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 2010 NFL Draft Thread

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

  • #16
    Re: The 2010 NFL Draft Thread

    Alright, with Howard Mudd retiring, it looks to be that we are trying to bulk up the offensive line, which I am fine with, but as long as it doesn't hurt the pass-protection we have. We are not the best running team in the league, and while I would love to run better, I don't want us to go away from our passing when the league seems to be evolving into a much more passing-oriented game.

    Now, I know we aren't going to do anything like that as long as Peyton Manning is our QB, but what I am trying to say is I want our pass-protection to continue to be top-notch.

    This team is pretty set, and deep, but a big reason we struggled so much in the Super Bowl was the fact that Dwight Freeney was not 100% and not even close to 90%, and Brees kept wearing down Dwight and the pass-rush, which, when the pass-rush isn't healthy, the entire defense struggles. I'd like to see us draft some big DT's, just definitely draft defensive-wise. I'm no college football guy, so I'll just leave it at that.

    On the offensive side of the ball, I think we're pretty good, we're hopefully going to have a healthy Gonzo, added in the mix with Dallas, Pierre, Reggie and Joe and Donald. Back to the defense, I also hold out hope that Bob can return to form, which is just an added bonus to our squad. Special Teams, you draft a kicker if you find a good one, but if not, Adam, if healthy, (again, doesn't it always seem like it's always about health?) he can be our guy for a few more years I would assume.

    To sum up my feelings:

    Defense: Draft a big DT, maybe see what kind of CB's are out there, since we just lost Marlin Jackson.

    Offense: Draft guys for the future here, we're pretty much set on offense. Some people even suggested teams such as the Colts or Patriots to draft Tebow, so he wouldn't have to come in and perform immediately. Don't know how I'd feel about that.

    Special Teams: Look into a kicker for the future, and I think we've pretty much got a great punter, in Pat. So we look for Adam's replacement.
    Last edited by Lord Helmet; 03-26-2010, 08:47 PM.
    Super Bowl XLI Champions
    2000 Eastern Conference Champions




    Comment


    • #17
      Re: The 2010 NFL Draft Thread

      Unofficial Trade Value Chart:
      Source: http://www.draftcountdown.com/features/Value-Chart.php



      Note: Compensatory selections cannot be traded, so don't even try it!
      Originally posted by Natston;n3510291
      I want the people to know that they still have 2 out of the 3 T.J.s working for them, and that ain't bad...

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: The 2010 NFL Draft Thread

        If I had to pick an order of importance ...

        1. Rush DE -- Future success can only be maintained if we maintain a pass rush
        2. LOT -- Obviously.
        3A. OLB depth/future replacement
        3B. CB depth/future replacement
        5. DT -- If they're really worried about Moala being worthless
        6. TE depth/future replacement -- Tamme, Santi, Robinson could all be gone in the next 365
        7. O-Line depth/project
        8. QB -- If they don't like Painter after what they've seen
        9. Returner -- Everyone wants one except the Colts FO, so I slot it last

        Of no importance in draft: RB, WR, S, MLB

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: The 2010 NFL Draft Thread

          I'll already started a thread but who cares.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: The 2010 NFL Draft Thread

            Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
            I'll already started a thread but who cares.
            Looks like it was pushed back to the second page, I didn't even remember you starting one, we should merge them or something.....
            Super Bowl XLI Champions
            2000 Eastern Conference Champions




            Comment


            • #21
              Re: The 2010 NFL Draft Thread

              Threads merged.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: The 2010 NFL Draft Thread

                I know mock drafts never nail the Colts' pick, but I think Pouncey from Florida seems likely. He can play OG and Center, so if he pans out he can fill a hole at G the next season or two then take over for Saturday when he retires. That was the plan with Pollack, but it's looking like that's not going to pan out.

                I think the Colts' first 4 picks will be 1 to 2 o-linemen, 1 to 2 d-linemen, and maybe a cornerback. That said, Polian tends to draft best player available, so we'll see. I hope we grab a kicker in the 6th round or so. Last year we traded for McAfee to be our punter of the future, which was a great decision. He was excellent all year and great at kick-offs. Picking up a kicker that can consistently hit from beyond 40 would be nice.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: The 2010 NFL Draft Thread

                  Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                  I'll already started a thread but who cares.
                  Sorry.

