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

ESPN Week 6 Power Rankings

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

  • ESPN Week 6 Power Rankings

    http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/powerranking

    Tuesday, October 11


    Power Rankings: Broncos jump up to No. 2


    ESPN.com

    ESPN.com's Power Rankings
    This week's rankings were determined by a poll of ESPN.com's NFL staff -- writers John Clayton, Len Pasquarelli, Michael Smith, NFL Insider Jeremy Green, Scouts Inc., and ESPN.com NFL editors Peter Lawrence-Riddell and James C. Black.
    There was a lot of moving around in our top 10. Obviously, the Colts remain on top after another impressive defensive performance, but after that, the next eight teams in our top 10 are in different spots. The Broncos jumped from No. 8 all the way to No. 2 after beating the Redskins to improve to 4-1. The Steelers moved up to No. 3 with an impressive Monday night win. But if Ben Roethlisberger ends up being out for a considerable amount of time, Pittsburgh's hold on a top spot could be in trouble. After falling out of the top 5 for the first time since the 2003 season, the Patriots jumped back up to No. 4. At the other end of the rankings, the Texans kept a strong hold on the last spot, remaining the NFL's only winless team.

    On to the rankings. Also, you can rank the teams yourself with SportsNation's NFL Power Rankings.

    2005 Power Rankings: Week 6

    RK (LW) TEAM REC COMMENT
    1 (1) Colts 5-0-0 If the Colts keep up their current pace, they'll allow fewer than 100 points this year. Last year, they gave up 351
    2 (8) Broncos 4-1-0 Tatum Bell -- 127 yards on 12 carries in Sunday's win over the Redskins -- has clearly demonstrated that he's Denver most explosive option at running back.
    3 (6) Steelers 3-1-0 Pretty impressive win for the Steelers against a red-hot Chargers team. But obviously, losing Ben Roethlisberger would be a huge blow.
    4 (9) Patriots 3-2-0 Can anyone be surprised by the way Tom Brady played? That said, the secondary is a big problem.
    5 (3) Bengals 4-1-0 Bengals lost their first game, but they fought hard and came back. A good sign for a young team still learning.
    6 (2) Eagles 3-2-0 The Eagles are good, but you can't expect to keep winning games in which you fall behind 14 or 17 points.
    7 (4) Falcons 3-2-0 Yes, Matt Schaub played well. But any of you who think the Falcons would be better with him than with Vick, get a grip.
    8 (7) Chargers 2-3-0 Flying high off two performances that saw the offense put up over 40 points, the Chargers have to be bitterly disappointed by their prime-time loss to the Steelers.
    9 (5) Buccaneers 4-1-0 Obviously, the Bucs just aren't the same on offense without Cadillac Williams in the lineup.
    10 (10) Giants 3-1-0 Eli still has a better passer rating and more TDs than big brother Peyton. You'd better believe that has come up in convo at least once.
    11 (11) Redskins 3-1-0 The Redskins aren't pretty, but they've proved that they're for real. They look as though they'll be in the playoff hunt in the NFC all season.
    12 (12) Jaguars 3-2-0 Fred Taylor's performance against the Bengals -- 132 yards on 24 carries -- had to be extremely encouraging to the Jaguars. To be a playoff team, they need Taylor.
    13 (13) Panthers 3-2-0 It might have been premature to start doubting the Panthers after their Week 3 loss in Miami.
    14 (17) Cowboys 3-2-0 Cowboys jumped on the Eagles early and just never let them up. That was a pretty impressive performance.
    15 (14) Chiefs 2-2-0 The Chiefs are talking about rethinking their Priest Holmes-Larry Johnson RB rotation. If Johnson's carries get cut, you can expect an unhappy running back.
    16 (16) Seahawks 3-2-0 It's still kind of stunning to see that the league's second-leading receiver in Week 5 was ... Joe Jurevicius (9 catches, 137 yards, 1 TD).
    17 (15) Dolphins 2-2-0 All eyes will be on Miami and what kind of an impact Ricky Williams has in his first game back.
    18 (18) Rams 2-3-0 Just a message to Mike Martz to get well soon.
    19 (25) Bills 2-3-0 The Bills needed a win, and that's what Kelly Holcomb got them.
    20 (29) Jets 2-3-0 Vinny and the Jets. Jets fans are singing a happy tune after Testaverde's triumphant return in a huge win.
    21 (27) Browns 2-2-0 Trent Dilfer doesn't get the credit he deserves, but there are at least 10 other teams in the NFL who would take him as their starting QB.
    22 (28) Titans 2-3-0 Congratulations to Jarrett Payton, son of the late Walter Payton, on his first NFL TD.
    23 (26) Lions 2-2-0 It might not have been pretty, but the Lions desperately needed a win and that's what they got. It might sound weird, but the Lions are a first-place team.
    24 (21) Raiders 1-3-0 Kerry Collins has been perfect in one respect so far: no INTs.
    25 (23) Vikings 1-3-0 When you start bringing in "consultants" to help the coaching staff, that can't be a good sign.
    26 (31) Packers 1-4-0 Wow, a visit by the Saints and 51 points sure can turn a gloomy situation into a sort of sunny one. Or at least sunny for an NFC North team.
    27 (22) Bears 1-3-0 The Bears have to be kicking themselves for giving up 14 fourth-quarter points to lose to the Browns. In the weak NFC North, squandering a win is huge.
    28 (19) Saints 2-3-0 We're pretty sure no team in recent memory has moved up and down the Power Rankings quite like the Saints.
    29 (24) Cardinals 1-4-0 Cardinals aren't living up to some of the preseason expectations, but Larry Fitzgerald and Anquan Boldin have been as good as advertised. The two have combined for 72 catches and 1,047 yards through five games.
    30 (20) Ravens 1-3-0 Twenty-one penalties for 147 yards, four personal fouls and two players ejected. Maybe it wasn't the best day for the refs, but that's just embarrassing.
    31 (30) 49ers 1-4-0 Tough team for Alex Smith to get his first start against. The Colts came after the rookie all day, sacking him five times and forcing four INTs.
    32 (32) Texans 0-4-0 As big a fantasy bust as Daunte Culpepper has been, there can't be a bigger bust than Andre Johnson. He has 10 catches for 76 yards and zero TDs.
    Take me out to the black, tell 'em I ain't coming back. Burn the land and boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me.

