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

Dallas at Indianapolis - Game Thread - 12/5/10

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

  • Re: Dallas at Indianapolis - Game Thread - 12/5/10

    Originally posted by speakout4 View Post
    You're expecting more from a guy drafted by the colts 4th in the 6th round? He's doing as well as Reggie.
    That's flat out bull crap.


    Comment


    • Re: Dallas at Indianapolis - Game Thread - 12/5/10

      Originally posted by Shade View Post
      I'm starting to have the feeling that this could be the end of the line for the Colts. I'd imagine that Peyton is leaning toward leaving after the season. We could very well be the Cleveland Cavaliers of the NFL very, very soon.
      Where were you 75 minutes ago? A comment like that from you and we definitely win that game.


      Comment


      • Re: Dallas at Indianapolis - Game Thread - 12/5/10

        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
        That's flat out bull crap.
        As much bull crap as your opinion.

        Comment


        • Re: Dallas at Indianapolis - Game Thread - 12/5/10

          Originally posted by Shade View Post
          I'm starting to have the feeling that this could be the end of the line for the Colts. I'd imagine that Peyton is leaning toward leaving after the season. We could very well be the Cleveland Cavaliers of the NFL very, very soon.


          Its very likely although Manning doesn't hate us fans enough to host "Decision special"

          If anything unlike the Cavs we'd be taking Manning's side. If Irsay isn't a complete tool he'll know that Manning is who we keep and not Polian/Caldwell.

          I thought that infamous decision to throw away the perfect season would haunt this franchise and I'm starting to think this is the beginning of the end unless major changes are made. We've been 8-9 since.

          Comment


          • Re: Dallas at Indianapolis - Game Thread - 12/5/10

            Originally posted by speakout4 View Post
            As much bull crap as your opinion.
            You honestly think Pierre Garcon has been as good as Reggie Wayne? Honestly? With less than half the catches and yards? He had a whopping 1 TD coming into this game. He's been terrible. Reggie has been one of the best wideouts in the NFL while facing constant double teams at minimum.

            Garcon has barely been the third best receiver on the team this season. He's just barely beating out Tamme and Blair White.


            Comment


            • Re: Dallas at Indianapolis - Game Thread - 12/5/10

              Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
              You honestly think Pierre Garcon has been as good as Reggie Wayne? Honestly?

              Garcon has barely been the third best receiver on the team this season. He's just barely beating out Tamme and Blair White.
              No I don't think that. I think that Reggie has been as bad as Garcon. He doesn't drop that pass and we win the game. He's not fighting defenders for the ball.

              Peyton can't do it all. His receivers are not stepping up. White lets defenders get in front of him too much. All his receivers have to play better and peyton won't be throwing 10 picks in three games. This isn't peyton losing it.
              There is lots of blame to go around.

              Comment


              • Re: Dallas at Indianapolis - Game Thread - 12/5/10

                Whoa, I was upset by the loss too, but the sky is not falling folks.

                Colts have 4 very winnable games left. Titans twice, Jags at home and Oakland. We can win all 4 of those games. Of course we'll have to play better, but I wouldn't just rule us out.

                I truly think Collie will help out a lot if he can come back healthy. Peyton has always relied heavily on the slot beating the linebacker one on one. Stokley did it, Dallas Clark did it, Gonzo did it the little time he has been healthy, and Collie does it as well.

                Tamme and Blair White have played well given the circumstances, but they are constantly beating the coverage one on one like Collie can.

                Of course the defense has to play a lot better, and same for offensive line. I think Javaris James should get the carries at RB.

                Have faith folks, it's not over yet

                Comment


                • Re: Dallas at Indianapolis - Game Thread - 12/5/10

                  Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
                  Whoa, I was upset by the loss too, but the sky is not falling folks.

                  Colts have 4 very winnable games left. Titans twice, Jags at home and Oakland. We can win all 4 of those games. Of course we'll have to play better, but I wouldn't just rule us out.

                  I truly think Collie will help out a lot if he can come back healthy. Peyton has always relied heavily on the slot beating the linebacker one on one. Stokley did it, Dallas Clark did it, Gonzo did it the little time he has been healthy, and Collie does it as well.

                  Tamme and Blair White have played well given the circumstances, but they are constantly beating the coverage one on one like Collie can.

