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

Jim Irsay not happy with Peyton's comments

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

  • #16
    Re: Jim Irsay not happy with Peyton's comments

    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
    I knew it would come to this...because it's the only rational thing Irsay can possibly do. It would be irresponsible on his part not to draft a replacement QB for a guy who may never again play football. Everybody loves Peyton, but it's time to move on. If handled well, this could actually build on Peyton's legacy...but I fear he will not take the proper steps...and those steps are not on the football field.
    I never understood this build his legacy for what?

    His legacy is what he does on the field.

    Nobody cares where he wins SBs(only the fans of the respective teams) its whether he can win more than one. He wants to play until he can't anymore and preferably win another SB if possible. Favre tarnished his image with his indecisiveness than playing elsewhere. Had he won an SB with the Vikings he would be remembered far differently than he is now.

    He doesn't want it to end with him watching the Jets boot us out of the playoffs thanks to a ill fated gaffe by Caldwell.

    I get that and as a fan of Manning himself I'd like to see him play even if its not here because he deserves to have his career end on his terms.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Jim Irsay not happy with Peyton's comments

      Originally posted by Shade View Post
      I'm very disappointed in these comments by Jim. Peyton didn't say anything that justified that response.
      Yes and no.... They certainly weren't THAT bad... But what if Manning wanted Polian gone himself? What if Manning wasn't a fan of the defense? What if Manning thought Caldwell was a great guy, but not a great coach? What if Manning agreed with what a lot of fans and pundits had said? And what if Irsay knew that Manning felt that way?

      Then instead of backing Irsay or staying neutral, Peyton talks about low morale at the Colts complex and separates himself from the decisions being made and could be construed as implying he doesn't agree with them. That would be what a politician would do... (Edit: Let someone else take the heat for decisions you agree with but can sidestep and act like you wouldn't have done the same).

      If I was Irsay and knew Peyton was being disingenuous I wouldn't be happy with his comments either. But that assumes Manning is being disingenuous. IMHO he probably was exactly that... But I could be wrong.

      Honestly, I don't see Irsay doing anything any sane football executive wouldn't be doing... except for he's a few years too late IMO.... And I have a hard time seeing how Manning could disagree with the moves to this point (except maybe hating to see Caldwell fired but he HAD to understand why...).
      Last edited by Bball; 01-27-2012, 04:21 AM.
      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: Jim Irsay not happy with Peyton's comments

        Originally posted by Shade View Post
        I'm very disappointed in these comments by Jim. Peyton didn't say anything that justified that response.

        I agree. Christ, all Manning basically said was that he was sad to see longtime friends go. It's not like he trashed the organization or anything. Irsay looks like a fool reacting this way.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Jim Irsay not happy with Peyton's comments

          I don't blame Irsay for feeling this way at all, but he looks like a hypocrite for saying it publicly.

          Keep it in house, Mr. Irsay.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Jim Irsay not happy with Peyton's comments

            Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
            I don't blame Irsay for feeling this way at all, but he looks like a hypocrite for saying it publicly.

            Keep it in house, Mr. Irsay.
            That was my first reaction in all of this. You are going to go to the media to complain about your HOF QB who talked about things to the media. That does not make a whole lot of sense and is just making things worse.

            How about instead of going to the media to say this you call Manning and talk about everything.

            Instead you just upstage your new HC and everything becomes about you vs. Manning instead of about the Indianapolis Colts.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Jim Irsay not happy with Peyton's comments

              I don't necessarily disagree with anything Jim said but I know he's foolish for getting into a PR battle with Peyton, even an extremely minor one like this. Peyton isn't losing that fight.
              "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

              -Lance Stephenson

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Jim Irsay not happy with Peyton's comments

                This is surprising. People who have thought PM was gone last week, think this means he's gone today.

                Talk about blowing things out of proportion. Par for the course, I guess.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Jim Irsay not happy with Peyton's comments

                  At the end of the day, there is absolutely no way Irsay can justify releasing a healthy Peyton Manning. He gives the Colts the best chance to win now and in the coming seasons.

                  Irsay has repeatedly said that if Manning is healthy, he is a Colts next year. Irsay can recoup that $28 million just in the extra ticket sales at home games.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Jim Irsay not happy with Peyton's comments

                    Originally posted by hoosierguy View Post
                    At the end of the day, there is absolutely no way Irsay can justify releasing a healthy Peyton Manning. He gives the Colts the best chance to win now and in the coming seasons.

