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

TO released by the Cowboys

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

  • #16
    Re: TO released by the Cowboys

    Originally posted by Pacersfan46 View Post
    Certainly better than Marvin, but I don't know about top 3. Calvin Johnson, Andre Johnson. Fitzgerald and Steve Smith would all like to have a talk with you.

    Top 10, certainly. Top 3 is a bit much for me though.

    -- Steve --
    I can't say he is better than AJ, Fitz, or CJ but he is at the very least on par with them. This is a year where the Cowboys poorly utilized TO too. He still has a lot left in the tank because he keeps himself in such great shape.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: TO released by the Cowboys

      Originally posted by Moses View Post
      I can't say he is better than AJ, Fitz, or CJ but he is at the very least on par with them. This is a year where the Cowboys poorly utilized TO too. He still has a lot left in the tank because he keeps himself in such great shape.
      If you ask the Cowboys, they say because he refused to talk to Romo, he couldn't get an understanding for some of the decisions he made on the field. TO blatantly refused to talk to him. So, Romo didn't trust that he was going to run the right route, or make the same decisions on the fly as Romo.

      I don't know what you mean by poorly utilized, but I remember seeing a stat that his 'thrown to' total was on par with other star quality WR's, he just wasn't catching enough of them. Misscommunication and misunderstandings would go a long way in explaining that.

      -- Steve --

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: TO released by the Cowboys

        Originally posted by Pacersfan46 View Post
        If you ask the Cowboys, they say because he refused to talk to Romo, he couldn't get an understanding for some of the decisions he made on the field. TO blatantly refused to talk to him. So, Romo didn't trust that he was going to run the right route, or make the same decisions on the fly as Romo.

        I don't know what you mean by poorly utilized, but I remember seeing a stat that his 'thrown to' total was on par with other star quality WR's, he just wasn't catching enough of them. Misscommunication and misunderstandings would go a long way in explaining that.

        -- Steve --
        If the quality of his routes were poor, they were not utilizing him correctly. Many Cowboys fans I've talked to said that the main reason TO was so pissed off was because Garrett didn't have him going deep enough. TO probably ran more slants than any WR in the league which is alright for some WRs, but not when you have an athletic freak like TO. Some of his problems definitely did stem from the lack of communication between TO and the rest of his offense (not just Romo, him and Witten had a big falling out) but I stand by what I said in saying that Owens was not correctly used this past year.

        Some people are speculating that Owens may sit this year out because nobody wants him a la Barry Bonds, but there is no way some teams will pass up on Owens. He can turn your team from playoff contender into championship contender..or there is a chance he could corrupt your locker room and turn a very talented team into a non playoff contender (Cowboys).
        Last edited by Moses; 03-06-2009, 10:23 AM.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: TO released by the Cowboys

          TO always thinks he's being used incorrectly. Unless he gets every ball, on every down, thrown the exact way he wants to him, he's going to complain.

          Maybe he is better suited to go deep everytime, but Garrett is the coach. TO is not. Once TO figures out that the whole team is more important than his ego, he will really be scary. Unfortunately, or fortunately depending on the way you look at it, that time is quickly running out.
          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: TO released by the Cowboys

            Originally posted by travmil View Post
            You know who would be dangerous with TO? Big Ben, but that would never happen.
            But it wouldn't meet your first criteria. The Steelers have a very clear leadership chain of command - especially on offense with Tomlin, Ben, and Hines Ward. In the very unlikely event this occurs, T.O. must know that he'll be way down in the pecking order. Of course, Tomlin just might be the guy that could get him to buy into that, but I have no interest in seeing that.

            There was a great article in the Tribune this week on the fallacy of making a big FA or draft "splash" for a WR. The Steelers lost Nate Washington because they aren't going to pay a third WR the foolish type of money that the Titans game him. $27 million over 6 years for a #3 reciever? Hell, the only reason Washington was a #3 reciever was because Limas Sweed didn't take it away from him as a rookie.

            Wade Deep Into the NFL Draft to Catch Best Receivers

            http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports...7367915.column

            Anyway, I thought it was interesting to note that the Steelers drafted two of the three WRs to score a game winning TD in the last minute of a Super Bowl - Plexiglass and Santonio. The closest thing the Steelers have ever made to signing a WR that contributes in the last decade is Cedric Wilson, who moved straight down the depth chart after he arrived. Otherwise, they typically draft a guy and if he's worth keeping at the right price (Hines, Santonio) they'll resign him and if he's not worth keeping (Troy Edwards, Plexiglass but that was more for off-field/ oversized ego reasons) they'll let him go. Most importantly, they don't get suckered into bidding wars, and they'll let a Nate Washington or an Antwaan Randel-El get away because they trust their ability to draft recievers that can contribute.

