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

2013 offseason

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

  • #76
    Re: 2013 offseason

    Originally posted by Really? View Post
    My plan for the offseason would be to sign two high level O-lineman, preferably at guard. Target Tracy Porter, I know some have said DRC but I think Porter plays more aggressive and is better against the run. Look to grab an OLB through free agency possibly Conner Barwin or Paul Kruger.

    In the draft I would not mind targeting a safety, and there are few that might be around when we draft Kenny Vaccaro from Texas, he is pretty good all around, coverage, run support, but lacks picks, or we could grab a guy through free agency, but there are not many, and I am thinking a fresh guy that Pagano could mold would be great. If we can not get Vaccaro then I would wait around and take a chance on Ray Ray Armstrong in the 6th, he has a tremendous ceiling, has UMiami roots, and seems like a Pagano type guy.

    Other guys I would not mind targeting in the draft:
    3-4 positions

    Dion Jordan OLB
    Alec Ogletree ILB
    Sheldon Richardson DE
    Johnathan Cooper RG
    Barrett Jones C/G/T
    Barkevious Mingo OLB
    Chance Warmack RG

    Possible players(depending on workouts)
    Ezikel Ansah DE/OLB
    Anthony Barr OLB
    I agree with you on Ray Ray. Should def get this guy.
    First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: 2013 offseason

      O-Line is a glaring need. The other big need are guys that can get pressure on the QB. I think Chapman will get it done, but the Colts need more. Freeney is gone. Mathis is getting up there in age....

      Safety is probably the 3rd biggest need.
      First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: 2013 offseason

        That Donald Brown fella, is he rather injury prone?
        Never forget

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: 2013 offseason

          Looks like San Diego has hired Telesco as their new GM. Link coming...

          http://www.wthr.com/story/20545095/c...hargers-new-gm


          Posted: Jan 09, 2013 2:28 PM EST
          Updated: Jan 09, 2013 2:32 PM EST


          Colts' Telesco to be named Chargers' new GM


          SAN DIEGO - Tom Telesco, the Indianapolis Colts vice president of football operations, has been named the new general manager of the San Diego Chargers.

          The Chargers are expected to make an official announcement at 4:00 pm. Telesco will replace fired general manager A.J. Smith. Telesco beat out Jimmy Raye, the Chargers' director of player personnel.

          Telesco was promoted to vice president of football operations in 2012, and worked in the Colts organization for 14 years.

          His first task with the Chargers will be to help select a new coach to replace Norv Turner, who was fired along with Smith on Dec. 31 after the Chargers missed the playoffs for the third straight season.

          The move is raising speculation that Telesco may offer the job to Colts offensive coordinator Bruce Arians. Arians led the rookie-heavy Colts team to 11-5 this season (9-3 in Head Coach Chuck Pagano's absence while he battled leukemia).

          Arians, 60, is expected to interview for head coaching jobs with the Bears, Eagles and Browns. He missed the Colts' playoff appearance last Sunday in Baltimore after an illness. He was discharged from a Baltimore hospital Monday, according to reports, but checked back into hospital upon returning to Indianapolis for an inner ear condition, NBC Sports said.
          Last edited by travmil; 01-09-2013, 03:37 PM. Reason: added link

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: 2013 offseason

            Originally posted by Really? View Post
            You are confused, that was actually one of the best overall games they had all year, the were more consistent in that game putting drives together throughout the game than any time this season. If it was not for the drops they would have won.

            And do you mean neither is Donald Brown? I don't agree with the focus part, typically atleast with my experience even though you are tired late, when the game is on the line your adrenaline is pumping and you tend to focus better in key moments.

            I will say that everyone is different and we are but just stating our opinions but the only way we would know would be to ask Ballard... anyone know if he has a twitter?
            Same for the Jets game, they couldn't score in either game. You can drive the ball down the field, but if you don't score touchdowns, that's not a good offensive performance
            Smothered Chicken!

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: 2013 offseason

              Fixing the offensive line is obviously the number 1 priority. But I also think we should look at adding a receiver after watching all of the butter-finger botched catches on Sunday. Wayne was great this season, but what if age finally catches up with him next year? I think it's more likely than not that he has another 1000+ yard season, but it wouldn't be the biggest shock ever if father time finally slowed him down a bit. It's going to happen sometime. Thank God he was great this year because zeroing in on him was crucial for Luck. But it would also be nice to add a receiver who is a bit younger that can grow with Luck over the next several years. I like Hilton a lot, but Avery can be unreliable.

              I agree with those who say we should explore getting another running back. I like Ballard, but we should still look to improve the position. The better running game we have, the more dangerous Luck can be.

              What a tremendous season. Hats off to our GM and excellent coaching staff for the superb job they did. I hope we don't have a letdown season in 2013 a la Lions this year, but I don't think we will. I look for Luck to make tremendous improvements next year after an off-season of looking at film, working with receivers, and just getting better. It just kind of sucks that there is a very good chance he will have to get used to a new offensive coordinator next season.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: 2013 offseason

                Originally posted by travmil View Post
                The move is raising speculation that Telesco may offer the job to Colts offensive coordinator Bruce Arians. Arians led the rookie-heavy Colts team to 11-5 this season (9-3 in Head Coach Chuck Pagano's absence while he battled leukemia).

