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

Pittsburgh Steelers cut Joey Porter

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

  • Pittsburgh Steelers cut Joey Porter

    After two weeks of internal debate, the Pittsburgh Steelers decided to cut ties with one of their most recognized players -- linebacker Joey Porter.

    Porter and running back Verron Haynes were released Thursday as the Steelers got under the salary cap. But the decision to release Porter wasn't as much a cap move as it was a change in direction. A three-time Pro Bowl performer, Porter turns 30 on March 22. And with new coach Mike Tomlin taking over for Bill Cowher, the Steelers were looking to go in a different direction with their linebacking corps.


    Porter is one of the league's most outspoken players and is willing to verbally challenge opponents. His approach at time did not mesh well with the Steelers' image.


    Over the past couple of days, Pittsburgh shopped Porter in trade discussions and there was some interest. In the end, the Steelers decided to give him the chance to find a new team instead of sending him somewhere he might not want to go.


    Porter was entering the final year of his contract and there weren't any plans to sign him to an extension. Porter was scheduled to make $5.225 million this season. His release, and Haynes', save the Steelers $6.065 million of cap room.


    Because Porter is still a productive player, some people in the organization wanted to keep him. On Thursday, management decided to move on. James Harrison is expected to take over for Porter at outside linebacker.

    [Credit: ESPN]

    ______________

    I really wasnt expecting to see this. I wonder what team might pick him up if the Steelers cant re-sign him
    If you havin' depth problems, I feel bad for you son; I got 99 problems but a bench ain't one! - Hicks
    [/center]
    @thatguyjoe84

  • #2
    Re: Pittsburgh Steelers cut Joey Porter

    alot of ppl saw this coming. I wonder can they restructure and resign?
    STARBURY

    08 and Beyond

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Pittsburgh Steelers cut Joey Porter

      Nope, I've posted on here numerous times last season that I expected this. The Steelers are great at releasing their star linebackers when they have "less than a season left."

      Joey turns thirty in a month, and was showing signs of decline all season long. He wasn't playing badly, but his ability to make as many plays in the offensive backfield was limited.

      But somebody will sign him to big bucks and then be disappointed. Same thing happened to our other all-pro LBs: Kevin Greene, Gregg Lloyd, Levon Kirkland, Earl Holmes, Jason Gilden, on down the list. None of them retired as members of the Steelers organization but hardly made a dent for their new teams.

      There was a great tribute to him in the Pittsburgh paper today. For as good as he was for the Steelers on the field, he was an even better teammate/ teammember - very coachable, loved by his teammates who always ralleyed around him when he ran his mouth. He'll be missed, but he's also not the same player he was.

      Porter a terrific teammate
      http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07061/766257-87.stm
      He wasn't a Ham or a Lambert, but Porter was one of a kind
      Friday, March 02, 2007

      Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

      Strictly talking business, it makes perfect sense for the Steelers to get rid of Joey Porter. His performance slipped badly last season. The team has every right to believe that Porter, soon to be 30, with a game based on speed and quickness, no longer can get the job done at a high level, certainly not at a level worth $5 million. Once it reached that decision, it had to let him go.

      But that doesn't mean Porter doesn't deserve a proper send-off.

      He should be remembered as one of the Steelers' all-time great players, maybe not Hall of Fame great along the lines of Ham and Lambert, but great enough that the franchise wouldn't have won Super Bowl XL without him.

      Porter had some career here.

      You also might have heard along the way that he was something of a fascinating character.

      What do President Bush and NFL players Ray Lewis, William Green, Jerramy Stevens, Kellen Winslow Jr. and Peyton Manning and his bunch of softies from Indianapolis have in common?

      Yep, Porter.

      I'm already missing the guy.

      Porter never was the team leader that Jerome Bettis was or even that Levon Kirkland and Dermontti Dawson were before him, but he provided plenty of emotion to the Steelers in a sport that thrives on it. He did it before games when he pranced back and forth at midfield, helmet off, wearing a black beanie and eye black, his massive tattooed forearms and washboard stomach exposed, taunting someone, anyone, from the other team. He did it during games when he played well enough that Sports Illustrated put him on the cover of its NFL preview edition last year and called him the league's "most feared player." And he did it after games -- after the many victories anyway -- when he led the team in its traditional "Who Ride?" chant.

      The other players loved Porter.

      We loved his passion.

      Yes, Porter went too far at times, sometimes way too far, as when he used a homophobic term to describe Winslow Jr., the Cleveland Browns' tight end, after a game last season. He went to the Baltimore Ravens' bus in an attempt to fight Lewis after the game here in 2003 because he felt Lewis had made light of his buttocks wound after he was the random victim of a drive-by shooting in Denver earlier that season. And he was ejected before the game in Cleveland in 2004 after he and Green were involved in a brief fight in warm-ups.

      Certainly, Porter overreacted to media coverage of his light-hearted remarks directed against President Bush not long before the Steelers were to visit the White House as Super Bowl champions in June. Even though his comments were portrayed accurately -- as being said in jest -- he threw a fit, even issuing a ridiculous statement through the team. He then made matters worse by showing up at the ceremony in the East Room as the only player wearing sunglasses. It wasn't just disrespectful; he looked ridiculous.

      But more often than not, Porter pushed the right buttons, not just his teammates' but those of opposing players. He called out Manning and the Colts as a finesse team before the Steelers played them in the AFC playoffs after the 2005 season, then backed up his words with a brilliant performance that included two late sacks, giving him 61/2 in six games down the stretch and into the playoffs. (He added another and a forced fumble in the win against the Denver Broncos in the AFC championship game). Before Super Bowl XL, he flat out called Stevens, the Seattle Seahawks' tight end, soft, just about the worst thing you can label an NFL player short of that homophobic word. It was easy to think he got into Stevens' head after Stevens dropped three passes in the Steelers' 21-10 win.

      Those are wonderful memories, to be sure.

      But the best memories of Porter involve his soft side.

      Shhhh!

      Don't tell Peyton and Stevens.

      Late in the 2005 season, Porter organized an amazing tribute to Steelers defensive coordinator Dick LeBeau. He and the other defensive players wore LeBeau's retro No. 44 Detroit Lions' jersey to Heinz Field before a game against the Lions. LeBeau cried.

      But the topper came at Super Bowl XL when Porter, after clearing it with Bill Cowher, made sure Bettis was sent out alone when the Steelers were introduced as a team in the pregame introductions in Bettis' hometown of Detroit. Porter could be seen on camera, holding back his teammates, all of whom were eager to get on the field for the biggest game of their lives, yet deferred to his wishes. "I wanted the cameras to shine on Jerome alone," Porter said after the game.

      The guy wasn't just a great player.

      He was a great teammate.



      --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      (Ron Cook can be reached at rcook@post-gazette.com. )
      I enjoyed the Dick LeBeau jersey story, but if you've read anything I ever post on the football side of PD you already know how much I love Dick LeBeau's aggressive defense.
      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

      Working...
      X