                  Of course the defense has to play a lot better, and same for offensive line. I think Javaris James should get the carries at RB.

                  Have faith folks, it's not over yet


                  Technically? No but it might as well be.

                  The Titans usually show up to play against us I'd love for them to mail it in twice but I don't see them doing that.

                  The Raiders aren't pushovers they swept the Chargers we can't even beat them!

                  Jags? Jack Del Rio is smarter than Jim Caldwell and yes I'm serious.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Dallas at Indianapolis - Game Thread - 12/5/10

                    I agree that Caldwell needs to go. His sideline demeanor reminds me of the guy the Cowboys just let go- Wade Phillips. His win-loss record is only good because he's been running of Peyton's fumes- and now even Peyton is struggling.

                    Peyton could leave after this year, but it would be nothing like Lebron leaving Cleveland. First, Peyton never promised us a championship, second, Peyton actually won us a championship, and third, Polian has ****ed this team up beyond recognition in the last couple of years making it perfectly justifiable for Peyton to leave lest he wants to end his career early by getting hit so much. We only made the Super Bowl last year because Peyton was incredible and we had an incredibly easy run to the big game.

                    Peyton leaving would not permanently decapitate this franchise. We have somewhat of a winning history now, and Irsay could probably net us a good GM to replace Polian, who in that case would absolutely have to go. The NFL is much easier to rebuild in than the NBA. But until that time, those Colts "fans" can bandwagon back over the Pacers where they were from 1994-2005.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Dallas at Indianapolis - Game Thread - 12/5/10

                      I'm starting to hope there is a lockout next year. That means we won't have to watch this poorly constructed/poorly prepared team stink it up again.

                      We've relied on Manning for far too long. Since Manning is crap right now we're a pretty poor football team.

                      We aren't beating the Titans twice....we'll be lucky if we do once Their DL/OL will have a field day with us. Their season is usually defined in their minds by how they fair against us and they will no doubt be playing like world-beaters in those two games.

                      Winning in the Blackhole? The way Oakland has played this year, I'd expect a loss.

                      Jaguars? They are a better team than us right now.

                      The combination of poor coaching, Polian's abysmal drafting since the Super Bowl win, and Manning's poor play = missed playoffs.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Dallas at Indianapolis - Game Thread - 12/5/10

                        Originally posted by idioteque View Post

                        Peyton leaving would not permanently decapitate this franchise. We have somewhat of a winning history now, and Irsay could probably net us a good GM to replace Polian, who in that case would absolutely have to go. The NFL is much easier to rebuild in than the NBA. But until that time, those Colts "fans" can bandwagon back over the Pacers where they were from 1994-2005.


                        It might not permanently decapitate it but it would be absolutely devastating. If Manning leaves then we are automatically a bottom 5 or so team in the NFL. That's how poor this roster is. It would take years to be respectable again.

                        Our winning history is 100% tied to Manning. We have no tradition here aside from the miracle 95 run.

                        People know Peyton can't play forever, but they expect him to the leave the Colts when he can't play football anymore, not because he wants to play for another team. Manning playing somewhere else would be catastrophic for the franchise. Luckily for Irsay, he was handed that gift of a stadium when the popularity was at its peak.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Dallas at Indianapolis - Game Thread - 12/5/10

                          Caldwell needs to go. I would think that's pretty obvious.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Dallas at Indianapolis - Game Thread - 12/5/10

                            Originally posted by idioteque View Post
                            I agree that Caldwell needs to go. His sideline demeanor reminds me of the guy the Cowboys just let go- Wade Phillips. His win-loss record is only good because he's been running of Peyton's fumes- and now even Peyton is struggling.

                            Peyton could leave after this year, but it would be nothing like Lebron leaving Cleveland. First, Peyton never promised us a championship, second, Peyton actually won us a championship, and third, Polian has ****ed this team up beyond recognition in the last couple of years making it perfectly justifiable for Peyton to leave lest he wants to end his career early by getting hit so much. We only made the Super Bowl last year because Peyton was incredible and we had an incredibly easy run to the big game.

                            Peyton leaving would not permanently decapitate this franchise. We have somewhat of a winning history now, and Irsay could probably net us a good GM to replace Polian, who in that case would absolutely have to go. The NFL is much easier to rebuild in than the NBA. But until that time, those Colts "fans" can bandwagon back over the Pacers where they were from 1994-2005.
                            I think Manning leaving would make ChicagoJ feel like Nostradamus x 10.

