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

AP: Houston signs Mario Williams!!

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

  • AP: Houston signs Mario Williams!!

    http://cbs.sportsline.com/nfl/story/9404233

    Texans pull shocker, choose Williams over Bush
    April 28, 2006
    CBS SportsLine.com wire reports




    HOUSTON -- The Houston Texans have signed North Carolina State defensive end Mario Williams with the No. 1 pick in the NFL draft.
    Developing ...
    AP NEWS
    The Associated Press News Service


    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

  • #2
    Re: AP: Houston signs Mario Williams!!

    hhhmmmm...

    Do the Saints take Bush with Deuce McAllister?
    i guess Bush could play some WR...

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: AP: Houston signs Mario Williams!!

      Originally posted by REL31
      hhhmmmm...

      Do the Saints take Bush with Deuce McAllister?
      i guess Bush could play some WR...
      Yeah, I would. Bush wasn't gonna be an every-down back anyway. It frees him up to play the slot and be a return guy.

      As a Brees fan, I'm ecstatic right now. The only downside to him leaving coaching hell in SD was he was losing LT. Now he's getting a good back who'll make him look great with his receiving ability.
      Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: AP: Houston signs Mario Williams!!

        The texans are retarded, honestly why would they pass on Bush? It's not like they have a awesome HB. The Texans are stupid.... seriously I've never saw anything like this.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: AP: Houston signs Mario Williams!!

          Originally posted by BoomBaby31
          The texans are retarded, honestly why would they pass on Bush? It's not like they have a awesome HB. The Texans are stupid.... seriously I've never saw anything like this.
          Well, the talk was they couldn't reach an agreement with Bush.

          Frankly, I don't care if Williams is the next Julius Peppers. Their fanbase is gonna hate them for not taking one of the star offensive players.
          Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: AP: Houston signs Mario Williams!!

            No-freakin'-way. This is absolutely shocking news.
            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.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: AP: Houston signs Mario Williams!!

              Not surprising at all, and a good decision.

              You draft gearing towards your division first. And in a division with Peyton Manning, Byron Leftwhich, Steve McNair/Vince Young, you have to figure out how to stop someone, not how to get into a shooting match.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: AP: Houston signs Mario Williams!!

                Originally posted by Kegboy
                Well, the talk was they couldn't reach an agreement with Bush.

                Frankly, I don't care if Williams is the next Julius Peppers. Their fanbase is gonna hate them for not taking one of the star offensive players.
                Who cares if you don't reach an agreement, you take him and reach one when he is with the team. He knows what the next team is going to offer, so of course he is going to hold out if the offer isn't as good as the next. When he shows up the veterns will put a lot of heat on the rookie and get him to sign.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: AP: Houston signs Mario Williams!!

                  Originally posted by btowncolt
                  Not surprising at all, and a good decision.

                  You draft gearing towards your division first. And in a division with Peyton Manning, Byron Leftwhich, Steve McNair/Vince Young, you have to figure out how to stop someone, not how to get into a shooting match.
                  I have to agree with this. I'm just wondering if Bush's recent issues with agents had anything to do with the decision or if it was what they considered the best football move.

                  Regarding how much their fan base is going to hold it against them, think back to the uproar when we passed on Ricky Williams who seemed like a sure fire all-pro to be and no one really knew who Edge was. The fans quickly forgot the next year when we went 13-3.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: AP: Houston signs Mario Williams!!

                    Colts trade down to #2 pick and select Bush...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: AP: Houston signs Mario Williams!!

                      Originally posted by btowncolt
                      Not surprising at all, and a good decision.

                      You draft gearing towards your division first. And in a division with Peyton Manning, Byron Leftwhich, Steve McNair/Vince Young, you have to figure out how to stop someone, not how to get into a shooting match.
                      I disagree with this statement. It's always been my stance that a team should field the best team possible, regardless of what your opponents are doing. In fact, it's been proven time and time again that the best way to shut down Peyton Manning isn't to play smothering defense. The best way to shut down a great offense is to never let it onto the field, a la the Steelers this year. The reality of the cap means that to get something on offense, you give up something on defense. If you play in a division where everyone has monster O and no D, you simply get a good RB, a great line, an accurate QB (not neccessarily a great one), some cheap possession receivers, and load up on D. You'll still score, albeit slowly, and your defense will be good enough to hold an offensive team to a reasonable total. But this all starts with a good O-Line and a reliable RB, and the Texans have neither. Assuming they didn't want Bush, they should have traded the pick to get Ferguson and future picks.

                      To further expound on this discussion, let's look at the top playoff teams in the past. Have we ever seen a super successful team that had great D, and a terrible offensive line? It's counterproductive. You'll get stops, but you'll have to count on the D doing it twice as much as normal, due to all the 3-and-outs your offense is going to be putting out. For that matter, have we ever seen a successful team that had a top notch D and crap for a RB? I think the closest we ever saw to this was the Patriots pre-Dillon, but their O-line was good enough to mask those deficiencies. Any way you slice it, you need an offensive line before you can plan on doing anything else, and the Texans have probably the worst O-line in the league.

