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

Looks like the "Fire Jim Caldwell" movement may have a backer

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

  • #16
    Re: Looks like the "Fire Jim Caldwell" movement may have a backer

    Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
    Mike Ditka on Mike and Mike had some interesting comments. Paraphrasing, he said that if you look at how this Colts team is constructed, there are a lot of bricks that are missing or in the wrong place. Nothing fits together and it had to fall apart.

    He then said something about how players ought to be motivated by pride, if nothing else, to not let something like that happen.

    Two comments that seem to aim first at Polian, then at Caldwell and the players.
    Everyone is pounding on the coaching staff's door with pitch forks and torches ready to run them out of town, but a lot of the anger and disbelief needs to be directed at the people who sit up in their white ivory tower. The Polians should carry as much or even more blame for this disaster then the coaching staff.

    They are the ones who constructed a defense that is only effective when playing with a lead. They did not build an aggressive attacking defense that can stand on their own if the offense is struggling. They need Manning as that threat that forces teams to abandon their plans and revert to the passing game to keep up.

    They are the ones who continually neglected the offensive line and relied on Manning's ability to diagnosis a defense and Howard Mudd to coach up the UDFA and cast offs from other teams. When they do address it is a total miss with Ugoh that cost us another first round pick.

    They are the ones who have continually missed on early draft picks over the past five to six years. Ugoh, Pollak, Gonzo, Brown, and Hughes are huge misses that really have crippled this team.

    Manning's leadership and ability has covered up the scars that have been left by poor draft decisions and just years of neglect. Finally the Polians rolled snake eyes and it has all come crashing down. When you put everything on Manning's shoulders you are bound to have a total disaster if he gets hurt.

    With that said Caldwell and his staff have been totally outmatched this year and this team has not been able to react or make any adjustments. It is time for them to all go.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Looks like the "Fire Jim Caldwell" movement may have a backer

      We've had a lead a few times this year and the defense was just as capable of being ran over and picked apart then as it is when we've been behind.
      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


      • #18
        Re: Looks like the "Fire Jim Caldwell" movement may have a backer

        The Polians aren't the ones who brought the Tampa 2 defense in. Tony Dungy brought the Tampa 2 defense. Is it really a surprise that one of his assistants would keep the Tampa 2 in place?

        We have seen that Polian has been able to construct a team that doesn't use the Tampa 2 defense. We haven't seen Caldwell's ability.

        I don't think throwing the baby out with the bathwater is the solution.

        Bring in a different coach with a different strategy and draft the players that fit that scheme. IF Polians show that they're either unwilling to move in a different direction or if they're unable to draft players that aren't Tampa 2 fitting, then they need to go.


        But you guys keep pretending like Polian is some God awful GM, when in fact, he's going to retire as the best GM football has ever seen. I think he's probably a little more versatile than you're giving him credit for.


        And plus, I've heard for a very long time that Dungy was Irsay's man, and not Polians. So it sounds like the Tampa 2 thing is coming from the very top of the ladder.
        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Looks like the "Fire Jim Caldwell" movement may have a backer

          I honestly don't have a problem with Chris Polian if dad steps down. Considering it was the younger Polian responsible for the last draft I could see a wait and see on the youngster.
          You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Looks like the "Fire Jim Caldwell" movement may have a backer

            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
            But you guys keep pretending like Polian is some God awful GM, when in fact, he's going to retire as the best GM football has ever seen. I think he's probably a little more versatile than you're giving him credit for.
            Polian is not a god awful GM, but to act like he and Chris do not carry some of the burden for this disaster is just trying to pass the buck.

            I much rather get rid of Caldwell and his staff then to fire either Polian.

            As much as Polian is a major tool as a person he is still one of the better GMs in this league and has a proven track record. I rather roll the dice with him then stick with Caldwell and his crappy staff.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Looks like the "Fire Jim Caldwell" movement may have a backer

              Originally posted by thewholefnshow31 View Post
              Polian is not a god awful GM, but to act like he and Chris do not carry some of the burden for this disaster is just trying to pass the buck.
              I'm not saying they aren't responsible. I'm saying we simply don't know who's making the decisions.

              In order to make a good decision, I would think all the facts of the situation would need to be looked at rather than rushing to judgement.

              For some reason, saying "I don't know" is frowned upon.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Looks like the "Fire Jim Caldwell" movement may have a backer

                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                The Polians aren't the ones who brought the Tampa 2 defense in. Tony Dungy brought the Tampa 2 defense. Is it really a surprise that one of his assistants would keep the Tampa 2 in place?

                We have seen that Polian has been able to construct a team that doesn't use the Tampa 2 defense. We haven't seen Caldwell's ability.

                I don't think throwing the baby out with the bathwater is the solution.

                Bring in a different coach with a different strategy and draft the players that fit that scheme. IF Polians show that they're either unwilling to move in a different direction or if they're unable to draft players that aren't Tampa 2 fitting, then they need to go.


                But you guys keep pretending like Polian is some God awful GM, when in fact, he's going to retire as the best GM football has ever seen. I think he's probably a little more versatile than you're giving him credit for.


                And plus, I've heard for a very long time that Dungy was Irsay's man, and not Polians. So it sounds like the Tampa 2 thing is coming from the very top of the ladder.
                Yeah, I agree. Here's what I know: Jim Caldwell is a bad coach. He wasn't a good coach in college, and he hasn't been a good coach in the NFL. That much, I am certain of. Here's what I don't know: If the Polians really deserve as much vitriol as they are getting from all this. Certainly, they deserve a healthy dose of the burden for the team's current predicament, but I don't think letting go one of the best GMs of all time would be a wise move at this juncture. Like Since, I am willing to give the Polians the benefit of the doubt and just get rid of that imbecile Caldwell.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Looks like the "Fire Jim Caldwell" movement may have a backer

                  I have a hard time understanding how Jim Mora was kicked to the curb by Polian when Jim Caldwell would not be. So I have some hope this Caldwell experiment is fast coming to an end.

