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

Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game (and Deflategate discussion)

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

  • #61
    Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
    Well the NFL cares about that sort of thing since there is a taunting rule. I think that having a penalty for taunting in football is extremely wussy, but it is a rule. It's an extremely subjective one.
    Most of the rules in the NFL are not only subjective, but are often in favor of the qb. Not just whatever QB the Colts are playing that week. That was the point of my post

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

      Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
      Most of the rules in the NFL are not only subjective, but are often in favor of the qb. Not just whatever QB the Colts are playing that week. That was the point of my post
      Most of the rules that favor the QB at least have to do with the game itself. Being subjective with a "taunting" rule is a pure popularity contest. There are rules...and then there is enforcement of the rules.

      I mean, do you really expect Colts fans to be 100% subjective when we're about to play the Pats in the AFCCG? Obviously any good Colts fan despises the Pats....even though they must be respected for an obscene 14 years of dominance. At the end of the day, most sports fans are the same. We watch behind a TV and then rant about it on a computer. Those who win gloat, and those who lose find ways to hate the other team. Everyone would act the opposite if the shoe was on the other foot.
      Last edited by Sollozzo; 01-12-2015, 10:25 PM.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

        Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
        Well they did beat Tom Brady in 2006....

        But in all seriousness, this feels more like 95 or 03 to me. Fun teams that broke through to the AFC Title game, but had to face nasty AFC opponents on the road in the title game. It definitely doesn't feel like 2006 since the game is at NE instead of Indy. Also, this current team is just getting started, whereas the 2006 team featured 9th year Manning.
        Yep, this has been a team that has overachieved and broke through the DEN-NE ceiling of the last two seasons. The Colts could be the #2 team in the AFC next season assuming decent health and Luck's continued progression. At some point Brady has to retire.

        The true test for New England is if they are able to sustain success when Brady retires. The Colts are more impressive than New England in that they were able to quickly rebuild from NOTHING after tearing the organization down to the foundation. Can NE do that? The Packers had some bad seasons in Favre's later years and Rodgers was 6-10 his first season. The Colts had one terrible year and then went right back to winning 10+ games.
        Last edited by hoosierguy; 01-12-2015, 10:31 PM.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

          Taunting should be handled after the game through the league office and via fines. A subjective taunting call during a game has an impact on the outcome (or can have anyway). Whereas if it's ignored during the game at least the league office can address it later without letting such a call have any impact on the game.
          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


          • #65
            Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

            Originally posted by shags View Post
            Except the Colts won't be playing Rex Grossman.
            Are we already in the Super Bowl? Because we beat Brady in 2006 too.


            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

              Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
              Well they did beat Tom Brady in 2006....

              But in all seriousness, this feels more like 95 or 03 to me. Fun teams that broke through to the AFC Title game, but had to face nasty AFC opponents on the road in the title game. It definitely doesn't feel like 2006 since the game is at NE instead of Indy. Also, this current team is just getting started, whereas the 2006 team featured 9th year Manning.
              But it shares one important thing with 2006, no one having any optimism going in to the playoffs because of a late season blow out (06 against Jax, 14 against Dallas) the 06 team was completely written off after that Jax game just like most of us did with this team after Dallas.
              Last edited by Trader Joe; 01-12-2015, 11:57 PM.


              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

                Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                But it shares one important thing with 2006, no one having any optimism going in to the playoffs because of a late season blow out (06 against Jax, 14 against Dallas) the 06 team was completely written off after that Jax game just like most of us did with this team after Dallas.
                I think some of us wondered how seriously the Colts were taking that Dallas game with the play calling on that first series and the fake punt in the shadow of their own goalposts. I know it had me wondering... Still there was concern but there was also that question mark about whether the team was doing anything more than taking some snaps and treating like a preseason game.

                Meanwhile, that Jax game was just inexplicable. I still think our run defense was so bad, not improving at all, and looked so awful that game that we changed things up for the playoffs and actually sold out to stop the run. Which worked remarkably well. Plus I think teams expected to run all over us to the point they kept trying rather than taking what we were giving them which ended up feeding our confidence. Then we got to our old nemesis, the Pats, and we knew each other well enough that gimmicks weren't really a factor. And the Bears were the Bears so....
                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


                • #68
                  Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

                  It is gonna be a heck of a game to watch.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

                    Looks like 44-degrees and only a slight chance of precipitation for Sunday. Hope the forecast holds and keeps all the options open for the Colt's passing game.

                    Common sense says Hoodie will just roll out the heavy package once again and look to run over the Colts defense for 4-quarters and keep the ball out of Luck's hands. I don't trust him.

                    If I see Landry line-up on Gronk in press coverage like he did many times on Sunday against Julius Thomas I may puke. IMO that was a sure sign the Colts didn't think Manning was near 100%.

                    Since 2010 Brady has produced pretty much an equal number of stinker games in the playoffs vs. good performances. If the Colt's can come up with a scheme to answer the Pats power running attack this game is winnable.

