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

Whitlock turns wool into gold???

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

  • Whitlock turns wool into gold???

    Well not that miraculous, but he does give Indy its props. Though not entirely.


    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...k/051020&num=0


    By Jason Whitlock
    Special to Page 2



    Before revealing this week's truths, I figured you might enjoy reading some of the random e-mails I have received from fans of the column.

    Jason:

    Thanks for the help with New York's blitz package. Drew said it really helped him with his third-down reads. We had Strahan guessing all day.

    -- Coach P

    Whitlock:

    What up, dog? When you going to show me some love in your column? If I ain't in the column this week, you just a hater! I ran for a touchdown, threw a touchdown and caught a touchdown. Give it up for ya boy!

    -- L.T.

    J-Dub:

    The Silver and Black needs you. The offer is still on the table. Plus you get control over all personnel decisions, including signing George, if that's what you think it will take to win. Let me know.

    -- Al

    Dear Jason:

    I have some free time this week. We're taking a break from filming. Figured you might want someone to snuggle and watch football with this weekend. I promise not to push you about a commitment. We can just remain friends with benefits. Call me.

    XOXOXO

    -- Halle

    Being the foremost authority on all things NFL does have a few perks. OK, here are 10 more NFL truths:

    10. Marc Bulger's injury isn't what helped the Colts rally from a 17-0 deficit and spank the Rams by 17 points. St. Louis' defense is responsible.

    Opposing teams are more worried about Peyton, and Edgerrin James is reaping the benefits.
    First off, the ease with which the Colts rallied was very, very impressive. You should've left Indy's "Monday Night Football" victory convinced the Colts are the best team in football.

    You also should've left the game convinced that it's foolish to drop eight defenders into coverage and never pressure Peyton Manning. The Rams, like many teams this season, decided to try to slow Indy's offense with a passive defensive scheme that took away the long ball.

    The strategy opened up monster running lanes for Edgerrin James and freed Indy receivers for underneath routes. It also made the Rams' defenders embarrassingly soft. They couldn't tackle. The first defender almost never tackled James. Watching the Rams play defense was painful.

    Even if Bulger had remained healthy, the Colts were going to come back and blast the defenseless Rams.

    A defense has to occasionally blitz Manning and knock him to the turf.

    9. Indy's second-best defender, second-year safety Bob Sanders, is nearly as important to the Colts' defense as Dwight Freeney.

    USA Today's Jarrett Bell was the first person who told me that I'd love Sanders when I got a chance to study him.

    Sanders is the second coming of Blaine Bishop, the undersized, hard-hitting Pro Bowl safety for the Houston Oilers/Tennessee Titans. Sanders is a sure and deadly tackler. He's just 5-foot-8 and 200 pounds. He hits like Ray Lewis.

    Indy linebacker Cato June, who has five interceptions this season, is going to receive quite a bit of hype for Indy's defensive turnaround. June is a fine player. But Sanders might be the best player in the league at his position.

    8. Minnesota's "Love Boat" is in no way a symptom of what's wrong with the Vikings on the field.

    People are having too much fun beating up the Vikings and head coach Mike Tice over Smoot Dogg's pleasure cruise.

    If all it took to throw a team into chaos was a sex party involving a third of the roster, then I'd suggest that a third of the league's teams would be in chaos.

    The Vikings stink because they're poorly coached, they have mediocre defensive personnel, and Daunte Culpepper can't read a defense. Lack of discipline and lack of morality have nothing to do with Minnesota's on-field failures.

    7. NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue needs to follow David Stern's lead and institute a dress code in the NFL.

    As someone who routinely wears throwback jerseys and otherwise prefers to dress casually, I see nothing wrong with the NBA's requiring its players to come to work dressed professionally.

    The players are on TV from the time they step off the bus to enter the arena or stadium. Why not force them to project a professional image? It's a good message to the fan base, and it's a reminder to the players that they're in a "business environment" when they're playing a game.

    Too many pro athletes view themselves as rappers forced to play football or basketball. They decorate themselves with all of the latest prison tattoos and whatever clothing line 50 Cent has popularized.

    Stern is not attacking youth culture, hip-hop culture or black culture. He's running a business and trying to improve the profitability of his league.

    It's kinda sad to see Deion past his prime time.
    6. Watching Deion Sanders masquerade as a nickel corner for the Baltimore Ravens reminds me of Muhammad Ali's battle with Larry Holmes. Deion's comeback is twice as damaging to Deion's reputation as Ali's comebacks were to his.

    Ali made a fool out of himself late in his career, but he never lost the title as "The Greatest."