                  But there's a couple of elephant's in the room:
                  Whose idea is it to have a defense that funnels teams into playing the type of offense needed to beat the Colts? Even if you have excellent players playing the defensive scheme it's still flawed once the league realizes you don't need to chase points against the Colts. You take what the defense gives you, control the ball, keep Manning on the bench for long stretches, and put pressure on him and the offense to play perfect football or else they will hardly see the ball again. (Now couple that with a team with an injured Manning...)

                  The scheme only works if teams panic and try to get into a shootout with the Manning led Colts and also chase points (go for it on 4th down rather than take an almost sure FG for example). But teams don't do that any longer. They've all figured out what the smarter teams knew all along- Take what the defense EASILY gives you, it's a perfect strategy to beat the Colts anyway.

                  The other thing that's hard not to pin on Polian is the draft misses and how they've compounded. One miss has led to another miss... and then to another... Get it right and you maybe aren't even looking at the same players in following drafts.
                  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


                  • #24
                    Re: Looks like the "Fire Jim Caldwell" movement may have a backer

                    Originally posted by Bball View Post
                    I have a hard time understanding how Jim Mora was kicked to the curb by Polian when Jim Caldwell would not be. So I have some hope this Caldwell experiment is fast coming to an end.
                    Who has said Jim Caldwell should stay? I have not seen one person say he shouldn't be fired.

                    Originally posted by Bball View Post
                    The other thing that's hard not to pin on Polian is the draft misses and how they've compounded. One miss has led to another miss... and then to another... Get it right and you maybe aren't even looking at the same players in following drafts.
                    And yet you give him zero credit for finding a 2x Pro Bowler in Antoine Bethea in the 6th round.

                    That's been my whole sticking point with Bballfan. You pick and choose what you want to look at, and what you want to ignore.

                    Sure, Polian has missed some draft picks. He's also found a lot of good, and even great players in the later rounds.

                    If you're going to criticize about his drafting, then you should also acknowledge his successes.

                    EDIT: It's really not about the players he's finding, but rather how they're trying to use them.
                    Last edited by Since86; 10-25-2011, 02:32 PM.
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Looks like the "Fire Jim Caldwell" movement may have a backer

                      Originally posted by RWB View Post
                      I honestly don't have a problem with Chris Polian if dad steps down. Considering it was the younger Polian responsible for the last draft I could see a wait and see on the youngster.
                      I thought this years draft was pretty good. The jury is out on the first 2 picks because of injuries but it doesn't seem to be terrible picks yet.. Nevis was a great pick, kinda. Dominated when healthy.. Carter was a great pick, hes our best skilled runner. Haven't seen a lot of Rucker yet, but that also means he isn't getting burnt and brought into the limelight. Doubt he's worse than Lacey.

                      I blame Bill a bit for missed picks in the last few drafts. And Jim because he doesn't know how to coach and adjust during games.. Then the trainers for not teaching our guys how to stay healthy! ...Its a mess.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Looks like the "Fire Jim Caldwell" movement may have a backer

                        Originally posted by RWB View Post
                        I honestly don't have a problem with Chris Polian if dad steps down. Considering it was the younger Polian responsible for the last draft I could see a wait and see on the youngster.
                        That's the thing its nice in theory but if we told his dad to kick rocks what makes you think Chris would want to stay with the team after that? Bill claims he isn't the GM now but yet his presence is still huge with the team.

                        I see them as a package deal so yes they both have to go.

                        Now as much as I think Polian is a complete and utter douchebag he was a good GM for the Colts from 1998-2006 but now? He's a liability and his antics aren't tolerable anymore with the team in shambles. There are other GM's the Colts can get that are out there and unlike Polian are hungry and willing to prove something and not rest on past success and arrogance.

                        This team needs to change drastically otherwise it will continue to get worse(hard to believe but yes it can)

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Looks like the "Fire Jim Caldwell" movement may have a backer

                          At first I was on the don't fire Caldwell but now 7 games into this stomach turning season I think a change needs to happen and happen after the conclusion of the season. I hate the idea of firing a coach mid season, unless there is a guy on the staff that could do the old interim thing while we recruit our next coahing staff and have an idea of who we want when the time comes. Peyton is not going to be here forever and we have to think long-term in how our team operates. The Tampa 2 works well when you have a lead and have the talent out there to run the schemes properly. This upcoming year's draft will be very interesting on how we go. If we don't have the 1st pick I think we should really look at trading down a few spots for extra picks in the 2-3 round range. We have most of our holes to fill on defense. Sorry for getting off on a little tangent but it happens sometimes.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Looks like the "Fire Jim Caldwell" movement may have a backer

                            Fire Caldwell, Coyer, and Rychleski at minimum. The real question is will the Polian contingent be safe? It's more palatable if Bill retires and truly takes a hands of approach, but is that enough or do we need a totally new, fresh perspective and direction? I'd welcome it.

                            Either way, this draft best be wildly skewed to the defensive side of the ball. Certainly, what we do with Wayne will have a lot to do with that. I'm sure he won't want a pay cut, and it's hard to judge based on this year. On one hand, different QB can have different relationship and comfort zone with different receiver hierarchy. On the other, you'd think the bona fide star/best receiver would somehow get a bit more action just based on his ability.
                            I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                            -Emiliano Zapata

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X