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

Porter says refs cheated for Colts

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

  • Porter says refs cheated for Colts

    http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playof...ory?id=2294214

    Pittsburgh Steelers linebacker Joey Porter is not known to shy away from a microphone, and that might make him a little lighter in the wallet after his comments after Sunday's game against the Indianapolis Colts.

    When they did that, they really want Peyton Manning and these guys to win the Super Bowl. They are just going to straight take it for them. I felt that they were like 'We don't even care if you know we're cheating. We're cheating for them.'

    Joey Porter, in The New York Times, after Troy Polamalu's interception was reversed.
    When Troy Polamalu's fourth-quarter interception was overturned by referee Pete Morelli, Porter felt the Steelers were facing opponents on two fronts: the Colts and the refs.
    "I know they wanted Indy to win this game," Porter told The New York Times. "The whole world loves Peyton Manning, but come on man, don't take the game away from us.
    "I felt they were cheating us. When the interception happened, everybody in the world knew that was an interception. Don't cheat us that bad. When they did that, they really want Peyton Manning and these guys to win the Super Bowl. They are just going to straight take it for them. I felt that they were like 'We don't even care if you know we're cheating. We're cheating for them.' "
    Porter
    Porter said he was relieved in more ways than one when Colts kicker Mike Vanderjagt missed a 46-yard field goal try with 21 seconds left that would have tied the score.
    "The way the refs were going, I wouldn't have trusted them in overtime," Porter told the Pittsburgh Post Gazette. "If we hadn't won, they would have cheated us in overtime."

  • #2
    Re: Porter says refs cheated for Colts

    I hate him - but let him talk - they earned it
    Heywoode says... work hard man.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Porter says refs cheated for Colts

      Originally posted by Doug in OH
      I hate him - but let him talk - they earned it
      I stated in another thread along with the majority here who thought the reversal was wrong. However, no, shut his punk mouth, because he was mouthing off before the game even started trying to start a fight. Porter is class less.
      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


      • #4
        Re: Porter says refs cheated for Colts

        He's also one of the best linebackers in football.

        And it seems he's been right far more than he's been wrong with everything he's been saying lately.

        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
        And life itself, rushing over me
        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Porter says refs cheated for Colts

          Originally posted by Jay@Section204
          He's also one of the best linebackers in football.

          And it seems he's been right far more than he's been wrong with everything he's been saying lately.


          He's kind of like Nostradamus, who made so many predictions and statements, that some of them were bound to come true.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Porter says refs cheated for Colts

            Honestly, that was the only call that the colts got their way though. He can't say that the refs cheated, when the calls effected both teams in a bad way. That was the screwiest piece of officiating that I have ever seen.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Porter says refs cheated for Colts

              By the way...rolling on the ground is not considered a "football move" Once he was on the ground he would have had to of been downed by contact. Once a player gets off the ground he has to take two steps before making a "football move" which was not satisfied here because he lost the ball before he took any steps. Therefore it was indeed an incomplete pass and the refs got it right.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Porter says refs cheated for Colts

                There was a badly missed interference call in the second quarter, too.

                Now the whole false start/ no play fiasco on the Steelers fourth-down play was just goofy. The zebras were clearly unworthy of such an important game.
                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                And life itself, rushing over me
                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Porter says refs cheated for Colts

                  Jay, congrats to your team and I hope for 99% of the Steelers team they get that SB ring. Just can't stand a mouth like Porter, or Keyshawn or even former Colt players like Ray Buchanan or Andre Rison.
                  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


                  • #10
                    Re: Porter says refs cheated for Colts

                    It was 1995. The Colts were playing the Steelers in the AFC championship game. Kordell Stewart went out the back of the end zone and then came back in to catch the winning score. The Colts lost the game.

                    If the stars would have been aligned and the Colts won yesterday, in my mind it would have been poetic justice, revenge for 1995. But I doubt Joey Porter would remember 1995 let alone anything that happened 15 seconds ago. They won the game......what is he *****in about?
                    Dallas Clark>Tony Gonzalez

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Porter says refs cheated for Colts

                      Originally posted by microwave_oven
                      By the way...rolling on the ground is not considered a "football move" Once he was on the ground he would have had to of been downed by contact. Once a player gets off the ground he has to take two steps before making a "football move" which was not satisfied here because he lost the ball before he took any steps. Therefore it was indeed an incomplete pass and the refs got it right.
                      That's nonsense. Had he just stayed on the ground, without attempting to get up, that was clearly an interception. No sane person on the planet thinks he did not catch the ball.

                      I guess the lesson for all football players is that you're better off quitting on the play, and keeping the interception, staying on the ground, waiting on somebody to walk by and touch you, than to try to get up and make something else happen.

                      He clearly had control of the ball and kicked it out with his own knee.

