard the old "but OH MAN, over in Chicago/New York/LA/etc. those drivers would eat you alive. . . " thing, like I'm somehow supposed to respect or admire the fact that an entire city drives like idiots. (That and the stories seem inevitably overblown, as when I've either been or driven in these cities, the traffic is never quite that horrendous.)
                            You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Headlights Vs. Driving Lights

                              So I went on a little rant. If someone comes up your tail pipe, you have a choice between staying in their way and moving over. The correct choice EVERY TIME is to move over.

                              The fact that someone else is being rude or breaking rules does not give you the right to do the same.
                              “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                              “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Headlights Vs. Driving Lights

                                Originally posted by tora tora
                                So the posted speed limit doesn't apply to anybody riding the "fast lane"?
                                Who said anything about that. This is about slower traffic moving over.

                                I give up.
                                “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                                “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X