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

The draft

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

  • The draft

    I'm guessing that the majority of the draft will be used on the defensive side again.... which it should be. I'm guessing mostly DT, LB and CB will be addressed again.

    I also think the Colts will take a WR to try and fill the slot so Dallas can return to TE.

    It'll be interesting to see who's availible when we pick.

  • #2
    Re: The draft

    Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
    I'm guessing that the majority of the draft will be used on the defensive side again.... which it should be. I'm guessing mostly DT, LB and CB will be addressed again.

    I also think the Colts will take a WR to try and fill the slot so Dallas can return to TE.

    It'll be interesting to see who's availible when we pick.
    I think it will go like this:

    DT or LB. I think Justin Harrell will be gone so probably LB here, maybe Lawrence Timmons. But if Harrell is there he's the pick. This guy is tough, he only played in three games last season, one of them with a completely torn bicep muscle. He postponed his surgery by a week to help the Vols win a key rivalry game. That instantly makes him tougher than just about any other Colt. Plus the bang for the buck here could be tremendous. Harrell would have been the top DT in this draft had he not gotten injured and those guys don't make it much past the first 7 or 8 picks. Plus, with no 2nd rounder this year (sent to Tampa for Booger), the Colts really have to hit one out of the park in the 1st round. If they get him at this pick, I'll consider it a good draft.

    CB I don't know about. There are only 4 good ones in this draft and all will be off the board before the Colts pick. By the time they pick again, which is twice late in the 3rd round, any CB pick there will be a reach. Sometimes you do grab a guy in that range that pans out much better than anyone expected though so we'll see.

    Any WR capable of pushing Dallas Clark back to TE and out of the slot would be a first rounder and there's no way they are going that direction in round 1. Meacham, Ginn, Bowe, Jarrett, and of course Calvin Johnson will all be long gone by the end of the first, leaving only Anthony Gonzales as a dark horse for this slot. With the state of the Run D, if they picked him with Harrell still on the board I'd firebomb Lucas Oil. Dallas is effective at the slot whether he likes it or not and with Fletcher and Utecht respectably holding down the TE spot he may be there a while. Sorry Dallas. Besides with Stoke out of the picture Moorehead or even Standeford could get a shot there. I don't see any way on earth they take even one WR in this draft.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: The draft

      I think there a strong possibility we take a RB in the third round or if we trade into the second round to back up Joe.


      Comment


      • #4
        Re: The draft

        Originally posted by travmil View Post
        I think it will go like this:

        DT or LB. I think Justin Harrell will be gone so probably LB here, maybe Lawrence Timmons. But if Harrell is there he's the pick. This guy is tough, he only played in three games last season, one of them with a completely torn bicep muscle. He postponed his surgery by a week to help the Vols win a key rivalry game. That instantly makes him tougher than just about any other Colt. Plus the bang for the buck here could be tremendous. Harrell would have been the top DT in this draft had he not gotten injured and those guys don't make it much past the first 7 or 8 picks. Plus, with no 2nd rounder this year (sent to Tampa for Booger), the Colts really have to hit one out of the park in the 1st round. If they get him at this pick, I'll consider it a good draft.

        CB I don't know about. There are only 4 good ones in this draft and all will be off the board before the Colts pick. By the time they pick again, which is twice late in the 3rd round, any CB pick there will be a reach. Sometimes you do grab a guy in that range that pans out much better than anyone expected though so we'll see.

        Any WR capable of pushing Dallas Clark back to TE and out of the slot would be a first rounder and there's no way they are going that direction in round 1. Meacham, Ginn, Bowe, Jarrett, and of course Calvin Johnson will all be long gone by the end of the first, leaving only Anthony Gonzales as a dark horse for this slot. With the state of the Run D, if they picked him with Harrell still on the board I'd firebomb Lucas Oil. Dallas is effective at the slot whether he likes it or not and with Fletcher and Utecht respectably holding down the TE spot he may be there a while. Sorry Dallas. Besides with Stoke out of the picture Moorehead or even Standeford could get a shot there. I don't see any way on earth they take even one WR in this draft.
        I think Harrell is the pick in the 1st round as well, but I doubt he'll be there. I doubt Timmons will be there either. Not sure who will be availible, and I wouldn't be surprised to see the Colts trade out of that 1st round pick for multiple picks later in the draft.

