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

Good Kravitz column about Manning

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

  • #16
    Re: Good Kravitz column about Manning

    Originally posted by righteouscool View Post
    I would follow any team peyton goes to. I think he deserves to go down as the GOAT but unfortunately he's been set up for failure by this franchise the last few years.

    Come on, two years ago we started out 14-0 and made the freaking Super Bowl.

    Yeah you can legitimately question some roster moves in recent years, but saying he was "set up for failure"? That's a pretty big leap.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Good Kravitz column about Manning

      I mean the drafting. It's been awful. And lets not even start talking about the philosophy of building an undersized defense and never actively going after a defensive tackle that has been needed for years.

      I'm not part of the board that absolutely despises the polians, but you can't look at the roster right now and say they've given Manning the best shot of winning.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Good Kravitz column about Manning

        Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
        Come on, two years ago we started out 14-0 and made the freaking Super Bowl.

        Yeah you can legitimately question some roster moves in recent years, but saying he was "set up for failure"? That's a pretty big leap.


        I think set up for failure is too strong now I think we underachieved as a whole with Manning as QB.

        I mean really that same roster that went to the SB two years ago (well mostly the same) you take out Manning and go 2-14.

        There's something wrong with that. A team should find a way to stay competitive even without their QB. We're lucky this wasn't exposed sooner makes me wonder if this team was really as good as they appeared to be or not.

        You cannot have that type of dropoff in the NFL its really unacceptable.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Good Kravitz column about Manning

          Manning always seemed to like Kravitz? Really? I must've missed that part I was more shocked by him agreeing to an interview with Kravitz about said topic than anything he said in that article.

          Now I personally think Manning is gone whether its retirement or to another team I don't know but I don't believe he'll come back as a Colt.

          Also wouldn't surprise me if Irsay told Lowe to tweet that its like he wants to break up with Peyton but is too gutless to do it himself so he's hoping Manning requests a release so he won't look like the bad guy.

          You can't have two QBs taking up that much cap space and field a competitive team.

          It should never have come to this.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Good Kravitz column about Manning

            I'm really saddened, too. It was a hell of run, historic even, but it's clearly ending, and we'll be extremely fortunate to ever have one like it again, even with Luck in tow.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Good Kravitz column about Manning

              Originally posted by Shade View Post
              I'm really saddened, too. It was a hell of run, historic even, but it's clearly ending, and we'll be extremely fortunate to ever have one like it again, even with Luck in tow.

              I agree. I think the Colts FO is about 90% sure right now that they have to release Manning. You can't gamble 28 million dollars on a Chance that at some point Manning will be like the old Manning. No way is he recovered by March 8 when it's decision time. It shouldn't have ended like this with all Manning has done for the league and the city. Here's hoping Manning comes all the way back and makes me eat all the words I just typed but I don't see it. It's been a great ride!

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Good Kravitz column about Manning

                Extremely sad if he goes under any circumstances. If his health situation does not debilitate him too much football-wise, I would hope he goes to a contender and wins a few more SBs.
                I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                -Emiliano Zapata

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Good Kravitz column about Manning

                  The YA librarian in me is tickled at the Outsiders references.

                  Good interview, I'll be sad if Peyton is done.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Good Kravitz column about Manning

                    Damn the Peyton Manning leaving thing just hit me this is sad
                    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Good Kravitz column about Manning

                      If he leaves, I'll wear my Manning jersey in memoriam for a week.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Good Kravitz column about Manning

                        Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                        As for Manning’s health, he's not all the way back yet, but he's not going to put any kinds of percentages on his recovery, nor will he predict whether he'll be at full strength by early March, when the $28 million option bonus is due. At this point, he just doesn't know.

                        "You've been around me: You know I don't like to say something like, 'There’s no way I can play Sunday,' then come out and play Sunday and everybody in the media is writing 'I can’t believe he’s playing,'" Manning said. "I'm not into the drama. And I'm not into saying, 'Well, this is it, I sure have enjoyed it.' I'm not into saying goodbye. All I know is I'm still under contract to the Colts. I'm still the quarterback of the Colts That's why I'm in the building every day trying to get healthy."
                        .
                        I wanted to go back to this part of the interview and highlight some things.

                        He just emphasizes how he isn't going to say anything, one way or another. So my question is this, do you think he toes this line off the record as well? I do.

                        So we have a player that refuses to talk about the situation, while his family has said multiple times they expect him back, but yet the media thinks that he's gone because of the feeling they get while talking to him?

                        This is why I've continually said it doesn't make any sense.

                        They literally have NOTHING to base their opinion on, one way or the other. Nothing. No medical records. No doctor. No Peyton. No team statement. Nothing other than their personal feelings.

                        Just crazy.
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Good Kravitz column about Manning

                          They literally have NOTHING to base their opinion on, one way or the other. Nothing. No medical records. No doctor. No Peyton. No team statement. Nothing other than their personal feelings.
                          This is where I believe you get off track.... There's plenty of medical history with people with Peyton's type of injury, surgery, rehab, etc... out there. There's plenty of people who understand physically what is needed to play the QB position. There's even direct and implied info from Peyton and those around him that at the least should tell us he's not healing at lightning speed.