                Arians, 60, is expected to interview for head coaching jobs with the Bears, Eagles and Browns. He missed the Colts' playoff appearance last Sunday in Baltimore after an illness. He was discharged from a Baltimore hospital Monday, according to reports, but checked back into hospital upon returning to Indianapolis for an inner ear condition, NBC Sports said.
                I'd be shocked if Arians doesn't take the Charger job and yes Telesco will be asking. Actually at least they can get it over quick so the Colts will have a better selection if they do bring in someone else other than Clyde C.
                You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: 2013 offseason

                  Originally posted by RWB View Post
                  I'd be shocked if Arians doesn't take the Charger job. And yes Telesco will be asking.
                  Yeah, I think Arians is gone. What he did this year in those circumstances is way too impressive for him to start next season without a head coaching gig.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: 2013 offseason

                    Too bad Telesco had to leave
                    Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: 2013 offseason

                      Originally posted by Coopdog23 View Post
                      Same for the Jets game, they couldn't score in either game. You can drive the ball down the field, but if you don't score touchdowns, that's not a good offensive performance
                      No it wasn't we were 3-11 on 3rd downs and did not even have 300 yds, we also gave away the ball 4 times and we could not put any drives together, this game we had more than 400 yds, only 2 turnovers and were 9-20 on 3rd downs which is extremely good, matter of fact that would have been second highest in the league if we averaged that all year.
                      Why so SERIOUS

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: 2013 offseason

                        Originally posted by Really? View Post
                        No it wasn't we were 3-11 on 3rd downs and did not even have 300 yds, we also gave away the ball 4 times and we could not put any drives together, this game we had more than 400 yds, only 2 turnovers and were 9-20 on 3rd downs which is extremely good, matter of fact that would have been second highest in the league if we averaged that all year.

                        Yeah, this wasn't like the Jets game at all. We were never in the Jets game and pretty much got the crap kicked out of us from start to finish. But this Ravens game was so damn frustrating because we had so many opportunities. Several good drives where we got far but had to settle for three points or no points at all (Vinny miss and a Luck fumble on about the 30 when it was 3rd and 5). When push came to shove, we just couldn't score touchdowns and you have to score touchdowns if you want to win playoff games.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: 2013 offseason

                          Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                          Yeah, this wasn't like the Jets game at all. We were never in the Jets game and pretty much got the crap kicked out of us from start to finish. But this Ravens game was so damn frustrating because we had so many opportunities. Several good drives where we got far but had to settle for three points or no points at all (Vinny miss and a Luck fumble on about the 30 when it was 3rd and 5). When push came to shove, we just couldn't score touchdowns and you have to score touchdowns if you want to win playoff games.
                          Yes... we'd never have a Lombardi trophy in Indy if that wasn't true. Those Manning TD's against the Ravens propelled us to our sole SB win. Oh wait.... nevermind... Darned outliers...
                          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, thatís teamwork."

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: 2013 offseason

                            Link below explains the Colts 2013 cap situation.

                            http://espn.go.com/blog/afcsouth/pos...cap-situations

                            Kuharsky is dead on the money when he says Colts need to be careful how they approach next years signings. The cap floor will require them to spend a minimum dollar amount (88% of the cap ??) and do so in a way that doesn't limit future flexibility while at the same time plugging numerous holes.

                            I wouldn't mind seeing them do a front loaded deal with McAfee and maybe a front loaded extension (assuming rules allow) of Davis in order create some flexibility for a future "splash" signing once the roster depth issues get addressed.

                            Also here is the link to PFF's 2013 FA list.

                            https://www.profootballfocus.com/blo...gency-tracker/

                            There are some Colts on that list with pretty poor ratings who got a lot of playing time in 2012.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: 2013 offseason

                              Originally posted by Really? View Post
                              No it wasn't we were 3-11 on 3rd downs and did not even have 300 yds, we also gave away the ball 4 times and we could not put any drives together, this game we had more than 400 yds, only 2 turnovers and were 9-20 on 3rd downs which is extremely good, matter of fact that would have been second highest in the league if we averaged that all year.
                              I think the defense helped a lot with some key stops and forcing rare turnovers. I know what you are saying but in my opinion it was a bad offensive day
                              Smothered Chicken!

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: 2013 offseason

                                Originally posted by Coopdog23 View Post
                                I think the defense helped a lot with some key stops and forcing rare turnovers. I know what you are saying but in my opinion it was a bad offensive day
                                Yeah defense played really key in that game, especially early, stopping Baltimore consistently on 3rd downs, we had a couple of big let downs on defense as well, things I think will be easily fixed in the future.

                                Next year I know the offense will look good, but it will be interesting to see how the defense comes along, with the right moves I think we could be pretty good.
                                Why so SERIOUS

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X