                  I remembered your thread, but I thought it was more of a free agency thread...
                  Originally posted by Natston;n3510291
                  I want the people to know that they still have 2 out of the 3 T.J.s working for them, and that ain't bad...

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: The 2010 NFL Draft Thread

                    Kicker Adam V makes too much money and Stover or Gramattica seem to be FA ever year. I would rather get a WR or RB in the later rounds. I really hope we go DEF DEF DEF TE RB.

                    We have signed 2 OL b 4 the draft. I would love for the Colts to lay their hands on Lagerette Blount in the 5th Round. I feel he would be a steal. Colts build RB via draft. If he doesnt pan out fine the Colts did cut a 3rd pick last season DT from Mich.

                    I feel we need to upgrade LB dramatically Wheeler is ok but no other team is worried about him I understand the feeling to go OL OL but Polian is not tipping his hat. I want more speed out of the LB corps and have been wondering why Indy never drafts a LB in the early rounds for years.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: The 2010 NFL Draft Thread

                      Originally posted by Natston View Post
                      Sorry.

                      I remembered your thread, but I thought it was more of a free agency thread...
                      Thats fine. I am just glad we aren't talking about Jake Delhomme being cut or Bret Favre.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: The 2010 NFL Draft Thread

                        Originally posted by CooperManning View Post
                        I know mock drafts never nail the Colts' pick, but I think Pouncey from Florida seems likely. He can play OG and Center, so if he pans out he can fill a hole at G the next season or two then take over for Saturday when he retires. That was the plan with Pollack, but it's looking like that's not going to pan out.

                        I think the Colts' first 4 picks will be 1 to 2 o-linemen, 1 to 2 d-linemen, and maybe a cornerback. That said, Polian tends to draft best player available, so we'll see. I hope we grab a kicker in the 6th round or so. Last year we traded for McAfee to be our punter of the future, which was a great decision. He was excellent all year and great at kick-offs. Picking up a kicker that can consistently hit from beyond 40 would be nice.
                        I definately agree that we need to focus on the offensive and defensive line. Every position on that offensive line can be upgraded even center. They just got pushed around way to much and could not open up any holes for JA or Brown to run through. We had this issue two years in a row and it has to end. I am tired of watching our running backs make a move in the backfield just to gain 2-3 yards.

                        The past couple of years have shown Mathis is a product of Freeney. Without Freeney there Mathis cannot do anything when the opposing team focuses their attention on him. We need to get another DE in there that can get pressure on his own without Freeney being there. When Freeney is out then our pass rush is dead and that gives the QB time to pick apart our defense. That is what happened in the Super Bowl. Freeney gets hurt, they go to a three step drop, and Mathis is no where to be seen.

                        We need some extra depth at corner and Adam is made of glass now a days and makes way to much money so a kicker in the 6th or 7th round would be fine with me.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: The 2010 NFL Draft Thread

                          You heard it here first.

                          Jerry Hughes.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: The 2010 NFL Draft Thread

                            ITs finally here.....



                            http://www.indystar.com/article/2010...Wr7saNmjzmw%3D
                            The NFL is wading into uncharted waters. Not only has it decided to stretch its seven-round, 255-pick draft process over three days, the first two sessions -- beginning with round 1 tonight -- will for the first time unfold in prime time.





                            NFL Draft

                            » What: 75th NFL selection meeting, Radio City Music Hall, New York. Seven rounds, 32 teams, 255 total picks (including 32 compensatory picks). Ten minutes allowed for each pick in round 1, seven minutes in rounds 2-3 and five minutes in rounds 4-7.

                            » When: Round 1, 7:30 p.m. today; rounds 2-3, 6 p.m. Friday; rounds 4-7, 10 a.m. Saturday.

                            » TV: NFL Network and ESPN, 7:30 p.m. today. NFL Network, 6 p.m. Friday; ESPN, 6-7 p.m. Friday; ESPN2, 7 p.m. Friday. NFL Network and ESPN, 10 a.m. Saturday.

                            » Colts picks: Eight overall. Round 1, No. 31. Round 2, No. 63. Round 3, No. 94. Round 4, No. 129. Round 5, No. 162. Round 6, No. 200 (traded to Philadelphia in 2009 for P Pat McAfee). Round 7, Nos. 238, 240 and 246 (latter two are compensatory picks for free agent losses Darrell Reid and Hunter Smith).

