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

Nirvana's place in the world of music....

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

  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

    Originally posted by Constellations View Post
    that's fine, I can swallow that.

    Leave a comment:


  • Constellations
    replied
    Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

    Originally posted by cdash View Post
    This is going to sound rude (and it kind of is), but your arrogance about your musical opinion is extremely off-putting.
    That's fine, take it how you want it. I play guitar, bass, and Drums because I'm that passionate about music itself. So I stick for myself and I'm proud of my knowledge and talent with the subject/hobby/art or whatever you wish to call it. If arrogance is your word, that's fine, I can swallow that.

    Either way around, arrogant or not, I stand by my words and arrogance. So, you can dish all the rude statements out you want.

    Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
    Hugo Chavez is the only one who found that rude.


    Originally posted by billbradley View Post
    You made up something about not being on punk rock billboard.
    You're not right and check the charts. Clearly not made up. Nowhere on the charts. So go ahead and spend another 30 minutes searching through countless information for next strike. I can't wait to read it in a few days.
    Last edited by Constellations; 09-23-2011, 06:54 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • avoidingtheclowns
    replied
    Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

    Originally posted by cdash View Post
    This is going to sound rude (and it kind of is), but your arrogance about your musical opinion is extremely off-putting.
    Hugo Chavez is the only one who found that rude.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

    Originally posted by Constellations View Post
    I offered enough. You just hate being wrong. They aren't punk. But keep telling yourself they are to keep the fuzzy feeling in your head I guess. You're not as musically intellectual as I thought.
    You have offered nothing besides how they sound to you. Read your posts.

    You made up something about not being on punk rock billboard.

    I don't really care if you admit I'm right, I just hope I helped inform you on some punk history.

    Leave a comment:


  • cdash
    replied
    Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

    Originally posted by Constellations View Post
    I offered enough. You just hate being wrong. They aren't punk. But keep telling yourself they are to keep the fuzzy feeling in your head I guess. You're not as musically intellectual as I thought.
    This is going to sound rude (and it kind of is), but your arrogance about your musical opinion is extremely off-putting.

    Leave a comment:


  • Constellations
    replied
    Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

    Originally posted by billbradley View Post
    You admitted it again.

    So you have to be on the top of the charts to be punk? And Billboard has a punk genre? Please, go all day. I would really like to learn this information. Because so far, you have offered nothing.

    EDIT: You caught it.
    I offered enough. You just hate being wrong. They aren't punk. But keep telling yourself they are to keep the fuzzy feeling in your head I guess. You're not as musically intellectual as I thought.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

    Originally posted by Constellations View Post
    As a matter of fact I do have facts to prove my opinion. Not a single song or album made it to punk charts. I'll go all day if you honestly think I'm wrong, because I'm not. They are punk, hands down. Earlier publications being punk, we'll talk about it. Mainstream music, no.
    You admitted it again.

    So you have to be on the top of the charts to be punk? And Billboard has a punk genre? Please, go all day. I would really like to learn this information. Because so far, you have offered nothing.

    EDIT: You caught it.
    Last edited by billbradley; 09-23-2011, 04:20 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Constellations
    replied
    Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

    Originally posted by billbradley View Post
    You can't prove what you said, that is why you won't continue to try. You admit they were punk, so I don't even know what your argument really is? When they were famous they weren't punk anymore? Sure, I can agree with that. Being a mainstream band with more elaborate production kind of escapes their punk roots, but that is how they made punk mainstream. People bought Nevermind, then bought Nirvana's earlier punk work. That earlier work turned people on to punk. As for me being smug, I apologize. I'm just telling you what I know. It isn't my fault you don't have anything to back your opinion.
    As a matter of fact I do have facts to prove my opinion. Not a single song or album made it to punk charts. I'll go all day if you honestly think I'm wrong, because I'm not. They aren't punk, hands down. Earlier publications being punk? We'll talk about it. Bleach and beyond, no-way. Mainstream music, no. You need to tighten up your ears to what the punk sound actually is.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

    CNN has a nice piece as well today

    Why Nirvana's 'Nevermind' spoke to a generation
    http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/445241...entertainment/
    By Tony Sclafani

    It was one of the most influential rock albums of all time and arguably the last rock album to drastically change the course of popular music. And come Sept. 24, the album in question, Nirvana’s “Nevermind,” will mark its 20th anniversary with as much fanfare as you’d expect from such a significant piece of pop culture history.
    I don't know if anyone still reads this thread really, but I remember some Radiohead fans earlier. This made my week.

    Radiohead will tour in 2012
    http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/musicnews/s3323889.htm

    In a recent interview on BBC Radio 1 Radiohead frontman Thom Yorke told Gilles Peterson that they'll be touring in 2012.

    Yorke said:

    "The idea is to go out and play next year on and off during the year."