                          If Peyton was to return from this 100% and not suffer a return of symptoms when returning to full practice and game speed, not to mention for the rest of his playing career, he'd be the exception and not the rule.

                          There's nothing crazy about anyone siding with the idea that the odds aren't in Peyton's favor. We need to get used to the idea that not only is Peyton likely to never wear a Colts jersey again, he might never take the field again. And even if he does, the odds are with it being short-lived or with a reduced capacity. None of this is to say he can't beat the odds... And I've not seen anyone proclaim that he will not be back. Just several people of the opinion that either he won't be back or the odds aren't good.
                          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


                          • #28
                            Re: Good Kravitz column about Manning

                            Originally posted by Bball View Post
                            This is where I believe you get off track.... There's plenty of medical history with people with Peyton's type of injury, surgery, rehab, etc... out there. There's plenty of people who understand physically what is needed to play the QB position. There's even direct and implied info from Peyton and those around him that at the least should tell us he's not healing at lightning speed.
                            Not healing at lightening speed? What are you talking about?
                            http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/73...-healed-firmly

                            The whole article talks about how he's right on pace, and how they're pleased with his rehab, etc.

                            As far as other players with these types of injuries, yeah, some of them come back to play. Others don't. I've said it many times before. Find me a doctor than can give an accurate diagnosis, with an accurate opinion on the liklihood of recovery without seeing the patient, without even talking to the patient, or without seeing the medical records, and I'll show you a horrible doctor.

                            What does the future hold for treatment of cervical disk herniation in elite athletes?

                            Until this year, very little data were available that healthcare practitioners and athletes could use to help guide the decision-making process when faced with a cervical or lumbar disk herniation. The data in this study suggest that because NFL players can return to play at a high rate and sustain long, productive careers even after surgical treatment such as a single-level anterior diskectomy and fusion, elite athletes should not necessarily be afraid to undergo this procedure, should it be recommended. Although it appears that defensive backs of American football have poorer outcomes after a cervical disk herniation than other positions, other surgical procedures may be better suited for this type of athlete, such as a posterior foraminotomy. Our current prospective research initiative may answer questions such as these for elite athletes across several sports who may be predisposed to such cervical disk injuries.
                            http://www.orthosupersite.com/view.aspx?rid=66722
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Good Kravitz column about Manning

                              "This procedure is performed regularly throughout the country on persons from all walks of life, including professional football players. Two former Colts players had this same procedure last winter and have fully resumed their careers," the team said in the statement.
                              http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/69...e-surgery-neck
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Good Kravitz column about Manning

                                Here's a widly interesting article.

                                Dr. Wellington K. Hsu, an assistant professor at Northwestern University with a joint appointment in the department of orthopaedic surgery and department of neurological surgery, spoke with NFL.com on Thursday to shed light on the path facing Indianapolis Colts quarterback Peyton Manning, who's recovering from his third neck procedure in 19 months.

                                Dr. Hsu has been recognized as an international leader in the operative treatment of cervical and lumbar degenerative disorders, motion-sparing technology and spinal cord injuries, and he has published a number of studies focused on NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL players.

                                The Colts confirmed Thursday that Manning underwent single level anterior fusion surgery (which usually involves making an incision in the front of the neck, removing soft disk tissue between the vertebrae and fusing the bones together with a graft). Being a quarterback, will Manning face special challenges?


                                The quarterbacks in my study did quite well after this particular surgery that Peyton Manning had. Quarterbacks fare pretty well compared to other positions because they can predetermine their movements. Defensive backs and linebackers need to react differently. (QBs) don't rely on neck range of motion as much as a defensive back or linebacker. ... The wide receivers in my study also did pretty well after neck fusion. It really depends on position when it comes to prognosis.

                                Was this an injury that Manning could have possibly played through?

                                You can play through it if it's just pain. I don't know Peyton Manning's case specifically, but if it led to weakness that was affecting his arm velocity, surgery would be needed to get back to his normal level of play.

                                The Colts haven't set any timetable for Manning's return. When can the team reasonably expect to see him back on the field?

                                In general, depending on his surgery, depending on the graft he had, most surgeons would let him get back to training in six to eight weeks. And depending on rehab, another four weeks after that -- plus or minus a week or so -- he could be back on the field. That's a general timetable I would give for a high-level athlete like Manning.

                                Is Manning facing any additional risks when he does return?

                                There's never been a reported risk of catastrophic injury after this surgery, but there is a risk of having a problem develop at another level. Assuming he had one level fused, other areas of the neck could be affected by arthritis. There is only a 5 percent risk of a second operation in a player's career.

                                Manning doesn't seem to be in unchartered territory. Is that fair to say?

                                This is a pretty common surgery in professional and NFL players, and they do better than what many people think. I've heard people say it's really hard to get back from a neck injury, how if you have surgery, you don't come back, but that's simply not true. I think Peyton, being the stalwart that he is, playing the position that he does, has a very, very good prognosis for coming back.
                                http://network.yardbarker.com/nfl/ar..._k_hsu/6646870
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X