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:
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

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

Colts to wear throwbacks for Preseason opener (maybe as a 3rd all season?)

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Colts to wear throwbacks for Preseason opener (maybe as a 3rd all season?)

    By Phil Hecken

    Yesterday, the Baltimore Indianapolis Colts announced they will be wearing a throwback for 2010. This in and of itself is not notable — lots of teams throwback. This year alone, the Packers, Bears and Eagles have all announced they’ll be wearing special throwback uniforms for the 2010 season. It had been widely rumored the Colts would as well, and on Monday, in a small ticker item, we got our first glance at the throwback helmet.

    What was odd about this was (1) the team will be wearing a ROAD (white) throwback, and (2) they will be wearing it for their pre-season opener (August 15, 2010, against the San Francisco 49ers). I can’t ever recall a team wearing a throwback uniform during the pre-season, much less introducing it for their opener. I have no knowledge as to whether it will be worn during the season, but one could probably assume so.

    Blue Helmets Return: The uniform the Colts will be throwing to is from the year 1955. The Colts have worn blue helmets twice in their history: the first time, in their inaugural season of 1953, they wore a plain blue helmet. Uni Watch historian Tim Brulia noted they wore the plain blue helmet for a “couple of night games and a day game.” In 1954, the Colts had both a blue and a white helmet; the white had a single blue stripe, while the blue was adorned with a white stripe and two horseshoes at the rear of the helmet. They would keep the blue helmet until the end of the 1955 season, never to be worn again. In 1956, the Colts switched to a white helmet with the blue horseshoes. For their Thanksgiving game in 2004, against the Lions, the Colts wore 1956 throwbacks. The 1955 and 1956 road (white) jerseys were identical. By 1957, the Colts moved to a uniform that has largely unchanged for more than 50 years.

    According to the Colts press release, “The jerseys will be white with blue numbers and there will be three stripes on the sleeves below the jersey numbers. The pants will be white with a single blue stripe down the side, and the white socks will feature three blue horizontal stripes.”

    In with the old: This is of course, not dramatically different from the uniform they wear today. As you are no doubt aware, the uniform they wear today is basically what they first wore in 1957. For a pretty good analysis of the Colts uniform history, check out my Super Bowl uni-history breakdown, and scroll down to the Colts section.

    As mentioned above, the Colts threwback to their 1956 duds in 2004 (here’s another view). That is, to my knowledge, the only time (aside from 1994 for the NFL’s league-wide 75th anniversary celebration), they have ever “thrown back” (or worn a ‘alternate’ uniform). Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending upon your perspective), the Colts didn’t really throw back in 1994, basically wearing their current uniform at the time (which technically, because of only minor changes, could have been a 1957 throwback). So, with this new 1955 “alternate,” this will be the first time “home” (Indy) fans will see their beloved Colts in a throwback. And the “white at home” is an odd choice, because they did NOT wear their white jerseys at home in 1955.

    According to Timmy Brulia, in his tremendous “White At Home” research project, the Colts have only worn white at home a few times:

    Colts: 1964 every home game except extra home game vs. Cardinals; 1965 every home game; 1980 vs. Steelers, Jets, Patriots, Cardinals and Browns; 1981 vs. Cowboys; 1995 vs. Bengals (blue pants) and Jets.

    Yes, we all know how well the blue pants experiment (both photos from a game in Buffalo) went over.

    How will it look? If history is any guide, the white jersey, single-stripe pants, and blue helmets will be a “new” look for a very traditional (uni-wise) team.

    Not much reason was given for the throwback to 1955 (unless the Colts are borrowing the Los Angeles Dodgers odd gimmick of “55 since ’55″), but if the Colts were seeking to introduce an alternate (throwback), they had to go back pretty far into their history. It’s probably a LOT better than introducing a new alternate.

    According to the press release, Colts Owner and CEO Jim Irsay states, “Our uniform design has changed little through the decades and is among the most recognizable in all of sports. This is a chance for our fans to see a Colts uniform with a different twist, in a classic throwback at Lucas Oil Stadium.”

    So, how’d they do? I guess we’ll need to wait until the game to know for sure, but it looks like they have pretty much nailed, as best they can with modern materials and uniform cuts, the original. Not that they had too many changes to make. The most striking difference will of course be the blue helmet, while the rest of the uniform will not be much different from what they currently wear.

