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

The Wolf Game III: This Time It's Personal

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

  • #31
    Re: The Wolf Game III: This Time It's Personal

    Dear Journal -

    Well this is an unexpected turn of events. I've wondered recently if something strange was afoot, but whatever I was expecting it wasn't this. Werewolves, in our town? What next?

    There must be a way to catch the wolves. Four wolves, and two of them named? A plausible assumption: two of the wolves were at the scene of the crime (i.e. named in the initial narration) while two more are silent killers. Those at the scene of the crime are N8R, Hicks, Bellisimo, Ken, Suaveness, ToxicAvenger, and Natstoned. Plus myself, of course, although I'm certainly not a wolf. 8 of the possible 20 were at the scene, which (if my hypothesis is correct) would mean that a random guess would have a 25% chance of being right (2/8) instead of a 20% change (4/20). Time to test the hypothesis and see.

    Hicks voted for me and claimed it was unbiased, yet he would know that my keen analytical mind is more likely than average to pick out a wolf. Did he pick the methodology first and let that lead him to me, or did he pick me and find a workable rationalization after? For now I'll assume the former.

    No, my suspicions are with the one who found the body. Let us closely examine N8R to see if he is a lycanthrope. If such examinations require his death, the guilt will consume me. But we must act swiftly to counter this threat.

    N8R it is.
    This space for rent.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: The Wolf Game III: This Time It's Personal

      I fear that a few in the crowd are turning on me. I stumble upon a dead body, that of my gay best friend sweabs, and suddenly I am to blame? That is no reason for me to hang.

      My vote may need some reconsideration.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: The Wolf Game III: This Time It's Personal

        I should say this, ALL twenty villagers were at the scene of the crime. I only named some in the story and I picked them randomly, just FYI guys. None of my stories during the game are going to give away any clues.


        Comment


        • #34
          Re: The Wolf Game III: This Time It's Personal

          Sitting at my desk in my now empty classroom, not really upset that the children have been taken out by their parents since vacation time is close at hand. I am upset that I can't leave early and get out of this death trap since martial law has been put into effect and no one is allowed to enter or leave town.

          The reason for the lock down is peculiar and a bit disturbing. Not that Sweabs and B-Town are dead. They were in the short bus group and their contributions will not be missed by many except the sheep and our fearless leader. the loss of Gyron is sad. he was one of the few people in this town that one could hold a decent conversation with.

          But enough of the deadwood. Now I must figure out who is a wolf. Many possibilities have been laid out, but I'm not sure many of them are clever enough to be successful as such a bit of deception. My vote goes to Toxic Avenger. He always was a trouble maker, not to mention looking like he had been beaten with an ugly stick more than once.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: The Wolf Game III: This Time It's Personal

            Curse these creatures of death! They are ruining my whore house! I had to send away all my women to protect them from such vile beasts...they've taken my best costumers already! THIS IS MADNESS!

            Order must be brought back into the town so that the girls can come back to lead a normal life and earn some money!

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: The Wolf Game III: This Time It's Personal

              alright so how has the towns people reacted so far? lets have a look....the order of how people have voted.

              1) Hicks
              2) Binarysolo
              3) Dabney Prood
              4) cdash
              5) vapacersfan
              6) major cold
              7) n8r
              8) rupert stilinski
              9) kuq e Zi91
              10) suaveness
              11) pignash
              12) anthem
              13) sycamoreken

              so that leaves the following people left to vote:

              Myself, brushwithdeath, mourning, natston, since86, Toxic Avenger, Trophy


              None of these guys except myself have been seen around the town since the massacre took place...[ooc]for the newcomers *they've yet to check the thread*[/ooc]

              yet these are the guys that is getting most of the votes - sounds suspicious how its people that can't even be around to defend themselves that are getting the votes piled up...something is not humane about that!

              I do not have enough data at hand right now to generate a statistical conclusion...so i will put my vote on someone who has not received any as I do not want any blood on my hands by sending a fellow human to the gallows. For this reason I vote for: Hicks. He might be human, he might be wolf - but for now he should be safe considering there are others being ganged on.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: The Wolf Game III: This Time It's Personal

                Votes
                Anthem
                - 1(Hicks)
                Suaveness-1(Binarysolo)
                N8R- 2(Dabney Prood, Anthem)
                Mourning- 2(cdash, N8R)
                Brushwithdeath- 4(vapacersfan, Kuq_E_Zi91, Suaveness, Rupert Stilinski)
                Pig Nash- 1(Major Cold)
                Binarysolo- 1(Pig Nash)
                The Toxic Avenger- 1(SycamoreKen)
                Hicks- 2(bellisimo, Trophy)
                Last edited by Trader Joe; 06-05-2010, 12:44 PM.


                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: The Wolf Game III: This Time It's Personal

                  Originally posted by Indy View Post
                  I should say this, ALL twenty villagers were at the scene of the crime. I only named some in the story and I picked them randomly, just FYI guys. None of my stories during the game are going to give away any clues.
                  Whoops. Thought I had something there.
                  This space for rent.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: The Wolf Game III: This Time It's Personal

                    Anthem might be coming to his senses.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: The Wolf Game III: This Time It's Personal

                      My vote is Hicks. I can use some leadership assistance along with Belli.
                      Last edited by Trophy; 06-05-2010, 11:31 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: The Wolf Game III: This Time It's Personal

                        Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                        Whoops. Thought I had something there.
                        No, sorry I'm really not gonna give away any clues in my stories. They are just for entertainment. I thought I passed on that all villagers were there when I said I was the last to find out, but I probably should have been more clear. My fault.


                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: The Wolf Game III: This Time It's Personal

                          Rupert Stilinski is Scott "Teen Wolf" Howard's best friend. He must be the villain. Put a fully jacketed silver hollow point in his face and rid the town of his treachery.
                          "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                          -Lance Stephenson

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: The Wolf Game III: This Time It's Personal

                            I'm starting to wonder where our missing brethren are. Could they have been murdered as well?
                            Play Mafia!
                            Twitter

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: The Wolf Game III: This Time It's Personal

                              [ooc]Yeah everyone should have checked in by now. Maybe PM's should be sent out to those that havent voted/checking in this thread yet?[/ooc]

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: The Wolf Game III: This Time It's Personal

                                Major Cold is my vote. My allergies have been in a tizzy, and I think he's the cause. Plus, no one else has voted for him, and I cannot jump on a bandwagon so soon. What if they are wrong, and a human dies at our hands? I'm not nearly drunk enough to handle that horrible thought. I will have to get some liquid courage in me before I can accept what I must do.

                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X