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

NY Jets at Indianapolis Colts - 12-27-09 GAME THREAD

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

  • #91
    Re: NY Jets at Indianapolis Colts - 12-27-09 GAME THREAD

    Originally posted by Squirrelz View Post
    Me and my buddy were thinking about this game... I was pissed but then he said this:

    Well if the Colts let the Jets win, and the Jets can somehow win next week against Cincinnati, then that eliminates teams like the Pittsburgh Steelers from making the playoffs... Also, as good as 16-0 is, and being 18-0 heading into the Super Bowl, that's a lot of pressure on your shoulders. Just ask the Patriots.

    Anyways. You guys can look at past history and make a case that this is a bad move... I'd probably be all for it. But this could be something mystical... If the Steelers make the playoffs, and win in the wil card round, who do we face in our first game? The Steelers.

    So this makes sense to me.
    Nobody?

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: NY Jets at Indianapolis Colts - 12-27-09 GAME THREAD

      Originally posted by Squirrelz View Post
      Nobody?
      Well, Cincy clinched today too, so I think it's pretty likely that the Jets win next week because Cincy has some injury trouble too, and just ask them what happens when Carson Palmer goes down in a meaningless game. They lived Indy's nightmare. Cincy will go easy on the Jets next week because the last thing Cincy wants to see is Pitt making the playoffs. That also knocks the Broncos out and exacts a bit of revenge on that flukey win they got in week 1. So that probably means we're talking Indy, SD, NE, Cincy, NYJ, and Denver or Balt, in that order. NYJ is the 5 and Denver/Bal would be the 6 in that scenario based on record vs common opponents. So Balt @ NE in round 1. I give that one to NE, they looked awfully good against the Jags today. Then the Jets would turn right around and play Cincy again the next week. Lowest remaining seed comes to Indy in round two, so that would be Cincy or the Jets again. It's not the end of the world folks, but it is disappointing.

      The Denver/Baltimore situation is interesting. If both win or if both lose, Denver wins the strength of schedule tiebreaker. If one wins and the other loses the winner is in. If both lose but Houston and Pitt win, Houston will make the playoffs over Pitt based on the common games tiebreaker. Denver, Baltimore, and Houston have to lose and Pittsburgh has to win for them to make the playoffs.
      Last edited by travmil; 12-27-2009, 10:01 PM.

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: NY Jets at Indianapolis Colts - 12-27-09 GAME THREAD

        Originally posted by Indy View Post
        ...It's kind of like the Colts were a woman that had waited til marriage to lose her virginity then got wasted at her bachelorette party and ended up screwing the bartender that night...
        POST. OF. THE. YEAR.


        I've said it before and I'll say it again. Professionals play to win. Every game. They worry about WINNING, and they take what comes with that. They don't position themselves in the future by intentionally losing. No respect for Caldwell after this. NONE. Reggie Wayne said it best in the locker room after the game. If the players had gotten to take a vote, it woulda been a million to zero for GOING FOR IT and playing the game to win.

        Every single decision now will be questioned, and tons of very valid questions have already been asked. Do you seal your money guys in a vacuum until the playoffs now? Do you make Manning, Wayne, Clark, etc. sit in their apartments/houses for the next two/three weeks doing nothing so that they don't get in a car wreck/get a cold/get hurt in practice? What happens when they pull an Artest and get a concussion and some stitches without leaving the house?????

        You don't just throw away an opportunity like that. How many teams have been 14-0, and poised to play two EASILY beatable teams the last two weeks? Just a GOD AWFUL DECISION.

        I hate to knee jerk this bad, but I don't even want Caldwell as coach anymore.
        Last edited by heywoode; 12-27-2009, 10:19 PM.



        RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: NY Jets at Indianapolis Colts - 12-27-09 GAME THREAD

          The thing that hurts most is that 16-0 was right there for the taking. I don't think the Jets could have beaten our starters, and I'm not convinced that the Bills will beat our backups.

