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

Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

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

  • Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

    http://www.indystar.com/article/2011...ws|text|Sports

    Once again, the Indianapolis Wallflowers are losing the offseason. There's this huge free agent party raging around them -- Adam Schefter has gotten more airtime recently than John Boehner -- and the Wallflowers are kicking back and watching, as per usual.

    That's fine by me. And really, it ought to be fine by most sober-minded Colts fans.

    Every March (in a normal year), the league's other 31 teams go nuts, throwing money -- sometimes stupid money -- at free agents, generating all the big headlines while appeasing their fan base. The Washington Redskins routinely toss cash at undeserving free agents, get their fans all hot and bothered, then go 6-10 every season.

    The Colts?

    They re-sign most of their own guys. Maybe they add a spare part here and there when the bargains become available later in free agency, but for the most part, they are the Indy Wallflowers. While Bill Polian did the free agent thing early in his tenure as Colts president when the team needed to add bodies -- Chad Bratzke, Chad Cota, some other guys named Chad -- he has generally been a spectator during free agent season.

    Big names? Adam Vinatieri, who worked out great. Corey Simon, who didn't. There have been some midlevel guys, notably Montae Reagor and Brandon Stokley, but by and large, the Colts don't play that game.

    And it has worked. Or did I miss something?

    They won 12 or more games a record seven consecutive years, and maybe most remarkably, won 10 games last year with half their starters in civilian clothes.

    Yeah, it's boring, and it doesn't make for sexy headlines, but you can't argue with the philosophy. Chris Polian, who is in charge now, would be a clod to try to reinvent the wheel here. And it's not like he has much room to play around: The Colts are up against the salary cap, whether fans like the choices they've made or not. And with Peyton Manning's contract number still up in the air, there's not a lot of certainty. Whatever the quarterback gets -- $20 million, $25 million or the gross national product of Mongolia -- there won't be much wiggle room for a franchise that's already paying several other stars big dollars.

    On paper, yes, a lot of the Colts' biggest opponents have gotten better. The Patriots made a low-risk, high-reward acquisition in defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth. The Texans added Johnathan Joseph to their putrid secondary.

    I also think the Colts have gotten better.

    They will have Dallas Clark. And Anthony Gonzalez. And Melvin Bullitt. And Austin Collie. And Jerraud Powers. And Kelvin Hayden. All those players missed significant time, and this group still won 10 games.

    Would I feel better if Joseph Addai came back? Absolutely.

    Would I like to see the return of Ryan Diem, likely at a diminished contract number? Absolutely.

    Would I be thrilled if they turned to bargain free agency later and added a kick returner and got some depth at defensive tackle and in the secondary? Absolutely.

    Are you getting tired of all these parenthetical questions? Absolutely.

    But this is far from a finished product, and Chris Polian is far from massaging this roster. I don't expect any headline-makers these next few weeks, but I don't expect them to sit around and play solitaire the whole time, either.

    "One of the things we do is try to look at our own guys who we value," coach Jim Caldwell said Friday.

    "The culture here is to build the team through the draft. That's always been the case and will always be the case. There are teams who live in the free agent market; we're not one of those. And we've put together some pretty competitive teams."

    I hear the argument and understand it: The window of opportunity is closing. The marquee players are getting up there in age, and there's ample concern about the health of Manning.

    But it's too early to panic or drop-kick a tried-and-true philosophy. Every year, we head into camp concerned about this, concerned about that, and then somebody who played sparingly the year before, or some no-name rookie free agent out of Where's That State, emerges and becomes a major contributor.

    Maybe if we're sitting here two, three years from now, with the end in sight of the Manning era, you clear the cap space to add a big-time free agent who fills an area of need. But not yet.

    As team owner Jim Irsay tweeted recently. "We didn't make a NFL record 9 straight playoff births with bad cap management n dumb signings of other people's problems,we like 2 pay r own".

    The Wallflowers will once again lose during free agency season. And you know they're going to lose in preseason, a time when they routinely go winless or win a single game and give rise to the usual level of panic.

    Then they'll win 10 to 12 games and have a chance to reach and even win a Super Bowl.

    Like always.

  • #2
    Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

    There's a lot of truth to this article: Will have a great regular season then flameout in the playoffs

    Sounds about right

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

      Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
      There's a lot of truth to this article: Will have a great regular season then flameout in the playoffs

      Sounds about right
      You probably said this the year we won the Super Bowl too. If you say it every year you'll be right much more often than wrong. No matter what team you're talking about.

      Its rather irritating to hear a spoiled fanbase nag about this all the time when not winning the Super Bowl is the end result for almost every one every year. Do people just like stating the obvious or do they really think they're saying something relevant with this logic?

      I don't get it.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

        Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
        You probably said this the year we won the Super Bowl too. If you say it every year you'll be right much more often than wrong. No matter what team you're talking about.

        Its rather irritating to hear a spoiled fanbase nag about this all the time when not winning the Super Bowl is the end result for almost every one every year. Do people just like stating the obvious or do they really think they're saying something relevant with this logic?

        I don't get it.

        I don't expect to win the SB every year(I want it of course but we know its not possible) I do however expect us to have gone farther in the playoffs than the one and dones.

        I at least expected us to win the SB when we were last in it. That's what a fanbase usually expects when they actually get there. Especially after the PR nightmare they created by throwing away the perfect season only to epically fail in the SB.


        But then again just because some are content with doing what we do and not expecting more out of a team that has one of the greatest QB's in NFL history and only managing to get 1 SB out of it doesn't speak for everyone here.

        Imagine that.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

          Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
          You probably said this the year we won the Super Bowl too. If you say it every year you'll be right much more often than wrong. No matter what team you're talking about.