                      The NFL is going to have to come up with a better rule. How 'bout control of the ball and two steps? That worked just fine for decades. And Troy had control of the ball and had both feet down, in bounds. The fact that he didn't kick the ball out of his own hand until step #3 only makes it more obvious that the final call (incomplete) was wrong and the refs are very confused by the current version of the rule.

                      From my perspective, thank goodness the Steelers played well enough that this call didn't change the outcome. I'd hate to spend the next decade of my life b!tch!ng about that call, and how it changed the game, every time the Colts and Steelers play.
                      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                      And life itself, rushing over me
                      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Porter says refs cheated for Colts

                        Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                        There was a badly missed interference call in the second quarter, too.

                        Now the whole false start/ no play fiasco on the Steelers fourth-down play was just goofy. The zebras were clearly unworthy of such an important game.

                        Actually the DB had a play on the ball and therefore had as much right for the ball as the Steelers WR did - it was good no call.

                        Amazingly the Colts defensive line did not touch the Steelers linemen if you watch the replay - so no encroachment could be called. The refs blew the play dead so it was a 'do - over.'

                        What was bogus was the false start call on Tarik Glenn when he took a deep breath in the 1st half. Also the face mask call on Sanders when Hines Ward had his hands full of Sanders facemask earlier and longer than Sanders did.
                        "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
                        - Benjamin Franklin

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Porter says refs cheated for Colts

                          Originally posted by bmac
                          It was 1995. The Colts were playing the Steelers in the AFC championship game. Kordell Stewart went out the back of the end zone and then came back in to catch the winning score. The Colts lost the game.

                          -snip-
                          Kordell's legend grows!!

                          That was in the second quarter, right before halftime. The Steelers were in the red zone, and that was a second-down play.

                          A blown call, yes. Did it have much impact in the outcome? Debatable. I do wish they would've gotten the call right, and let us try again on third down, because I believe we would've scored down there anyway.
                          Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                          Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                          Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                          Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                          And life itself, rushing over me
                          Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                          Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Porter says refs cheated for Colts

                            Originally posted by fwpacerfan
                            Actually the DB had a play on the ball and therefore had as much right for the ball as the Steelers WR did - it was good no call.
                            I'd need to watch it again. I remember thinking that about a couple of no-calls (for both teams), but I also remember one that was a really bad no-call, where the receiver was wrapped up before the ball got there.

                            Amazingly the Colts defensive line did not touch the Steelers linemen if you watch the replay - so no encroachment could be called. The refs blew the play dead so it was a 'do - over.'
                            Yep, that was goofy. I guess the refs anticipated the Colts would have to touch someone, otherwise, they should not have blown their whistles. But I still can't figure out why the Steelers never snapped the ball while the Colts players were offsides. That would have made it a much easier call.

                            What was bogus was the false start call on Tarik Glenn when he took a deep breath in the 1st half. Also the face mask call on Sanders when Hines Ward had his hands full of Sanders facemask earlier and longer than Sanders did.
                            I thought the first of Tarik's false starts was very, very subtle. Shame on him for exhaling.

                            As for the facemask, that's a tough one to figure. Because from the one angle you couldn't see the defensive facemask at all and from the other angle I couldn't tell if Hines' stiff-arm came before or after the personal foul. Regardless, I just can't think of a time when that's been called on the offense or even offsetting. I guess if the defensive guy gets the facemask then the offensive guy is given leeway with his stiff-arm? I just don't know...
                            Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                            Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                            Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                            Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                            And life itself, rushing over me
                            Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                            Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Porter says refs cheated for Colts

                              Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                              I'd need to watch it again. I remember thinking that about a couple of no-calls (for both teams), but I also remember one that was a really bad no-call, where the receiver was wrapped up before the ball got there.



                              Yep, that was goofy. I guess the refs anticipated the Colts would have to touch someone, otherwise, they should not have blown their whistles. But I still can't figure out why the Steelers never snapped the ball while the Colts players were offsides. That would have made it a much easier call.



                              I thought the first of Tarik's false starts was very, very subtle. Shame on him for exhaling.

                              As for the facemask, that's a tough one to figure. Because from the one angle you couldn't see the defensive facemask at all and from the other angle I couldn't tell if Hines' stiff-arm came before or after the personal foul. Regardless, I just can't think of a time when that's been called on the offense or even offsetting. I guess if the defensive guy gets the facemask then the offensive guy is given leeway with his stiff-arm? I just don't know...
                              I actually didn't catch Ward's facemask until I heard Dierdorf talk about it. There were a lot of close calls that could've/should've gone the other way.

                              I'm actually going to be rooting for the Steelers next week. I always like the underdog and for them to win 3 games on the road as a #6 seed and make the Superbowl would be awesome. People seem to forget that they were 15-1 last year so they are a very good team. Vegas oddsmakers must be hating life right now trying to figure this stuff out.
                              "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
                              - Benjamin Franklin

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X