        I think CBs and WRs can be found anywhere in the draft, u just have to find a guy who fits the scheme well, or compliments Marv and Wayne. Not saying that all WRs will pan out like Colston, but all the WR has to do is be durable and able to get open and catch the ball. Maybe Moorehead or Standeford can do that... maybe not. And I like Fletch, but Utecht puts the ball on the ground a lil more then I like.

        I'm not sure how the draft will pan out, but I'm sure that the Colts will continue to draft well

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: The draft

          Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
          I also think the Colts will take a WR to try and fill the slot so Dallas can return to TE.
          .
          You do understand the Colts for years have run a lot of 2 TE sets and a lot of no huddle offense. Clark in the slot is there as the 2nd TE and adds lots of flexibility being adept at 2 roles. A true slot WR is another good tool to have, but I really can't see this as a major area of need. If anything I would prefer another TE who can slide out to the slot as a backup/replacement for Clark. With both Sanders and Clark FAs next year something may have to give.
          No matter how much success Larry Bird attains in Indiana he'll never top that first command to fire Thomas. -Peter Vecsey. NY Post 12/4/07

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: The draft

            Originally posted by Shack80 View Post
            You do understand the Colts for years have run a lot of 2 TE sets and a lot of no huddle offense. Clark in the slot is there as the 2nd TE and adds lots of flexibility being adept at 2 roles. A true slot WR is another good tool to have, but I really can't see this as a major area of need. If anything I would prefer another TE who can slide out to the slot as a backup/replacement for Clark. With both Sanders and Clark FAs next year something may have to give.
            Yeah I know, and we still have Utecht and Fletcher as TE as well. Fletcher seems to be coming along nicely, and Dallas has had some injury problems in the past. Stokley went down and Dallas filled the void well, but when Dallas went down as well, we went something like 1-4. The two TE set is nice, but the majority of the time, Dallas was in the slot.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: The draft

              OOPS: The following post was written by pizza guy, on hoopsforlife's computer because pizza gal is on pizza guy's copmuter, and pizza guy forgot to sign HFL out.

              CB and LB, then DT. As far as the slot reciever goes, Moorehead is good enough for that. But for the last few years, we've needed upgrades at DT and LB, and now with Harper and David gone, we need at least depth at CB. I love Marlin Jackson, and Kelvin Hayden made the biggest play of his life in the biggest game ever. But I'm not overly confident they can handle it...and if they get hurt, we're screwed. Losing June makes LB a bigger priority, but I do really like Freddy K. Adding Booger last year was our 2nd round pick this year, and well worth it, but we can always use more size on the front line.

              As it stands, we've got Freeney, Booger, Brock, and Mathis on the line. Morris, Brackett, and Gardner/Freddy K in the middle. Marlin and Kelvin at the corners (I don't even know who our nickelback would be), and the best safety tandem in the league (IMO).

              So, I think you take the best player available at either LB or CB, unless there's a total stud at DT available.

              A late round pick can go for a back-up RB.

              --pizza

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: The draft

                The more I keep hearing about this Justin Harrell (DT, Tennessee) the more I think he won't be around at pick 32. There's really no other DTs who'd be available that'd make sense in the first round, as far as I know.

                So I'd prefer a LB or CB. I think a guy like Daymeion Hughes (CB, Cal) would fit perfectly into the Dungy Cover 2. As for LBs, I'd almost consider trading Peyton for a chance to get Patrick Willis (OK not really, but he's a beast).

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: The draft

                  Originally posted by hoopsforlife View Post
                  OOPS: The following post was written by pizza guy, on hoopsforlife's computer because pizza gal is on pizza guy's copmuter, and pizza guy forgot to sign HFL out.

