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

Penn State accusations

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

  • Re: Penn State accusations

    Originally posted by Sandman21 View Post
    Seeing as the Presidents' Council (made up of Presidents of NCAA member schools) gave him the power to do so... I think this Nation writer is a complete dumbass.
    I understand that the specific wording could be misleading (intentionally or accidentally), but I think the main point of the article - that the NCAA is acting beyond its jurisdiction - stands. Calling the author a "complete dumbass" does not seem necessary.

    Comment


    • Re: Penn State accusations

      Well some of the actions did occur on campus which gives them some right to act, but I do agree overall that this action should mainly be taken care of by the courts and government.

      And taking away the wins the TEAM had is ridiculous. They did nothing wrong on the field of play.
      Last edited by Cactus Jax; 07-23-2012, 07:24 PM.
      "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

      ----------------- Reggie Miller

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Cactus Jax View Post
        Well some of the actions did occur on campus which gives them some right to act, but I do agree overall that this action should mainly be taken care of by the courts and government.

        And taking away the wins the TEAM had is ridiculous. They did nothing wrong on the field of play.
        Paterno sheltered a pedophile and benefitted for 14 years in the win column. You call that nothing wrong?

        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

        Comment


        • Re: Penn State accusations

          The game of life he failed and he will be forever shamed and held in bad name for doing those horrible things, but football itself there was nothing wrong, and I could care less about Paterno, its about those players, they don't deserve those losses taken away. There wasn't a pay for play, help students get good grades, or cheat in any way getting atheletes nor did they cheat on the field of play itself. Imagine being a player on those teams, you forever hate the proper people of Penn St. for covering up horrible acts, but you worked your *** off and played to the fullest on the field.
          "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

          ----------------- Reggie Miller

          Comment


          • Re: Penn State accusations

            The football program did directly benefit from the cover-up.

            Right now the PSU program is stained by 1) the child molestations by an assistant football coach who held his position for nearly 30 years and had generous campus priviledges for 14 years after that, and 2) the cover-up, perhaps as bad from an NCAA perspective, though not at the same level legally.

            If all of this had come to light in 1998 or 2001, #1, the stain of the child molestations by an assistant football coach would have sullied their reputation greatly and it would not have been the program it became in the interim. It would have been hard to distance the genius behind "Linebacker U" from PSU.

            Paterno wanted to save his football team that horriffic scandal.

            Now it's doubled.
            The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

            Comment


            • Re: Penn State accusations

              Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
              Calling the author a "complete dumbass" does not seem necessary.
              Agree... He could just be a partial dumbass for all we know....
              Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

              ------

              "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

              -John Wooden

              Comment


              • Re: Penn State accusations

                Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
                Calling the author a "complete dumbass" does not seem necessary.
                Maybe I'm just biased towards the people who I worked with for nearly two years at 1 NCAA Plaza, but I'm not changing my mind on that writer.

                There ARE NCAA bylaws that cover standard decency, which I do believe Dr. Emmert cited yesterday in handing down this decision. Simply put, if you are covering up criminal activity in your athletic program, end it NOW, or face the consequences.

                For those who are wringing their hands over the vacating of wins, guess what? The wellbeing and safety of 10 kids is MORE important than 110 or whatever victories. Paterno lost sight of that when he let that monster continue to hang around his program.
                "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                Comment


                • Re: Penn State accusations

                  Paterno should have been fired probably 13 years ago, at the very least he should not have been head coach for the past 10 years if this scandal had come to light. The team benefited from having Paterno around while he covered up the abuse of underage boys. Underage boys that were abused ON PENN STATE PROPERTY. IN PENN STATE LOCKER ROOMS. DURING PENN STATE TRIPS TO NCAA BOWL GAMES. How is this not an NCAA issue? I don't understand that line of thinking at all. It's not like Sandusky even had the guts to take his criminal activity off site. He did it in areas where the NCAA absolutely has jurisdiction. If the NCAA doesn't have the right to punish programs that allowed young boys get sexually assaulted in their locker rooms on school property for NCAA sports teams, then what's even the point of having the NCAA?

                  If Jerry Sandusky had been beating men to death in Penn State locker rooms and Paterno had been covering that up or had they been hiring prostitutes to blow players after every game, it would still be a criminal issue but I would also damn well hope the NCAA would be able to punish the damn school for it. Otherwise we might as well just get rid of the NCAA and let schools do whatever they want if we're just going to say that only the court system can punish individuals for any violation that is a criminal offense. Shouldn't we be giving the NCAA more power to go after schools and athletic programs the more serious the offense is, not less?


                  Comment


                  • Re: Penn State accusations

                    I mean let's just be real, yes it's graphic and hard to think about it, but Sandusky was so brazen, and felt so safe and so protected at Penn State University, that he was comfortable with anally raping an underage boy in a locker room the football team uses in broad daylight. That is some ****ed up **** right there.


                    Comment


                    • Re: Penn State accusations

                      Went way to soft on Penn State should of killed the program for 15 years. The same time the President, Joe Pa and the Ad knew. You cant know about a monster and let him run wild and rape kids for another 15 years they put the tradition and football program ahead of the children who's lives now will never be the same some will be ruined because of that monster. But no one at that school gave a **** all they cared about is football. Letting them play is a shame and the $60m is chump change State college got 200m in donations since that Monster was arrested. You needed to send a message to that whole program and more importantly the victims that they are far more important than football. This is about the worst crime outside of murder how a whole city can cover it up for so long is unreal they should all be ashamed of themselves.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Penn State accusations

                        Yes, lets completely destroy the Happy Valley economy for 15 years because of something they probably didn't know was happening and deprive players of scholarships to get educations again because of something they more than likely had no idea was going about. Soon the former President and AD will be rotting in jail with Sandusky. Paterno's legacy is as dead as he is. For ALL intensive purposes, what Penn State got in much more devastating than what SMU got, and look at how pathetic that program has really been since that ruling.

                        As for the $200 mill in donations, good for Penn State, even BETTER for the soon to come lawsuits against Penn State by the victims of Sandusky. The 60m penalty is just the TIP of that iceberg.
                        "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                        "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                        Comment


                        • Re: Penn State accusations

                          Yep, the attorneys for those filing the lawsuits will be using all of these figures and more. Penn State will be bleeding money by the end of this. The money is not the issue. I would have liked to see at least a one year TV ban, maybe even two year alongside the postseason issue. That would have been my change, along with removing them from the Big Ten if I was the conference.


                          Comment


                          • Re: Penn State accusations

                            The only reason I would NOT kick them out of the Big Ten is because of the other PSU Athletic teams that did nothing wrong (even though their boss and his boss were scumbags involved in this). Id have suspended them from Big Ten football for a minimum of one season.
                            "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                            "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                            Comment


                            • If the happy valley economy is going to be "destroyed" by 10-15 years of bad football (not NO football mind you, just bad football), that's their own fault.

                              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                              Comment


                              • Re: Penn State accusations

                                for ****s sake the whole town knew. Victim #1's mom was told to not go to the police and calm down from a principal at a local HS so Sandusky could keep coaching HS football. That whole town is to blame and most of the town knew what Sandusky was doing but were hush hush about it to keep the program in a positive light.

                                15 yr death sentence or 15 years of donating every dollar the football program makes to charity and the victims.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X