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

Harrison PO'd at Star

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

  • #16
    Re: Harrison PO'd at Star

    Originally posted by Bball View Post
    I have a slightly different take... Why did he bother with this 'breaking of silence' anyway? If you're going to talk, then talk (openly). Otherwise, keep up the silent treatment or just say "no comment".

    Even if he's pi$$ed, address it head-on instead of odd, weird comments that really only reflect bad on him (if he can't elaborate or put them in context).

    I've noticed Marvin getting more odd over the years. I'm not sure what to make of it.
    I have to wonder if Marvin isn't mad at the Colts for how they handled his condition last year. It's obvious he had absolutely no business playing and should have been on the IR. I wonder if he thinks the Colts rushed him back to quickly for the Jacksonville game? I remember reading that it was Marv who said that he couldn't play in the final game of the season. Or he could think the Colts put him in a bad situation against SD when he still had no business playing. His mind was on his knee, and not protecting the football (not his fault).

    I would just like to know what it was that ticked him off. I don't remember The Star ever hanging him after the Philly incident. Am I wrong about that? I mean, they initially reported it as did every news outlet, but they seemed to let it go after nothing came out of it. Chappel wouldn't be doing his job if he didn't ask Harrison about it.

    Is Harrison seriously mad because people were whispering about his condition last year? If the Colts and Harrison weren't so super secretive about the injury, then there would be nothing to whisper about.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Harrison PO'd at Star

      Wow, a few PD'ers got their feelings hurt again. Why? In this world, there are different types of personalities. Marvin is a introvert. For the record, so am I. People like us are quiet socially, but always have an edge that drives us to succeed. At times we snap, it's a much needed release, as keeping quiet and leading by example is what gets us to the top. The more the media tries, the more Marvin will get annoyed, just a personality trait. He has been good, no outstanding, for 12 years, he was bound to snap. At least it was subtle lashing. **** all these media type liberal candy***es anyway. Dissect this if you guys want, but no one outside of Indy is listening or cares.

      Tarnished? On Sunday's you won't be thinking that when he makes a one handed grab in the corner of the end zone while dragging two feet for six.

      With all the legitimate off field problems involving Indy professional sports, I'd like to think we all know what's really bad and not so bad. This not so bad. Mr. Talks-A-Lot needs to relax when quiet guys gets annoyed, because quiet guy is tired of listening to Mr. Talks-A-Lot.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Harrison PO'd at Star

        Originally posted by Since86 View Post

        He's exactly right. They need to write what they see. Is he making cuts like the Marv before injury, or is he favoring the knee?

        But if all they should do is "write what they see", then there would never be a need to interview any player/coach/what have you. That would be pretty boring wouldn't it? Players/coaches are interviewed to get a unique, inside perspective that only they can give. Interviews are the entire basis of sports coverage. That's how we really learn what's going on. Without interviews, all Chappel would be giving was an opinion. So I think that Marvin Harrison's thoughts on the knee are far more valuable than what Chapel or any one else can observe with their eyes.

        Sure it *looks* like he is doing okay and not favoring the knee. All we can do is give an educated guess. However, Marvin's opinion on it would be infinitely more valuable than anything Chapel or anyone has to say about it.

        That's my problem with it. I don't expect Harrison to give some in depth answer about his knee, but would it have killed him to just say something like "it's doing okay, i'm trying everything I can to get back to 100% this year." I don't think it would. Is it really necessary to give such condescending answers?

        Maybe I'm overreacting, and I can see your points with the rest of your posts. I understand that Harrison is going to always be a quiet guy, and I have ZERO problem with that. However, I don't think it's necessary for him to be so consistently standoffish with people. I mean, lighten up a bit Marvin. You've spent 12 great years here and the people here want so badly to have a relationship with you. I don't think that is too unnecessary given the fact that most fans support the team financially in some way.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Harrison PO'd at Star

          Originally posted by Adam1987 View Post
          That's my problem with it. I don't expect Harrison to give some in depth answer about his knee, but would it have killed him to just say something like "it's doing okay, i'm trying everything I can to get back to 100% this year." I don't think it would. Is it really necessary to give such condescending answers?
          After years hearing JO talk about how he's fine and all that, you really expect to get a straight answer? I would much rather evaluate someone's performance, and how they move than have them tell me.