    Since the release of The King Of Limbs in February, Radiohead have only played one live show, a secret appearance at Glastonbury Festival.

    Two New York shows have been confirmed for the end of this September but with no other performances announced it's unknown whether or not an Australian visit is planned.

    In other music news, Yorke's side project Atoms For Peace is almost ready to release their first album. In the same chat with Gilles Peterson, Yorke mentioned that he, Flea (Red Hot Chilli Peppers) and producer Nigel Godrich are now close to finishing the LP.
    I saw them back to back on their last tour, at palooza then in indy. They absolutey killed it. It amazes me how they can perform such layered and complex songs (especially vocally) so well live.
    Last edited by billbradley; 09-23-2011, 04:01 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

    Originally posted by Constellations View Post
    I'm not going to try and prove myself someone as smug and pompous as yourself. There past was punk, which was before they were famous, simple as that. Once they hit the bigs, the were no longer punk. Have any other smug or passive aggressive questions or comments for me?
    You can't prove what you said, that is why you won't continue to try. You admit they were punk, so I don't even know what your argument really is? When they were famous they weren't punk anymore? Sure, I can agree with that. Being a mainstream band with more elaborate production kind of escapes their punk roots, but that is how they made punk mainstream. People bought Nevermind, then bought Nirvana's earlier punk work. That earlier work turned people on to punk. As for me being smug, I apologize. I'm just telling you what I know. It isn't my fault you don't have anything to back your opinion.

    Leave a comment:


  • Constellations
    replied
    Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

    Originally posted by Merz View Post
    That is a vomit inducing post. (this is not a knock on your posting or your point in this thread...just what is currently considered a great rock band).
    I don't rightly care honestly if it's a vomit inducing post, but it is true. I can guarantee you I'm the most avid follower of today's music out of anyone in this thread. These bands are considered the top tier whether you like it or not, and I know I don't. Breaking Benjamin for sure is one of my favorite bands. But the Nickelback and Staind is gross. So I'm with you on that one for sure buddy.

    Originally posted by Merz View Post
    I honestly think a large group of people (the nickelback fans) should STOP paying attention.

    Leave a comment:


  • Constellations
    replied
    Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

    Originally posted by billbradley View Post
    I did, you say their early work was punk and they were labeled punk. So then they were punk.



    No, you didn't and you don't.



    No, but you said it yourself Nirvana was punk.



    This also makes no sense, but you are right. I don't listen to songs I don't want to, however I listen to all of Nirvana's songs.



    Your fanhood isn't proof here. Give me another reason besides how you think they sound. I will give some as an example for you. We agree Nirvana sounded punk, Nirvana was labeled punk, Nirvana is credited with bringing punk mainstream, and the went on a punk tour with icons of punk.

    I don't think this sounds punk..



    Do you? It doesn't matter. The Clash is the only band that matters
    I'm not going to try and prove myself someone as smug and pompous as yourself. There past was punk, which was before they were famous, simple as that. Once they hit the bigs, the were no longer punk. Have any other smug or passive aggressive questions or comments for me?
    Last edited by Constellations; 09-23-2011, 03:30 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Merz
    replied
    Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

    Originally posted by Constellations View Post
    Nickelback is a superstar band. Staind is a great band. Breaking Benjamin is a superstar band. Seether is a great band.
    That is a vomit inducing post. (this is not a knock on your posting or your point in this thread...just what is currently considered a great rock band).

    Leave a comment:


  • Merz
    replied
    Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

    Originally posted by Constellations View Post
    Nickelback is one of the biggest bands in music currently. If you think this isn't true, you should really pay attention.
    I honestly think a large group of people (the nickelback fans) should STOP paying attention.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: Nirvana's place in the world of music....

    Originally posted by Constellations View Post
    I clearly noted that some of their work before Bleach and such was punkish. Read the post again maybe?
    I did, you say their early work was punk and they were labeled punk. So then they were punk.

    I made perfect sense actually.
    No, you didn't and you don't.

    This is something that happens every day. Bands get labeled something they are not. Am I wrong on that?
    No, but you said it yourself Nirvana was punk.

    Maybe you should try listening to the songs you don't want to and realize something Bill.
    This also makes no sense, but you are right. I don't listen to songs I don't want to, however I listen to all of Nirvana's songs.

    They are not ****ing Punk lol. I used to be a die hard Nirvana fan. Dressed/Acted/Played/studied and wrote like the band did. I know what I'm talking about.
    Your fanhood isn't proof here. Give me another reason besides how you think they sound. I will give some as an example for you. We agree Nirvana sounded punk, Nirvana was labeled punk, Nirvana is credited with bringing punk mainstream, and the went on a punk tour with icons of punk.

    I don't think this sounds punk..



    Do you? It doesn't matter. The Clash is the only band that matters

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X