                            » Draft party: Fans can watch the draft with selected Colts players and cheerleaders at the Blue Crew Sports Grill from 7-11 p.m. today.





                            The Indianapolis Colts will adapt as necessary, but adhere to what they consider to be a proven blueprint.
                            With the 31st overall pick, they'll take the best prospect still on their draft board, regardless of position.
                            "You can never have enough good football players and you can never have enough difference-makers,'' team president Bill Polian said Wednesday.
                            With their remaining seven selections, the Colts will look to strengthen an already well-stocked roster.
                            "It's about the entire process, not just the first round,'' Polian stressed. "Our focus is actually greater on the lower rounds than it is the first.''
                            It's anyone's guess whom the Colts might have their eye on at the bottom of the first round. This time of the offseason in the NFL is all about secrecy, and few teams do secrecy better than the Colts.
                            Polian never discusses how his draft board is aligned -- it generally contains between 115 and 135 "draftable'' players -- or which prospects he favors. National mock drafts haven't been as reluctant. Among players they have affixed to the Colts at the bottom of round 1 are offensive tackles Rodger Saffold of Indiana and Charles Brown of USC, Florida center Maurkice Pouncey and UCLA defensive tackle Brian Price.
                            Mel Kiper Jr., ESPN's longtime draft expert, believes the Colts are in the market, especially early, for an offensive lineman, a pass-rushing defensive end and a cornerback. He also believes Polian will come away with suitable players.
                            "What Bill has always done is identify a guy that might have been a second-rounder or a third-rounder (according to other teams) that they had a much higher opinion on,'' Kiper said. "When they've identified that guy, they've taken him and they've hit on that player a lot over the years.''
                            The Colts have hit on them early, late, even in the immediate hours after the draft when teams hustle to sign players who weren't chosen.
                            Consider the breakdown of the current 63-player roster. It includes 30 of their own draft picks and another 12 players who were signed as undrafted rookies. The draft picks run the gamut: 12 taken in rounds 1-2, 11 selected in rounds 6-7.
                            Two nuggets are worth keeping in mind:
                            The Colts won't hesitate to trade out of the first round if the situation presents itself. They entered the 2004 draft with the 29th overall pick and traded back twice before selecting Iowa safety Bob Sanders with the 12th pick of round 2.
                            "If we get the right price for the pick and we think it's the right thing to do, we'll be happy to do it,'' Polian said. "We've let people behind us know that.''
                            If the Colts stay put at No. 31 in the first and second rounds, history says they'll select players who performed on a big stage. Of the 22 first- and second-rounders since Polian's arrival in 1998, 20 played at BCS schools. The only exceptions: Memphis safety Idrees Bashir, a second-round pick in 2001, and BYU linebacker Rob Morris, a first-rounder in 2000.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: The 2010 NFL Draft Thread

                              Well Drew Brees will announce the 32nd pick in the NFL draft tonight

                              http://www.nola.com/saints/index.ssf...erback_49.html

                              New Orleans Saints quarterback Drew Brees will announce Saints' draft pick tonight in New York
                              By Mike Triplett, The Times-Picayune
                              April 22, 2010, 10:28AM

                              New Orleans Saints quarterback Drew Brees will be on hand in New York City tonight to announce the Saints' first-round draft pick - the first time a player has ever done so.

                              Brees was invited to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the NFL draft. He was voted by fans as one of the top 75 draft picks of all time (finishing No. 21 in the rankings).

                              He was a natural selection, considering he's the reigning Super Bowl MVP quarterback. And he was already scheduled to be in New York City to promote being selected for the cover of EA Sports' Madden NFL 11 video game.

                              Alos, it's especially fitting that Brees will be announcing the No. 32 pick, since he himself was selected No. 32 overall by the San Diego Chargers in the 2001 draft. That year, he was the first pick in the second round.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: The 2010 NFL Draft Thread

                                I guess Rodger Saffold is a name to watch now...
                                Originally posted by Natston;n3510291
                                I want the people to know that they still have 2 out of the 3 T.J.s working for them, and that ain't bad...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X