          If we end up winning the Super Bowl, the Colts will be the team that could have gone 19-0 if they had decided that it was a worthwhile thing to do. And to me, it guarantees that this season will be at least a little bit of a disappointment. If the Colts win the championship, I'll be pissed we're not undefeated. If the Colts don't win the championship, I'll be pissed that we lost.
          That'll do.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: NY Jets at Indianapolis Colts - 12-27-09 GAME THREAD

            Caldwell now has quotes in the press saying 16-0 was never one of their goals and that they didn't really think much about it.

            I don't know how true that is, but I don't like what I'm hearing regardless. It's not that I want him to say, "God, I'm so upset right now," but couldn't we have at least admitted as we approached 12-0, 13-0, or 14-0 that history was within our grasp and that it was worth at least trying to pursue it? Couldn't he do that, and then say, "But I honestly thought this was better because __________."

            No, instead we get comments that try to dismiss the achievement as nothing special.

            Well, I'm sorry, but it WAS special.

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: NY Jets at Indianapolis Colts - 12-27-09 GAME THREAD

              Agreed, it would have been VERY special.
              That'll do.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: NY Jets at Indianapolis Colts - 12-27-09 GAME THREAD

                Originally posted by heywoode View Post
                POST. OF. THE. YEAR.



                Do you seal your money guys in a vacuum until the playoffs now?
                That woulda been a good move in 05 with Harper...
                Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                ------

                "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                -John Wooden

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: NY Jets at Indianapolis Colts - 12-27-09 GAME THREAD

                  It also goes against the 'we just keep our eyes focused solely on each week's game' stuff we always hear. I'm sorry but, hours later, this still tastes bitter. Even if we win the SB there will be the lingering What If. Man.
                  You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: NY Jets at Indianapolis Colts - 12-27-09 GAME THREAD

                    Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                    Caldwell now has quotes in the press saying 16-0 was never one of their goals and that they didn't really think much about it.

                    I don't know how true that is, but I don't like what I'm hearing regardless. It's not that I want him to say, "God, I'm so upset right now," but couldn't we have at least admitted as we approached 12-0, 13-0, or 14-0 that history was within our grasp and that it was worth at least trying to pursue it? Couldn't he do that, and then say, "But I honestly thought this was better because __________."

                    No, instead we get comments that try to dismiss the achievement as nothing special.

                    Well, I'm sorry, but it WAS special.


                    The thing that upsets me about Caldwell saying that it wasn't a goal and had never really been discussed is that he is LYING. Don't insult my intelligence. When I was in organized sports and was asked what my goals were, I always answered, "To go undefeated. To beat the best, and BE the best. I want to win every single game."

                    Going undefeated and winning the Super Bowl almost certainly WASN'T a goal put forth by the team at the start of training camp. I can totally agree with that. You don't set goals that are outlandish and most likely unreachable. You set goals of winning your division, getting a high seed, making the playoffs, stuff like that. Sure. That is fine. But once they got to 10-0 and beyond, there is nothing anyone can say to convince me that they weren't looking at the schedule and contemplating what "could be" and how they could get there. Taking it one game at a time with the direct focus, but playing to keep the train rolling and keep the opportunity and the dream of a perfect season alive. Once you clinch the division, you go for the conference. Perfect season is still in the back of your mind, and still a very real goal. Clinch the conference and home field throughout, and your thoughts then turn to keeping momentum, keeping focused on one game at a time, and continuing to do what keeps working.

                    Playing to win, and following your game plan without getting too far ahead of yourself has been the procedure all along; who would deviate from that at this point? Yes, the Jets had something to play for since all three teams lost who needed to for them. They were certainly playing to win. They weren't playing dirty, they weren't getting to Manning, or doing anything out of the ordinary that would make one consider protecting anyone for the playoffs. Indy asked the very good questions about why be selective in who you're protecting? Why not a mass exodus of starters?

                    UGH.