  • #2
    Re: ESPN Week 6 Power Rankings

    Those poor, poor Texans.....
    Super Bowl XLI Champions
    2000 Eastern Conference Champions




    Comment


    • #3
      Re: ESPN Week 6 Power Rankings

      Idiot coaches. How in the world did they not do something about that oline? Carr can't do well if he doesn't even have time to throw the ball!
      Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: ESPN Week 6 Power Rankings

        I like how the top 5 teams are all AFC. I think the broncos are very overrated though.
        I was ready for Josh Smith to go to Indiana, but he went to the NBA. I am ready for him to come to Indiana once again.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: ESPN Week 6 Power Rankings

          Denver is definitely overrated.

          Is anyone else concerned that we have yet to face a top 10 team yet?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: ESPN Week 6 Power Rankings

            Originally posted by Shade
            Denver is definitely overrated.

            Is anyone else concerned that we have yet to face a top 10 team yet?
            I would argue though Jags are close to if not a real top 10 force, and the just knocked off the Bengals who up until then have looked very solid.

            Why Not Us ?

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: ESPN Week 6 Power Rankings

              I think Dallas could start making some noise

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: ESPN Week 6 Power Rankings

                With the Pats' secondary being the problem I can't wait to see Manning and the recievers beat up on them.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: ESPN Week 6 Power Rankings

                  Denver is overrated.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: ESPN Week 6 Power Rankings

                    Plummer will always screw stuff up for Denver.

                    Cowboys will be 10-6, but no real contender.
                    You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: ESPN Week 6 Power Rankings

                      If the Colts keep up their current pace, they'll allow fewer than 100 points this year. Last year, they gave up 351
                      Whats the record for points allowed in a season?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: ESPN Week 6 Power Rankings

                        Originally posted by Believe_in_blue
                        Whats the record for points allowed in a season?
                        I know it's a lot more than they are on pace for. If the Colts kept up their pace (they won't) they'd EASILY break the record.

                        http://www.football.com/nfl/records/NFLDScoring.shtml

                        Looks like the record for fewest points allowed in a 16 game season is 165 points set by the 2000 Baltimore Ravens.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: ESPN Week 6 Power Rankings

                          How the hell is Denver overrated? They beat San Diego, a damn good team. They beat KC, another good team, offensively at least. They won AT Jacksonville, which isn't easy to do (who beat Cincy, an undefeated). And then they beat a very good undefeated Redskins team. How is that overrated? They beat better teams than us.


                          Of course, Denver has a knack for screwing this stuff up. But they haven't so far, so don't say they are overrated.
                          Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: ESPN Week 6 Power Rankings

                            Originally posted by btowncolt
                            Hahahhahahhahaahahhaha















                            hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahaha




                            Redskins.





                            Hahahahahahahahahahahaha

                            I just wet myself from the hilarity of that statement.
                            Well if you watched the game, Btown, the Redskins pretty much outplayed Denver. They also got screwed with that "tuck rule" thing.


                            It's Suave, you *******.
                            Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: ESPN Week 6 Power Rankings

                              Originally posted by SoupIsGood
                              Plummer will always screw stuff up for Denver.

                              Cowboys will be 10-6, but no real contender.
                              Soup, 10-6 in the NFC is like going undefeated all season in the AFC.

                              That said, I don't think Denver is as good as they're ranked. But, who is better? Obviously, the Colts are playing top notch football, cream puffs of the league or not....The Eagles aren't strong, and they're just getting it done. The Pats have seemingly fallen from grace (eerily feeling....). The Chargers are a good team with LdT and Gates, and a decent defense. Steelers are the team that scares me as a Colts' fan, but if Big Ben is out for long, that really hurts Pitt.

                              Wasn't Atlanta supposed to be good?

                              The Giants make noise in the NFC this season. Next season, they've got a good chance at NFC Champs IMO.
                              It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X