                      Part of the problem is that people don't know how to build teams, and it's even more important in the NFL than in the NBA, because offense and defense have to complement each other. Look at the Texans. They've got a high-dollar young QB, and they have no idea if he's worth a crap, because he can't spend more than 3 seconds upright once the ball gets snapped. The smart thing would be to trade down and pick up Ferguson to protect Carr and Davis, meanwhile picking up more picks and/or a vet that could help. The second smartest thing to do would be to draft Bush. He's quick enough that he could pull off some Barry Sanders type moves without a line. They'd still be a bad team, but at least they'd pack the stadium and guarantee themselves they'd have the RB they need to build around. What you DON'T do is draft defense when your offense is completely inept. If your offense keeps doing 3 and outs, your D is going to spend way too much time on the field, and a good offense will eventually wear out your D.

                      Don't get me wrong, drafting D is smart, but you have to have some other elements in place for it to be effective, starting with an offensive line, and ending with a workmanlike RB.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: AP: Houston signs Mario Williams!!

                        I tend to agree with Btown, but this is still shocking. Takes some pretty big onions for a GM to make that decision knowing he's going to **** off the entire fan base.

                        I'm kind of happy we won't have to see Reggie 2 times a year though...

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: AP: Houston signs Mario Williams!!

                          Originally posted by Spicoli
                          I tend to agree with Btown, but this is still shocking. Takes some pretty big onions for a GM to make that decision knowing he's going to **** off the entire fan base.

                          I'm kind of happy we won't have to see Reggie 2 times a year though...
                          The talk has been for months that Houston plans to fire Casserly after the draft.

                          I still think this comes down to money, and only money. My brother lives in Houston, I'll give him a call later and see what the spin is down there.
                          Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: AP: Houston signs Mario Williams!!

                            Some good points here.

                            http://cbs.sportsline.com/nfl/story/9404449


                            Protection-needy Texans bizarrely turn backs on Carr
                            April 28, 2006
                            By Clark Judge
                            CBS SportsLine.com Senior Writer
                            Tell Clark your opinion!





                            If the Houston Texans weren't going to draft the best player on the board, then they should have drafted for need. And defensive end Mario Williams is not what they need most.

                            Tackle D'Brickashaw Ferguson is.

                            Ask quarterback David Carr. He's the poor sap who was sacked an NFL-high 68 times last year. And 49 times the year before that. And 76 times in his rookie season. The guy's not a quarterback; he's a piñata.

                            David Carr can expect a lot more of this after the Texans' No. 1 pick. (Getty Images)
                            But he's Houston's piñata, with the Texans making a commitment to him when they could've chosen University of Texas quarterback Vince Young or USC's Matt Leinart. If the Texans honestly believe he can be a franchise passer -- and they sure act like it -- then why not give the guy a chance to fulfill their expectations?

                            Why not give him someone who can block?
                            It sounds so simple, yet I could understand where the Texans were going. They would draft Bush because he's the best player in the draft and because he could breathe life into a sluggish offense. And if they didn't, they would trade down -- accumulating picks so they could find the parts necessary to keep Carr in one piece and make the club healthy at the same time.

                            Fat chance.

                            Instead of bailing out Carr with the best running back to come along in years -- maybe decades ... instead of turning to Bush to take some of the heat off Carr and a beleaguered passing attack ... instead of turning to the best offensive lineman in this year's draft ... instead of trading down to pick up draft picks ... they did the unthinkable and chose Mario Williams.

                            Nothing against Mario Williams; I just don't see how he's going to handle Dwight Freeney.

                            "We have to look at it on the basis of what our needs are and how that player can add value to our team," owner Bob McNair said on Thursday, foreshadowing what was to happen. "Yes, temporarily, some of the fans might be unhappy with the pick. But, long term, what counts is whether you win.

                            "If we pick a popular player, temporarily, everybody is happy. But then if you don't win then they say, 'Well, that was the dumbest pick I've ever seen. Why did you listen to me? You're supposed to be the professional.' The bottom line is we have to win, so we'll pick the best player who gives us the best chance to win."

                            Fair enough. But McNair started that discussion by saying the Texans had to look at "what our needs are." Question: Is there anything Houston needs more than an offensive lineman who knows how to pass block? The Texans have holes the size of the Astrodome in their front five, yet, for some reason, they chose to attack the other side of the ball.

                            Question: What was wrong with D'Brickashaw Ferguson?

                            The Texans had 37 sacks last year, which tied them for 14th in a 32-team league. That's not great, but it's not bad, either. In fact, it tied them with Dallas, Atlanta and Arizona. But they allowed 68 sacks, 14 more than the Minnesota Vikings, and you don't have to be an Einstein to figure out what that means.

                            It means David Carr must duck. And with Friday's move, Carr must duck again. And again. And again. There's no word yet from Carr, but I bet he's delighted Houston chose a defensive end to cover his back.
                            "It's not often we have an opportunity to select a player of this caliber," McNair said of the first choice. "So you want to make a pick of a player who's going to be with you and make a contribution for you for a long period of time because it is a valuable pick."

                            If that player wasn't going to be Reggie Bush, it should have at least been someone who addressed the Texans' most urgent need. It should have been D'Brickashaw Ferguson.

                            Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: AP: Houston signs Mario Williams!!

                              I agree that the Texans defense needed ALOT of work..but they need to get the offense fixed first so Carr doesn't die. If you don't take Bush, you take D-Brick. Mario Williams is going to be a pretty good defensive end..but when it's all said and done, Bush and D'Brick will be better cornerstones for franchises. Bad pick for the Texans IMO but they were filling a need. They had an absolutely horrenous defense. I probably could have played corner in Houston last year.

                              And another thing, The Texans do have a great halfback. Domanick Davis is a stud and if the Texans ever build a decent O-Line, he will be a pretty dominant RB in the NFL.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X