          Its rather irritating to hear a spoiled fanbase nag about this all the time when not winning the Super Bowl is the end result for almost every one every year. Do people just like stating the obvious or do they really think they're saying something relevant with this logic?

          I don't get it.
          Agreed. 31 NFL fanbases are unhappy at the end of every season. We were fortunate to win one super bowl and I hope we get another before Peyton retires. Lack of perspective amongst most Colts fans is disheartening. The Browns sell out every game and have one of the most dedicated fanbases in the league, despite being terrible pretty much all the time. Those fans would kill just to make the playoffs and "flame out".

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

            Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
            I don't expect to win the SB every year(I want it of course but we know its not possible) I do however expect us to have gone farther in the playoffs than the one and dones.

            I at least expected us to win the SB when we were last in it. That's what a fanbase usually expects when they actually get there. Especially after the PR nightmare they created by throwing away the perfect season only to epically fail in the SB.


            But then again just because some are content with doing what we do and not expecting more out of a team that has one of the greatest QB's in NFL history and only managing to get 1 SB out of it doesn't speak for everyone here.

            Imagine that.
            Try explaining this "only getting 1 super bowl out of it" concept to a fan of (Bill Polian's) early 90s Bills.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

              Originally posted by CooperManning View Post
              Try explaining this "only getting 1 super bowl out of it" concept to a fan of (Bill Polian's) early 90s Bills.


              Yeah they should've won at least one if not more they were a bigger disappointment than us.

              Just because you're content with mediocrity doesn't mean all of us are. When you win 1 SB many actually expect a team to win more. I expected at least 2 maybe 3. Manning's career isn't going to last forever that's why its important to maximize the team's abilities while he's still effective who knows if the Colts will ever get to this level ever again.

              Go figure.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

                Winning a super bowl = mediocrity.

                I'm done here.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

                  Originally posted by CooperManning View Post
                  Agreed. 31 NFL fanbases are unhappy at the end of every season. We were fortunate to win one super bowl and I hope we get another before Peyton retires. Lack of perspective amongst most Colts fans is disheartening. The Browns sell out every game and have one of the most dedicated fanbases in the league, despite being terrible pretty much all the time. Those fans would kill just to make the playoffs and "flame out".
                  This!! Colts fans dont relize how good they have it. Just wait till Peyton retires you guys will get a taste of reality and how most NFL fans suffer. And then Colts fans will stop going to games!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

                    Originally posted by CooperManning View Post
                    Winning a super bowl = mediocrity.

                    I'm done here.


                    1 SB with one of the greatest QB's fo all time yeah its rather mediocre considering. To be the winningest team of the decade and only have 1 SB to show for it? Yet the Pats and Steelers have more yes its disappoitning to me.

                    Only Marino's career was disappointing since he's ringless.

                    You feel differently your choice.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

                      Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                      This!! Colts fans dont relize how good they have it. Just wait till Peyton retires you guys will get a taste of reality and how most NFL fans suffer. And then Colts fans will stop going to games!


                      You mean the 14 years before Manning was drafted? The Colts being the doormat of the NFL?

                      Yeah some of us actually remember those days too and just because we're good now doesn't mean we don't appreciate it some of us realize how fleeting it is and when Manning retires we can at least look back at his era as the good old days.

                      Some of us just think they could've actually done more they just choose not to.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

                        Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
                        Yeah they should've won at least one if not more they were a bigger disappointment than us.

                        Just because you're content with mediocrity doesn't mean all of us are. When you win 1 SB many actually expect a team to win more. I expected at least 2 maybe 3. Manning's career isn't going to last forever that's why its important to maximize the team's abilities while he's still effective who knows if the Colts will ever get to this level ever again.

                        Go figure.
                        How is what the Colts have done considered mediocrity? Before Manning, people didn't even know Indy had a football team. People see the Pats and Steelers winning multiple championships and they think it is easy to do. I will never take the 06 season for granted because that was a magical season. We are contenders every year, and as a fan, that is all you can really ask for.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

                          Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
                          1 SB with one of the greatest QB's fo all time yeah its rather mediocre considering. To be the winningest team of the decade and only have 1 SB to show for it? Yet the Pats and Steelers have more yes its disappoitning to me.

                          Only Marino's career was disappointing since he's ringless.

                          You feel differently your choice.
                          Defense wins championships in the NFL. The Colts aren't built like most teams that win a title. I would be ecstatic if my team at 1 Superbowl in the last 10 years and always make the playoffs. The way the NFL is set up any team can win any any given year.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

                            Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                            Defense wins championships in the NFL. The Colts aren't built like most teams that win a title. I would be ecstatic if my team at 1 Superbowl in the last 10 years and always make the playoffs. The way the NFL is set up any team can win any any given year.


                            And that's the problem the Colts insist on building a team that doesn't win the title. Never mind that the year we did win it all our defense actually made an impact.

                            Its one thing if we were outplayed but to lose because of the same failed logic over and over again is what I cannot deal with and find disappointing.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Kravitz: As usual, Colts lose in free agency but will win when it counts

                              Originally posted by KingGeorge View Post
                              How is what the Colts have done considered mediocrity? Before Manning, people didn't even know Indy had a football team. People see the Pats and Steelers winning multiple championships and they think it is easy to do. I will never take the 06 season for granted because that was a magical season. We are contenders every year, and as a fan, that is all you can really ask for.
                              In the playoffs they're mediocre 9-10?

                              That's not good I expected at least further runs in the playoffs.

                              I never said it was easy I do think if you're going to say you have a GOAT QB as the Colts often do you should have the team that matches up to that billing and a coach to go with it.

                              Otherwise you aren't going to be remembered as one of the great teams in NFL lore.

                              The Pats will have that because they did win multiple SB's so did the Steelers to a lesser extent.

                              The Colts? Not so much.

                              It is what it is.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X