            The Steelers are probably sweating over whether WR is already taking too much of the salary cap with Santonio and Hines... no way are they adding another high priced guy. Add Ben's huge contract and the skilled part of the "passing game" is already taking up too much salary cap space vs. O-line, RBs, and defense. They'll likely pick up Washington's replacement in the draft (actually they did that during the last draft), and a cheaper free agent.

            Anyway, teams that constantly chase WRs in the FA market or with high draft picks don't seem to find themselves making many deep playoff runs.

            Wherever TO goes, expect more of the same drama that accompanies a late season collapse.
            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


            • #21
              Re: TO released by the Cowboys

              I don't know if this has been mentuoned or not. I was listening to the radio when a commercial with Eddie White ('s radio partner) came on. He started talking about TO and where he would end up. Of course he said he should go to the Colts! If that's not a sign that Eddie needs to be in the home for the criminally insane I don't know what is.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: TO released by the Cowboys

                I was watching ESPN either yesterday or the day before, and they had Stephen A Smith on there talking about TO (I realize no one likes the guy). Regardless, he said he had spoken with TO and that he would like to go to a team like Indy that has a legit shot at a SB..and yes, SAS specifically said Indianapolis. Whether or not this was a credible comment can be argued. I just thought I would pass it along.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: TO released by the Cowboys

                  Never fails, ever coach and every fan base says

                  "Ron Artest might be different if he played for us"
                  and
                  "T.O might be different if he played for us"
                  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


                  • #24
                    Re: TO released by the Cowboys

                    Originally posted by HeartlandFan View Post
                    I was watching ESPN either yesterday or the day before, and they had Stephen A Smith on there talking about TO (I realize no one likes the guy). Regardless, he said he had spoken with TO and that he would like to go to a team like Indy that has a legit shot at a SB..and yes, SAS specifically said Indianapolis. Whether or not this was a credible comment can be argued. I just thought I would pass it along.
                    That cracks me up... I wonder if Peyton would sign off on this? T.O. physically is exactly what the COlts need in a WR. ITs the whole mental thing that scares the living crap out of me.

                    If T.O came here I wonder if Peyton would drill him in the head with the ball like he did in the saturday night live skit. With those 2 together it would be a yell fest.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: TO released by the Cowboys

                      TO going to Buffalo

                      http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3960653
                      "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


                      • #26
                        Re: TO released by the Cowboys

                        This really is a no risk situation for the Bills its only a one year deal, gives them much needed buzz they would not be getting(maybe squash the notion of the team moving to Toronto), and they really can't be worse off than before because they haven't been to the playoffs in 10 years.

                        My guess is he just settled for this because there weren't takers for him elsewhere like a SB contender.

                        Regardless should be interesting to see Moss vs T.O. two times a season.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: TO released by the Cowboys

                          This is an audition. If TO does what he usually does, then after about 5 games with a sub-par QB who doesn't get him the ball as much as he likes he'll go off.

                          If he behaves he'll have about a 65-catch season with 8 TD's but a contender will really like him next year.

                          I suppose Buffalo could win 10-12 games and make the playoffs while he gets 100 catches and 15 TD's and becomes a hero but I doubt it. People can and do change if the situation's right - look at Moss. We'll see if TO's ready to be a grown-up.
                          The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: TO released by the Cowboys

                            This does make buffalo a tough win for anyone playing against them next year. I remember last year I believe they came off to a quick start and just had a big melt down. With Lee Evans and TO the offense should be able to carry some load off the defense.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: TO released by the Cowboys

                              Hitler is a Bills fan... but not a T.O. fan....
                              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okhiJjuefPw
                              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


                              • #30
                                Re: TO released by the Cowboys

                                Originally posted by Bball View Post
                                Hitler is a Bills fan... but not a T.O. fan....
                                http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okhiJjuefPw
                                Haha, very funny!

                                http://www.theonion.com/content/news..._acquire_final
                                Paddle faster, I hear banjos!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X