                    Totally agree that it is a lose/lose for the rest of the season. Will be great if they win the Super Bowl, but I'll be very sad that Caldwell pissed away the golden opportunity that the team DESERVED to have by all the hard work and poise and execution under pressure it took to get to 14-0. If they don't go all the way, then it just shows again that the decision helped NOTHING and the golden opportunity was pissed away just the same.

                    I can also guarantee one thing: If they had not pulled anyone and kept playing to win, and then Manning or someone else got hurt and it made it much more difficult or ruined the season after that, AT NO TIME would I be there saying we should've tucked our tails, pissed away a chance at history and not played to win. GUARANTEE THAT.
                    Last edited by heywoode; 12-27-2009, 11:10 PM.



                    RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

                    Comment


                    • Re: NY Jets at Indianapolis Colts - 12-27-09 GAME THREAD

                      Wow I thought this was no big deal and I get on the Digest and it's like it's the end of the world in here. Cowards? Gutless? Are you serious? Holy crap get over it.



                      -- Steve --

                      Comment


                      • Re: NY Jets at Indianapolis Colts - 12-27-09 GAME THREAD

                        ^^

                        Now this is the post of the year...

                        But I still think their is something to be gained from this.

                        Pittsburgh is all but out of the playoffs now.

                        Comment


                        • Re: NY Jets at Indianapolis Colts - 12-27-09 GAME THREAD

                          Would you like us all to end our posts with laughter when we disagree with you? And should we also tell you to "get over it"? Would you appreciate that?

                          "I have opinion A"

                          "You're wrong! Get over it! "

                          Comment


                          • Re: NY Jets at Indianapolis Colts - 12-27-09 GAME THREAD

                            Went to the game tonight. Words can't describe how angered I am. What a slap (or should I say punch?) in the face to your players, your fans, the NFL, and to the game of football in general. I will never completely forgive this organization for spitting in the face of our fans like they did tonight.

                            PEYTON MANNING HAS PLAYED FOR 12 YEARS AND HAS MISSED ONE $@$@%@%@#$($ PLAY DUE TO INJURY. HE DOESN'T GET HURT. IF HE DID, IT WOULD BE THE BIGGEST FLUKE EVER.

                            Sorry, had to get that off my chest.

                            And if you're so damn worried about him getting hurt then why do you play him the entire game last week? Why do you play him as much as you did tonight? The logic of this franchise is so incredibly flawed.

                            No one EVER EVER EVER questions the durability of Manning throughout the season (for obvious reasons), yet all of the sudden when it gets to this point the Colts act like he could disintegrate into dust if left on the field.

                            It's never been more obvious to me that the head coaching position of the Colts is merely being a puppet of Bill Polian. I will always believe in my heart that Caldwell would have gone for this had it been his decision, but I think he felt the wrath of Bill Polian.
                            Last edited by Sollozzo; 12-28-2009, 12:05 AM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: NY Jets at Indianapolis Colts - 12-27-09 GAME THREAD

                              I'm with ya Adam1978, I'll never completely forgive coach/management for this slap in the face. Just giving up, not even trying to finish it off.

                              It's like running a 25 mile marathon and giving up with the tape in reach because you might cut yourself when you break through it.

                              I still can't believe how mad I am over this and the more I listen to their lame @ss excuses on the news the madder I get.
                              "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

                              Comment


                              • Re: NY Jets at Indianapolis Colts - 12-27-09 GAME THREAD

                                Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                                Would you like us all to end our posts with laughter when we disagree with you? And should we also tell you to "get over it"? Would you appreciate that?

                                "I have opinion A"

                                "You're wrong! Get over it! "
                                Sure, why not?

                                Really I'm laughing at the backlash over this because it reeks of the same overboard negativity that permeates the Pacers board after a loss in the past. Suddenly we suck, nobody's a fan anymore and we're doomed in the playoffs .... same old same old.

                                It's kind of humorous. Especially considering there's at least a couple involved here who nag about the over the top negativity on the Pacers side of things after a loss. This thread makes that whole board look like Sunshiners over there.


                                -- Steve --

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X