          Players play, and they're never going to give you the 100% truth.

          Let me ask you this. If a reporter asked Peyton how his knee was feeling, what would you expect him to say? My guess is, he's going to give an answer that makes it seem like it's doing better than it really is because of his desire to get back. I see no difference in Marv, especially considering all the talk last season.

          If I remember correctly, weren't you up in arms about not getting straight answers during that time? I doubt much has changed, answering question-wise not the injury.
          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Harrison PO'd at Star

            Sometimes I think it is OK simply to be one of the best to ever play at your position and not a celebrity/PR man/ambassador. Just because a man can catch a football doesn't make him an ambassador. Conversely not being a ambassador doesn't make him a jerk. It is just who he is. If he couldn't play the way he did no one on here would care if he was a good person or not.
            "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

            "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Harrison PO'd at Star

              We see what we see.

              Is he playing? Yes. Marvin is back.

              He is just calling everyone Mr. Obvious.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Harrison PO'd at Star

                Well, those comments could "mean" any number of things, one very real possibility being nothing really. If he comes back and is able to produce nobody will care about this little dustup.

                On the other hand, maybe he's irritated b/c Reggie Wayne has surpassed him in terms what have you done for me lately and exterior profile. Is Marvin, perhaps due to age, now 1A or 2 even if physically sound?
                I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                -Emiliano Zapata

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Harrison PO'd at Star

                  Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
                  On the other hand, maybe he's irritated b/c Reggie Wayne has surpassed him in terms what have you done for me lately and exterior profile.
                  Seriously, has Marvin ever given you any indication he cares about his "exterior profile"?

                  IMO, the Star sucks, glad to see someone give them **** once in a while.
                  Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Harrison PO'd at Star

                    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                    After years hearing JO talk about how he's fine and all that, you really expect to get a straight answer? I would much rather evaluate someone's performance, and how they move than have them tell me.

                    Players play, and they're never going to give you the 100% truth.

                    Let me ask you this. If a reporter asked Peyton how his knee was feeling, what would you expect him to say? My guess is, he's going to give an answer that makes it seem like it's doing better than it really is because of his desire to get back. I see no difference in Marv, especially considering all the talk last season.

                    If I remember correctly, weren't you up in arms about not getting straight answers during that time? I doubt much has changed, answering question-wise not the injury.
                    Fair point. It's doubtful that Harrison would be very straight forward, I guess I'm just a little turned off by his tone. It would be nice to know how he really feels about his knee, if the naysayers are what's motivating him this year, and what the heck happened in Philly. You make a good point that there's no way we'd ever get those answers from Harrison, but it certainly would be nice to know what he thinks.

                    This is what I want to know: What in the world did the Star do to tick him off? I see people here saying that the Star got what it deserved and stuff, but what exactly do to deserve it? I read Chappell and Richards weekly, and I think they do a pretty fair job of covering this team. I certainly think they're better than the guys who cover the Pacers.

                    If an 8 time pro bowl receiver is out for game after game with no straight answer, then I think that needs to be addressed. And I'm sorry, but Chappell and Richards wouldn't have been doing their jobs if they didn't question what happened in Philadelphia on that night.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Harrison PO'd at Star

                      Harrison is most definitely a Hall of Fame player, but his career has been marred, in my opinion, by several factors:

                      1. His stand-off'ish dealing with the media - like them or not a proffessional athelete must learn how to communicate with them.

                      2. His shoving of an IPD officer in the Circle Center parking garage

                      3. His battery settlement to the fan in Hawaii while there for the pro-bowl

                      4. And his most recent dust-up with his gun being used to shoot one person and wounding of an innocent child.
                      "I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post."

                      --Jack Nicholson as Colonel Nathan Jessup in A Few Good Men

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Harrison PO'd at Star

                        Originally posted by MarionDeputy View Post
                        Harrison is most definitely a Hall of Fame player, but his career has been marred, in my opinion, by several factors:

                        1. His stand-off'ish dealing with the media - like them or not a proffessional athelete must learn how to communicate with them.

