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

Who will give the Colts their first loss?

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

  • #91
    Re: Who will give the Colts their first loss?

    Originally posted by Moses View Post
    What Robertmo said may be a stretch, but to say as of now that Brady isn't a top 5 all-time QB is just plain stupid.
    I'll take Dan Marino, Steve Young, Joe Montana, Peyton Manning, Brett Favre, John Elway, Johnny Unitas, Len Dawson and Brett Star all in their primes over Brady.

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Who will give the Colts their first loss?

      Originally posted by Isaac@Section216 View Post
      I'll take Dan Marino, Steve Young, Joe Montana, Peyton Manning, Brett Favre, John Elway, Johnny Unitas, Len Dawson and Brett Star all in their primes over Brady.
      Good for you.

      Either way, It's a difference of opinions. I think Brady will win 3-4 more superbowls while Manning only may win 1 his entire career. Kind of hard to get a team to go out and sign people when your QB has a monstrous contract that eats up more then 1/3 of your cap space.

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Who will give the Colts their first loss?

        Originally posted by Moses View Post
        Kind of hard to get a team to go out and sign people when your QB has a monstrous contract that eats up more then 1/3 of your cap space.
        How did we ever sign Corey Simon and Adam Vinatieri or trade for McFarland?
        Edit Signature

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Who will give the Colts their first loss?

          Originally posted by naturallystoned View Post
          How did we ever sign Corey Simon and Adam Vinatieri or trade for McFarland?
          Giving up Edge as well as the fact that none of those guys are big name players...maybe with the exception of Vinatieri..but kickers aren't all that expensive to get.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Who will give the Colts their first loss?

            Originally posted by Moses View Post
            Giving up Edge as well as the fact that none of those guys are big name players...maybe with the exception of Vinatieri..but kickers aren't all that expensive to get.
            You didn't say anything about big name people, you said sign people period. I just listed three guys that are getting paid pretty well and aren't scrubs either. I didn't even mention that we gave #1 money to Reggie Wayne or even the new contracts on the defensive side...
            Edit Signature

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Who will give the Colts their first loss?

              Originally posted by Moses View Post
              I don't understand the lack of respect Brady gets on here.

              What Robertmo said may be a stretch, but to say as of now that Brady isn't a top 5 all-time QB is just plain stupid.
              Terry Bradshaw, Bart Starr, Dan Marino, Joe Montana, Steve Young.

              He's close... he's right there with Aikman, Favre, Elway... top ten certainly.

              I don't know about top-five, though.

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

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Who will give the Colts their first loss?

                Originally posted by naturallystoned View Post
                You didn't say anything about big name people, you said sign people period. I just listed three guys that are getting paid pretty well and aren't scrubs either. I didn't even mention that we gave #1 money to Reggie Wayne or even the new contracts on the defensive side...
                Well considering the fact that I said Mannings contract only ate a little over 1/3rd of your cap space..I would assume that you would know that the other 2/3rds could be used on other players. McFarland and Simon are good..but they aren't big game changers. You could only give money to Wayne because you lost Edge.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Who will give the Colts their first loss?

                  Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
                  Terry Bradshaw, Bart Starr, Dan Marino, Joe Montana, Steve Young.

                  He's close... he's right there with Aikman, Favre, Elway... top ten certainly.

                  I don't know about top-five, though.

                  Moses, let's see your top-ten.
                  Starr
                  Unitas
                  Montana
                  Bradshaw
                  Namath
                  Brady
                  Marino
                  Young
                  Aikman
                  Elway

                  I guess Brady wasn't top 5 in my mind after all. What I said earlier was probably a stretch, even for myself, but I'll resign that he's top 10 all time with plenty of time to improve. That's all personal opinion though so don't attack me for it...I'm sure everyones top 10 is different. Favre would have been in there if he wasn't still playing and ruining his legacy.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Who will give the Colts their first loss?

                    Originally posted by Moses View Post
                    McFarland and Simon are good..but they aren't big game changers. You could only give money to Wayne because you lost Edge.
                    Once again you made it sound like we were unable to do anything because of Peyton's contract, I was proving otherwise. We could only give money to Reggie because we chose to, almost a full month before Edge signed with the Cards...
                    Edit Signature

                    Comment


                    • Re: Who will give the Colts their first loss?

                      I don't understand how anyone can rank Aikman ahead of Peyton. Brady > Marino???

                      Here's mine:

                      1.) Joe Montana
                      2.) Dan Marino
                      3.) Johnny Unitas
                      4.) Joe Namath
                      5.) John Elway
                      6.) Steve Young
                      7.) Peyton Manning
                      8.) Terry Bradshaw
                      9.) Brett Favre
                      10.) Tom Brady

                      Comment


                      • Re: Who will give the Colts their first loss?

                        Originally posted by naturallystoned View Post
                        Once again you made it sound like we were unable to do anything because of Peyton's contract, I was proving otherwise. We could only give money to Reggie because we chose to, almost a full month before Edge signed with the Cards...
                        Are you trying to tell me that you could have signed both Edge and Reggie? It was either 1 or the other because Edge didn't want to be franchised yet again. You didn't have the money to sign both to extensions because the money was tied up...it was either one or the other. Peyton Manning hasn't the second biggest QB contract in football..just a little bit behind Mike Vick. He's a great player and deserves it..but when you have that much money tied up into just 1 player, it makes it hard to string together a bunch of solid defensive aquisitions to make a good defense. Simon and McFarland are starts..but you are going to need a ton of signings of decent defensive Vets. I don't even think Simon will ever be playing football again.

                        Originally posted by Isaac
                        I don't understand how anyone can rank Aikman ahead of Peyton. Brady > Marino???
                        Easily. Count the rings. If you are trying to argue who the best statistical QBs are of all time, then Marino and Manning should be at the top of the list...but you also have to remember, no other QB inside the 5 yard line has even as close to as many pass attempts that both Manning and Marino had in their huge TD seasons.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Who will give the Colts their first loss?

                          Fran Tarkenton should be in there somewhere, probably 10-15 along with maybe Roger Staubach, Don Meredith, Dan Fouts, Len Dawson, and a couple others. I'll let you put Y.A. Tittle in the second 10.
                          If you know who I'm talking about and didn't include any of these guys, so be it, but you guys that don't know what I'm talking about shouldn't be making lists.

                          Jeez, the problem with making a list like this is its always easier to remember guys from a few years back and some of us aren't old enough to remember the older guys.
                          Don't thank me, I'll kill ya.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Who will give the Colts their first loss?

                            Rings decide who was the better player?

                            I guess John Salley needs to be in the top 10 list of NBA players.......

                            Rings help, but they don't dictate. There's 22 starters on a freaking football team, and that doesn't even count special teams.
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right. ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Who will give the Colts their first loss?

                              Oops. Bob Griese
                              Don't thank me, I'll kill ya.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Who will give the Colts their first loss?

                                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                                Rings decide who was the better player?

                                I guess John Salley needs to be in the top 10 list of NBA players.......

                                Rings help, but they don't dictate. There's 22 starters on a freaking football team, and that doesn't even count special teams.
                                Wasn't my point. The QBs on that list earned their rings. They were the reasons their team got the rings. Rings do decide who the better players are..because the best players play well when it matters. Some mediocre QBs who got rings weren't the reason their team won a superbowl..but all the guys I listed were the main reason their team won it. This is going to turn into another Rings vs Stats war that will never end.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X