    Will they wear that throwback during the regular season? Stay tuned.
    Play Mafia!

  • #2
    Re: Colts to wear throwbacks for Preseason opener (maybe as a 3rd all season?)

    I like them, but since we never really wear throwbacks, I'm usually not opposed. I mean the last time we donned some retro's was back in '04 on Thanksgiving.
    Super Bowl XLI Champions
    2000 Eastern Conference Champions


    • #3
      Re: Colts to wear throwbacks for Preseason opener (maybe as a 3rd all season?)

      I wish we would go with the blue pants from 94. I think those uniforms were awesome.


      • #4
        Re: Colts to wear throwbacks for Preseason opener (maybe as a 3rd all season?)

        Ick, I hated those.

        That does not look like the Colts.
        Play Mafia!


        • #5
          Re: Colts to wear throwbacks for Preseason opener (maybe as a 3rd all season?)

          I've always thought a Black jersey would be a neat idea to try.


          • #6
            Re: Colts to wear throwbacks for Preseason opener (maybe as a 3rd all season?)

            Oh god, not BFBS!

            You people are obviously not uniwatchers.
            Play Mafia!


            • #7
              Re: Colts to wear throwbacks for Preseason opener (maybe as a 3rd all season?)

              Originally posted by Pig Nash View Post
              Oh god, not BFBS!

              You people are obviously not uniwatchers.
              I am, and BFBS doesn't apply. Black IS one of the Colts Colors. It's featured on a lot of their memorabilia. Especially last year's Draft Hat and 1st Half Sideline Cap Alternate (One which Reggie wore). And even the regular 1st half Sideline Cap had black on it. Same with the 2nd Half. The 2nd Color on the hat was black.

              2009 Sideline Cap Alternate "The Reggie Wayne Hat"

              2009 Draft Hat

              2009 2nd Sideline Cap
              Last edited by Day-V; 08-09-2010, 07:02 AM.


              • #8
                Re: Colts to wear throwbacks for Preseason opener (maybe as a 3rd all season?)

                It's not a third color, it's a merchandising thing since we only have 2 official colors and a lot of the merchandise that is designed for the whole league need three colors since most teams have 3 colors.

                End of the nineties, early two thousands it was gray most of the time. I don't want the colts to ever move away from the two color look. I don't want us to ever look like the eagles do now:

                Play Mafia!


                • #9
                  Re: Colts to wear throwbacks for Preseason opener (maybe as a 3rd all season?)

                  Originally posted by Pig Nash View Post
                  It's not a third color, it's a merchandising thing since we only have 2 official colors and a lot of the merchandise that is designed for the whole league need three colors since most teams have 3 colors.
                  If they wanted the third color for a "merchandising thing", then they'd use the gray color like on our facemasks. And you actually have it *** backwards.....End of the 90's and early 2000's it was actually black that was the 3rd color. They didn't make the uniform change and gravitate towards the Speed Blue, White, and Gray until 2004. And it showed on, yes, the merchandise. Blue, White, and Gray solely on the hats.

                  BUT, the past few years, the gray has gone away and the black has become more prevalent in the merchandise.

                  Plus, the NFL did sell team-wide Black jerseys last year. Look like this:

                  And the thing is, I've seen many Colts fans buy them. They seem pretty popular. Don't look half-bad, either.

                  I'm not saying change the jersey permanently, but I think it'd be a cool thing to whip out against New England or against another good team on a Primetime game or two a year.
                  Last edited by Day-V; 08-09-2010, 01:29 PM.


                  • #10
                    Re: Colts to wear throwbacks for Preseason opener (maybe as a 3rd all season?)

                    I like it!
                    It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.


                    • #11
                      Re: Colts to wear throwbacks for Preseason opener (maybe as a 3rd all season?)

                      Originally posted by pizza guy View Post

                      I like it!
                      those are sharp looking
                      If you havin' depth problems, I feel bad for you son; I got 99 problems but a bench ain't one! - Hicks


                      • #12
                        Re: Colts to wear throwbacks for Preseason opener (maybe as a 3rd all season?)

                        The helmets are awesome