                        2. His shoving of an IPD officer in the Circle Center parking garage

                        3. His battery settlement to the fan in Hawaii while there for the pro-bowl

                        4. And his most recent dust-up with his gun being used to shoot one person and wounding of an innocent child.

                        1. No, they don't. It's the athletes choice of whether or not they talk with the media. If they don't want to, that in no way shape or form detracts from what they do on the field.

                        2. Haven't heard about that. Have a link?

                        3. Haven't heard about this either so I can't comment.

                        4. Unless he is proven guilty of something, you can't say his career is marred because someone else used one of his weapons to commit a crime. How did the shooter get the weapon? Was it stolen?

                        I just think a lot of people are way too quick to say Marvin is tarnishing this, or ruining that. Give the guy a freaking break. He has been an upstanding citizen, and excellent role-model for 12 years. Why must everyone grasp for straws trying to take away from that?

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Harrison PO'd at Star

                          Meh...

                          Much ado about nothing, IMO.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Harrison PO'd at Star

                            Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
                            Meh...

                            Much ado about nothing, IMO.
                            I'd have to agree... Marvin, get back to doing what you do on the field. I personally could give the "business end of a rat" on how he deals with the media, especially the poor excuse of journallist we have in this market.

                            IMO, the guy isn't paid to accomodate media request, he is paid to catch footballs. So what if he doesn't want to talk to the media that he feels has already done him wrong in the past. Whether it is true or not, that is his perception. Making it his reality.
                            ...Still "flying casual"
                            @roaminggnome74

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Harrison PO'd at Star

                              Originally posted by HeartlandFan View Post
                              1. No, they don't. It's the athletes choice of whether or not they talk with the media. If they don't want to, that in no way shape or form detracts from what they do on the field.
                              Just sharing my opinion, I personally believe that proffessional athletes are paid to do more than just perform on the field.

                              2. Haven't heard about that. Have a link?
                              It's in the archive section of the Indy Star see the 4th article down I didn't want to buy, as I have read the police report and know one of the responding officers.

                              http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/...p_text_date-0=

                              This was during the time that Chief of Police over saw security for the police, there was a tape of Harrison chest bumping the officer that dissapeared from the evidence locker. Wasn't a huge deal in the publics eye, but in my circle it was.

                              3. Haven't heard about this either so I can't comment.

                              Here is the link for pro bowl incident http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2025485

                              4. Unless he is proven guilty of something, you can't say his career is marred because someone else used one of his weapons to commit a crime. How did the shooter get the weapon? Was it stolen?
                              I believe responsible gun owners should be in control of their weapons at all times. The shooting stemmed from a fist fight that Marvin was in with another guy in Marvin's bar, shortly afterwards that guy is shot with Marvin's gun. The gun is found in a bucket in Marvin's car wash. And originally Marvin denied that his gun was even involved.

                              http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3382026

                              I just think a lot of people are way too quick to say Marvin is tarnishing this, or ruining that. Give the guy a freaking break. He has been an upstanding citizen, and excellent role-model for 12 years. Why must everyone grasp for straws trying to take away from that?
                              As I said originally this is just my opinion, you are certainly entitled to yours. I just think pro athletes like Manning, Reggie and Jermaine Oneal recognize and demonstrate good citizenship and demonstrate class on a consistent basis. I would say that Marvin has not been an upstanding citizen nor an excellent role model for any kid. He is however an incredible athlete and one of the top wide recivers to have ever played the game.
                              "I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post."

                              --Jack Nicholson as Colonel Nathan Jessup in A Few Good Men

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Harrison PO'd at Star

                                Originally posted by Roaming Gnome View Post
                                especially the poor excuse of journallist we have in this market.
                                Couldn't agree with you more....what passes for journalism in this city is an embarssment to journalism everywhere.
                                "I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post."

                                --Jack Nicholson as Colonel Nathan Jessup in A Few Good Men

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X