                  CB and LB, then DT. As far as the slot reciever goes, Moorehead is good enough for that. But for the last few years, we've needed upgrades at DT and LB, and now with Harper and David gone, we need at least depth at CB. I love Marlin Jackson, and Kelvin Hayden made the biggest play of his life in the biggest game ever. But I'm not overly confident they can handle it...and if they get hurt, we're screwed. Losing June makes LB a bigger priority, but I do really like Freddy K. Adding Booger last year was our 2nd round pick this year, and well worth it, but we can always use more size on the front line.

                  As it stands, we've got Freeney, Booger, Brock, and Mathis on the line. Morris, Brackett, and Gardner/Freddy K in the middle. Marlin and Kelvin at the corners (I don't even know who our nickelback would be), and the best safety tandem in the league (IMO).

                  So, I think you take the best player available at either LB or CB, unless there's a total stud at DT available.

                  A late round pick can go for a back-up RB.

                  --pizza
                  Yeah I think Moorehead could fill in at the slot as well, but I had read somewhere that he was visiting the Vikings? I don't know if anything took place, but there was an article about Moorehead joining Doss in the Vikings.

                  I think defense is definitely the way to go. CB has become more of a need since the likely loss of David. LB could be an interesting spot as well, don't know who'll be around though. I think DT is still a big need. Simon can kiss my . But another DT to stuff the run and get pressure would be nice, and take pressure off the LB core.

                  It'll be interesting to see what happens at #30, I'm not sure Harrell will be there either, they'll probably take the best player availible at a need position, or trade it for more picks later.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: The draft

                    Here's a nice, fat draft clue from Peter King's colmun Tuesday:

                    1. I've gotten lots of questions on the talk-show circuit, from hosts and even a caller, about the contention in Monday Morning Quarterback last week that there are only 18 first-round-quality picks in this year's draft.

                    Colts GM Bill Polian told me, "I wondered, 'Did I talk to you?' I didn't, but that's exactly how many players we have graded as first-rounders.''

                    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...aft/index.html


                    Polian has said before he hates paying players first round money if they're not first round grades. He traded out of the first round two years ago because of this. If they're sitting at 32, and one of the teams at the top of the 2nd wants to trade up and give up their 3rd rounder to do it, I don't think he would hesitate at all to move down and not pick in the first round again.
                    Narf!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: The draft

                      I'm excited about the draft this weekend for both fantasy football purposes and to just watch where some guys end up. On top of that, the pats got 2 first round picks this year. I'm hoping we get some help at safety/CB and some help at the LB position in the first.

                      I expect the Colts to draft a lot of defensive players this year. They need some serious help in the secondary. I guess Polian expects the Colts to try and outscore everyone again. Maybe the Colts run defense will step up, but you guys are going to get torched in the secondary unless you get some quality CBs via the draft or FA/Trading.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: The draft

                        The Colts will get torched in the secondary anyway unless Jackson and Hayden are ready. Getting someone who can come in and start right away at CB is pretty tough. IMO the Colts will need to get someone who can play as a nickel back this year and hopefully start within a couple of years but I don't think there's a "have to" with getting a CB in the 1st or 2nd round - IMO the interior line's a bigger deal. And there it is possible to draft someone who can start right away.
                        The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: The draft

                          Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
                          The Colts will get torched in the secondary anyway unless Jackson and Hayden are ready. Getting someone who can come in and start right away at CB is pretty tough. IMO the Colts will need to get someone who can play as a nickel back this year and hopefully start within a couple of years but I don't think there's a "have to" with getting a CB in the 1st or 2nd round - IMO the interior line's a bigger deal. And there it is possible to draft someone who can start right away.
                          I think they're counting pretty big on Tim Jennings too.
                          Narf!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: The draft

                            One huge positive for the Colts is that they play a cover 2 scheme which does not require excellent CBs. The only thing I'd be worried about at this point in time is depth. The Colts have absolutely none in many of the defensive spots. I think the Colts will be fine even if they don't upgrade anyone on their defense. They may not win another SB without some help, but they should still be a 12 win team..even in the AFC.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: The draft

                              i wouldnt be shocked if they take sidney rice wideout from south carolina, or jon beason LB from miami

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X