    Every game that Deion plays with the Ravens, he's making a case for Rod Woodson as "the greatest" corner to play the game. It's not that Deion is horrible as a nickel corner. He's hurting himself by playing for a horrible team and being unable to do any of the things that made him one of the most exciting players to play the game.

    Sanders was famous for making big plays in big games. The Ravens don't play in big games and Deion doesn't make big plays anymore.

    5. Redskins owner Daniel Snyder deserves credit for allowing Joe Gibbs to bench LaVar Arrington.

    You hear all the horror stories about Snyder's being a meddlesome owner who has ruined the Redskins. You never hear the good stuff.

    How many NFL owners would let a guy they gave an eight-year, $80 million contract rot on the bench? Even if the guy was a stiff, most owners would demand that a player in Arrington's situation play simply because of the dollars involved.

    Arrington, despite a 2004 knee injury, isn't a stiff. He can still do the things that made him a three-time Pro Bowler. Arrington just isn't "assignment sound" enough for Joe Gibbs and defensive coordinator Gregg Williams.

    Gibbs and Williams adopted the defensive approach that has been the mainstay of Bill Belichick's New England defenses. Belichick will sacrifice athleticism at linebacker for players who will always fill the right gap.

    4. In case you missed it, the "Monday Night Football" officiating crew (and Paul Tagliabue) heard John Madden's message loud and clear during the Jeff Triplette-ruined Pittsburgh-San Diego contest.

    The refs did everything within their power to stay out of the Indy-St. Louis contest. There were 12 penalties enforced during Monday's game. Nine of the penalties were for false starts, offsides or 12 men on the field -- things a ref absolutely has to flag. The refs let the players decide the game.

    "MNF" is the showcase event for the NFL. The league is not going to let a bunch of mystery penalties ruin football's best marketing tool.

    3. Brett Favre or Dan Marino? It's not a fair question unless it's phrased this way: Favre and Reggie White or Marino and Reggie White? I'll take Marino and White.

    Without arguably the greatest defensive player of all time, Favre does not own a Super Bowl ring and two Super Bowl appearances. Give Marino a defender as dominant as White, and he wins at least one Super Bowl.

    I bring this up because it's my opinion that Marino, especially late in his career, routinely carried mediocre teams -- like the one Favre is leading now -- to the playoffs. I don't question Favre's greatness. I'm just saying there's no reason the Packers shouldn't win the NFC North and reach the playoffs. Marino would do it.

    2. After smelling a Colorado upset last week, I thought I'd take a mulligan on second-ranked Texas: Undefeated and 10th-ranked Texas Tech doesn't have a chance against the Longhorns.

    Texas Tech quarterback Cody Hodges has a flaw that the Longhorns will expose. Hodges holds on to the football too long because he likes to protect his gaudy 71 percent completion percentage. Hodges is going to suffer some horrible sacks and cough up the football. Texas' defensive line is so talented that the Longhorns won't need to blitz to pressure Hodges (22 TDs and five interceptions). Hodges could be involved in as many as six turnovers.

    On one more college note: Nine flags and 98 yards in USC penalties is the dirty little secret that kept "the greatest game ever played" close.

    1. The Denver Broncos pose the greatest threat to Manning and the Colts. Denver's running game can sideline Manning. And Denver's front four can put Manning on his butt.
    Jason Whitlock is a regular columnist for The Kansas City Star. His newspaper is celebrating his 10 years as a columnist with the publishing of Jason's first book, "Love Him, Hate Him: 10 Years of Sports, Passion and Kansas City." It's a collection of Jason's most memorable, thought-provoking and funny columns over the past decade. You can purchase the book at TheKansasCityStore.com. Jason can be reached by e-mail at ballstate68@aol.com.

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

  • #2
    Re: Whitlock turns wool into gold???

    I mean, he still managed to find a way to knock the Colts. Why hasn't he fornicated himself yet?
    Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Whitlock turns wool into gold???

      **** him.

      Seriously, I have no respect for him.
      Super Bowl XLI Champions
      2000 Eastern Conference Champions




      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Whitlock turns wool into gold???

        Too many pro athletes view themselves as rappers forced to play football or basketball. They decorate themselves with all of the latest prison tattoos and whatever clothing line 50 Cent has popularized.
        Stern is not attacking youth culture, hip-hop culture or black culture. He's running a business and trying to improve the profitability of his league.
        I did forward this on to Mark Cuban, although they're both idiots.
        Don't thank me, I'll kill ya.

        Comment

        Working...
        X