                    Irsay has repeatedly said that if Manning is healthy, he is a Colts next year. Irsay can recoup that $28 million just in the extra ticket sales at home games.
                    Im sure they did fine last year on tix sells I was at one game and it looked like a sell out. People bought tixs before the injury so sells weren't affected much.


                    PM 28m pays for itself pretty easily off merchandise and what not.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Jim Irsay not happy with Peyton's comments

                      Originally posted by hoosierguy View Post
                      At the end of the day, there is absolutely no way Irsay can justify releasing a healthy Peyton Manning. He gives the Colts the best chance to win now and in the coming seasons.

                      Irsay has repeatedly said that if Manning is healthy, he is a Colts next year. Irsay can recoup that $28 million just in the extra ticket sales at home games.
                      The problem for Manning and the Colts is that the end of the day is coming.....really, really soon. Colts have to decide by March 8 whether to cut him or pay him $28M. Manning's health right now is still up in the air at best and it probably won't be any more clear 6 weeks from now.

                      So this "If Manning is healthy" argument is really an empty statement. It doesn't mean anything because chances are you won't be anymore sure about his health (on the day that it matters) than you are now.
                      Last edited by d_c; 01-27-2012, 11:16 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Jim Irsay not happy with Peyton's comments

                        Originally posted by hoosierguy View Post
                        At the end of the day, there is absolutely no way Irsay can justify releasing a healthy Peyton Manning. He gives the Colts the best chance to win now and in the coming seasons.

                        Irsay has repeatedly said that if Manning is healthy, he is a Colts next year. Irsay can recoup that $28 million just in the extra ticket sales at home games.

                        I think Peyton ultimately retires and Irsay's decision to release him will be proven right in the long run. A neurosurgeon on the Colts board said most of the muscle strength should have returned by about 3 months and it's been almost twice that long and Peyton's not even close to 100%. I've also heard that Peyton is about as good as he's going to get by Jan./Feb. Manning has been very secretive about his arm strength and accuracy and if he were even close to 100% he would be shouting from the rooftops that "I will be back". If we pay out that bonus and retain him when he can't play it hits that cap big time not only next year but a couple of years after that. Can't handicap the team and future on an injury that is so unpredictable. Plus Luck needs to start day 1. There is a big learning curve in the NFL even for guys that are stellar and the sooner we get on with that the sooner we can get out of this mess and have our QB for the next 15 years. Thanks to Peyton for everything he's done but I think he's done here and really going to be forced to retire period. I hope I'm wrong but I doubt it.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Jim Irsay not happy with Peyton's comments

                          Here's exactly what the neurosurgeon posted:

                          I honestly think at this time if we are not hearing "good news" that he has power to throw, things are truly discouraging. The majority of strength recovery after nerve injury will occur in the first 3 months. If it has not happened after the 2nd surgery (but first time with nerve injury, Spring 2011), and has not happened after the 3rd surgery (second for the injured nerve problem, august 2011) then we will not see any significant recovery. To be fair, muscle atrophy can improve if a nerve is healthy, but by now nerve-induced weakness will likely not. Additionally, we don't have formal reports that he cannot throw well, either. I'm just not sure why anybody would withhold good news on his status.

                          I just hope they are hiding some good news we don't know. This has been a tough year across the whole organization, and it's hard to see Peyton dedicate his life to football and have it pause for reasons he can't control.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Jim Irsay not happy with Peyton's comments

                            So if Peyton can't play then what's the point in any of this? (Manning's interview/Irsay's reaction)

                            The decision is already made if Manning is done for good and Irsay can move on.

                            I think if they just said that fans would understand contrary to what we may think of course they would wait till after the SB is over of course.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Jim Irsay not happy with Peyton's comments

                              Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                              Im sure they did fine last year on tix sells I was at one game and it looked like a sell out. People bought tixs before the injury so sells weren't affected much.


                              PM 28m pays for itself pretty easily off merchandise and what not.
                              Helped that they didn't disclose how bad it really was until after ticket sales were in.

                              Ticket renewals deadline is March 2nd 6 days before whether Manning is cut or not.

                              Interesting timing.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Jim Irsay not happy with Peyton's comments

                                http://www.theindychannel.com/sports...08/detail.html

                                The Indianapolis Colts on Friday released a joint statement from owner Jim Irsay and quarterback Peyton Manning in the midst of some perceived acrimony between them in recent days.

                                "We would like to dispel any misperception that there might be any hard feelings between us,"
                                the statement began.
                                "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                                "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X