                            This team has relied on Manning to the point of over-reliance. I always assumed towards the end of Manning's career the team would retool in such a way that they'd field a winning defense with an offense that benefitted more from Manning's smarts than his arm. And one that had a running game that didn't rely on trickery to exist. Manning would give us leadership.
                            AND I assumed the team would be building toward Manning retirement as that time approached.

                            IOW... I was banking on a few more years of good football, more playoffs, a potential SB win again.... etc... and a plan for a transitioned handoff to the post-Manning era. So I always said predicting Lucas would become a ghost town was premature.

                            But you take Manning away from this team now and all bets are off at how the fans would react. I doubt fans respect Caldwell or in other coaches that much. Everyone believes they are puppets to either Peyton or Polian. There's little in the way of players that have much star power. Sure, there's Freeney and Sanders but Sanders barely plays and Freeney is marginalized if the other team isn't pass happy.

                            I'm still sticking to my prediction that Manning is going to demand changes more than dollars and that's why the contract negotiations are on hold. I'm not sure WHAT changes he'll demand. It's easy to say 'Polian gone'... From the fan's perspective it's easy to put Caldwell in the crosshairs too but I have a tough time believing Caldwell isn't coach with Manning's blessing in the first place. Of course, a year or two of Caldwell might've shown Manning something he didn't like.

                            So I didn't think he'd leave simply because I think the team will do whatever he wants. But I could be wrong. In fact, maybe he'd rather the team fix it's own mess and wants no part of second-guessing ownership and management and would rather just move on to somewhere that has built tougher teams that he thinks a QB of his ability to could take them to the next level.

                            Whatever the case I wouldn't be surprised to see the decision to give up the perfect season something that will weigh heavily in all of this. That was a mistake then and it looks like it might've been more of a mistake than we ever really realized.
                            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


                            • Re: Dallas at Indianapolis - Game Thread - 12/5/10

                              What a game. Another loss where I don't even know how the Colts were in it in the end.

                              I don't see Peyton as the type that would leave the team. However I couldn't blame him if he did.

                              Hopefully he stays and I honestly hope he tells Isray changes must be made like Polian out and/or Caldwell and co. out. I don't have much faith in Caldwell but if this team didn't have so many freaking holes on the team I think he would do alright.

                              Football is not like basketball. You cannot rely on one player like the Colts do with Manning. He has played pretty bad lately but if other parts of the team were up to par I don't believe Manning throws all those INTs.

                              Look normally I think that athletes need to shut up and play and while Peyton isn't perfect he is a once in a lifetime player. You have to take advantage of that when he is your QB. Bill Polian hasn't done that.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Dallas at Indianapolis - Game Thread - 12/5/10

                                The main difference between this year and years past is that in years past, Manning always found a way to pull a win out of his a**. If yesterday's game was last year then Manning finds a way to pull that game out.

                                The main weaknesses this year (no run game, can't stop the run) are weaknesses that have been around quite some time. Freaking Tashard Choice had 14 CARRIES THE ENTIRE SEASON going into yesterday's game, yet he runs all over us like he's Barry Sanders. Seriously, what does Bill Polian get paid to do exactly? Any other GM would have been fired a long time ago if such glaring weaknesses were never fixed. It's embarrassing really. Whether it's Ron Meeks or Larry Coyer, whether it's Tony Dungy or Jim Caldwell...we routinely get run over. The constant through all of those years is Polian, thus it falls on his shoulders.

                                When you add Manning not playing well to the problems that have always been there, you have a pretty lousy football team. Manning's bad play is a combination of a bad offensive line and him just making poor decisions. Regardless, him not playing well means our chances for the postseason are looking pretty dim right now.

                                And why did we waste a first round pick on a DT when we have Freeney and Mathis? Hughes can't even get on the field. Seems like that precious first round pick could have been used on a more immediate need (cough O-Line, cough cough). I don't care as much about the years down the road when Freeney and Mathis aren't going to be around as much as I do immediate problems that need to be fixed during Manning's remaining good years.
                                Last edited by Sollozzo; 12-06-2010, 06:41 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X