                    Not sure Luck has to have the game of his life in order for the Colt's to win but he needs to be damn good, eliminate turnovers & limit the 3 & outs.

                    Should the Colt's prevail and if there is a just God Reggie Wayne will catch the winning touchdown in this game.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

                      Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                      I might be setting myself up for disappointment, but I think the Colts will win. Here's the thing, Peyton Manning always had the whole "can he ever beat NE" question lingering around for almost ten years. Andrew Luck is different than Peyton, and I'm not suggesting he is better, just a different QB. If Luck loses Sunday, than his record vs NE will be 0-4. I just don't think Luck will be that guy that loses to the same team over and over, and has to answer the same question that plagued Peyton Manning early in his career
                      Of course you think the Colts will win. I'm almost certain you've picked them to go 18-0 thus far this year.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

                        What continues to **** me off is how little credit the Colts are getting for making it this far. Dip ***** like Skip Bayless and Greg Bedard have an agenda against Luck and the Colts and no amount of postseason success or wins will change their minds.

                        Luck leads the league in TD passes, wins two playoff games, beats a top team on the road (something Russell Wilson hasn't done) and still gets criticized unnecessarily.

                        Beating down the 10-5-1 Bengals- not noteworthy according to the Patsy media. Dominating the 12-4 Broncos, with a top five offense AND defense, at their place? Only happened because Peyton was hurt. Who cares that Denver was undefeated at home this season and won each game by an average of 14 points. Peyton had plenty of time to heal during the bye and the Colts defense made him look bad.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

                          Originally posted by hoosierguy View Post
                          What continues to **** me off is how little credit the Colts are getting for making it this far. Dip ***** like Skip Bayless and Greg Bedard have an agenda against Luck and the Colts and no amount of postseason success or wins will change their minds.

                          Luck leads the league in TD passes, wins two playoff games, beats a top team on the road (something Russell Wilson hasn't done) and still gets criticized unnecessarily.

                          Beating down the 10-5-1 Bengals- not noteworthy according to the Patsy media. Dominating the 12-4 Broncos, with a top five offense AND defense, at their place? Only happened because Peyton was hurt. Who cares that Denver was undefeated at home this season and won each game by an average of 14 points. Peyton had plenty of time to heal during the bye and the Colts defense made him look bad.

                          Yeah, it's all "Peyton, Peyton, Peyton, Broncos coaching staff, Elway, Peyton, Peyton, Peyton.......then a minor footnote about how the Colts played an almost perfect January football game with Luck playing spectacular disciplined football." Look, I get it to an extent...the Broncos are a big deal......but Luck and the Colts beating the former Colts QB to go to the AFCCG is a MONUMENTAL ACHIEVEMENT. These Colts were rightfully maligned by fans and media for not playing up to par against the good teams in the regular season, but they deserve massive props for that performance they just turned in. Our defensive backs were just phenomenal and did what you had to do against a Peyton team - disrupt the receivers. We got the one big hit/turnover on Peyton that clearly stuck in his head the rest of the game. And aside from the picks, Luck was just brilliant with his checkdowns and smart throws. Yeah I'm biased, but it just didn't get enough press. That was a HUGE win that a lot of people didn't see coming.

                          I can sympathize with non-Colts fans who got tired of the constant Manning coverage. I'm sorry, but it should have been hyped up a lot more that Luck went in there and completely outplayed his predecessor.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

                            Also, there is no mention of how the Colts, unlike New England, have been able to get this far in the playoffs with a completely new coaching staff, front office, and roster. This franchise has sustained success despite undergoing a complete rebuild.

                            Let's see New England do that when Brady/Belichick retire.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

                              Originally posted by Downtown Bang! View Post
                              Looks like 44-degrees and only a slight chance of precipitation for Sunday. Hope the forecast holds and keeps all the options open for the Colt's passing game.
                              Forecast has changed dramatically, lotsa rain and cooling down as the evening goes along

                              http://www.intellicast.com/Local/For...ation=USMA9941


                              Sunday 90% Precip.
                              Rain showers in the morning will evolve into a more steady rain in the afternoon. High around 45F. Winds SSW at 10 to 15 mph. Chance of rain 90%. Rainfall near a quarter of an inch.

                              Sunday Night 90% Precip.
                              Rain with some snow mixing in late. Low 31F. Winds NNW at 5 to 10 mph. Chance of precip 90%.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

                                Originally posted by Dab View Post
                                Forecast has changed dramatically, lotsa rain and cooling down as the evening goes along

                                http://www.intellicast.com/Local/For...ation=USMA9941


                                Sunday 90% Precip.
                                Rain showers in the morning will evolve into a more steady rain in the afternoon. High around 45F. Winds SSW at 10 to 15 mph. Chance of rain 90%. Rainfall near a quarter of an inch.

                                Sunday Night 90% Precip.
                                Rain with some snow mixing in late. Low 31F. Winds NNW at 5 to 10 mph. Chance of precip 90%.
                                I still like this for us. Anything to help take Gronk out of the game.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X