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

Luck hits field to rave reviews

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

  • #46
    Re: Luck hits field to rave reviews

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Luck hits field to rave reviews

      Originally posted by travmil View Post
      OK I won't mention it again. I'm not telling anyone what to do, I'm asking. I know I'm not the only one who feels this way or the posts asking for the troll to not be quoted wouldn't all be thanked multiple times. Everyone is free to do what they want, within the posted rules, when it comes to their use of this forum. I never said anyone wasn't, so please stop acting like I'm ordering everyone around and strong arming them to hold my opinion. That's not the case and it's insulting. But as I said, this is it, you won't hear it from me again.

      I can't wait to see Luck in action under center. I'm completely stoked for training camp. Definitly going to make the trip up there this season.
      Look, I generally enjoy your posts too so I'm not going to say anything else about this. But I'll just say that when I quote his posts, I'm not just responding to him. I'm responding to everyone who has negativity about the Colts and am addressing that line of thought which is illustrated through a specific post of his.

      But back to Luck, which is what's most important: I can't wait either and I think we are actually going to surprise some people this year. I love everything I'm hearing from training camp.

      I wonder how many Colts fans that root for Manning first over these next couple of years will come crawling back to the Colts when Manning is retiring and Luck is entering his prime?
      Last edited by Sollozzo; 06-14-2012, 10:50 AM.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Luck hits field to rave reviews

        Originally posted by PacerPenguins View Post
        I find this post very offensive. One, I don't want or intend to to disrupt your happy forum. I just state my opinion when someone has made an absure post in my opinion.
        Two, I am not here to cause trouble. I don't call people names or question their intelligence. I just speak up when I am in big disagreement with something they say.
        Three, I certainly do not have an exaggerated sense of my own importance. I don't expect everyone to agree with me but I don't expect to be called names every time I post either.
        Four, I have never suggested a persecution defense and my behavior is not antisocial. I am in a people business and I to be successful (and I am), I have to get people to like me every day.
        Five, I don't think anyone has asked me nicely to do anything. Why am I not allowed to post a negative comment about someone elses pie in the sky predictions? What you are doing is a form of censorship. Call anyone names who disagrees with you and try to get others to put them on ignore too. What do you call that if not censorship.
        Six, I have a viewpoint that the Colts will be the worst team in the NFL next year. I can find dozens of polls, experts and opinions who agree with me. So why is my view unpopular and why isn't your view unpopular since you can't find any expert support (that I have seen) to support the view that the Colts will win six games this year or be anything but the worst team in the NFL?
        Your vile post made it necessary that I respond...... Put me on ignore if you like and then shut up........

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Luck hits field to rave reviews

          The shame of things is the way the Manning era had to end in Indy. But the positive IMHO is that we finally have made an attempt to address weaknesses that went on too long- Coaching, over-reliance on one player, over-reliance on the offense, weak defensive system, weak special teams, money saddled to declining players, unwarranted FO arrogance, bad drafts... It is those things that were major hindrances to the Colts' post season hopes time and time again. With Manning at the end of his career those things had went on too long to address in the closing seasons of his competitive window without a major hail Mary (which would've had both short and long term franchise risks). And the injury and surgery put a big question mark up on what to reasonably expect for the end of Manning's career in length and ability to stay healthy and play at anything near 100%.

          The question now is how will things fall and what kind of job will these new faces do. So far, IMHO, they've done the right things. Judging anything by this next season could be premature (especially just looking at the W-L record). But as for building a long term, viable base.... The vision appears to be there.
          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


          • #50
            Re: Luck hits field to rave reviews

            Originally posted by Bball View Post
            The shame of things is the way the Manning era had to end in Indy. But the positive IMHO is that we finally have made an attempt to address weaknesses that went on too long- Coaching, over-reliance on one player, over-reliance on the offense, weak defensive system, weak special teams, money saddled to declining players, unwarranted FO arrogance, bad drafts... It is those things that were major hindrances to the Colts' post season hopes time and time again. With Manning at the end of his career those things had went on too long to address in the closing seasons of his competitive window without a major hail Mary (which would've had both short and long term franchise risks). And the injury and surgery put a big question mark up on what to reasonably expect for the end of Manning's career in length and ability to stay healthy and play at anything near 100%.

            The question now is how will things fall and what kind of job will these new faces do. So far, IMHO, they've done the right things. Judging anything by this next season could be premature (especially just looking at the W-L record). But as for building a long term, viable base.... The vision appears to be there.
            I agree with most of what you say. However, that system and those types of players got us the best regular season record in the decade. I wasn't a big fan of Caldwell but I certainly was of Dungy. His vision worked and we won a super bowl. I don't care how arrogant the FO is if they develop a winner. Everyone dealing with this team is untried and untested. I agree that the coming season's record doesn't mean much. I also agree that they have done the right things in rebuilding the team although I wonder if a rebuild was really necessary. Irsay will make a big chunk of change doing it this way. Why is that teams like New England and Pittsburgh never seem to have to sink to this kind of depth but just keep on winning?..........

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Luck hits field to rave reviews

              Things change, Blu, accept it. Give this team a chance, instead of condemning them to failure before they've even taken the field.
              There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Luck hits field to rave reviews

                Could we please stop quoting Bball when we respond to him?

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Luck hits field to rave reviews

                  That system did not get us the best regular system record, Peyton did. In spite of Dungy and the entire system.
                  Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    The thing that gets me is that Blu just avoids the posts that poke major holes in his flawed argument. Then once the next post shows up, just posts then and asks for "proving him incorrect..." if you read, you would already have that proof

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Luck hits field to rave reviews

                      Originally posted by Dgreenwell3 View Post
                      The thing that gets me is that Blu just avoids the posts that poke major holes in his flawed argument. Then once the next post shows up, just posts then and asks for "proving him incorrect..." if you read, you would already have that proof
                      That is such crap. Show me what you have to justify thinking the Colts will win six games this year as the post I responded to claimed. How about one expert? How about one poll? You have shown no proof that the Colts have enough talent to win six games this year and not even close to it. I think you are the troll here, not me.......

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Luck hits field to rave reviews

                        Originally posted by Suaveness View Post
                        That system did not get us the best regular system record, Peyton did. In spite of Dungy and the entire system.
                        Dungy's system was a winner in Tampa before he came here. Chucky won a superbowl playing with Dungy's players and Dungy's system. Peyton was a big part of it but they didn't start winning until Dungy came here. Do you remember "Playoffs? You are talking about playoffs?"......

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Luck hits field to rave reviews

                          Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                          Could we please stop quoting Bball when we respond to him?

                          Do you think I am a troll? Why don't you get off of your duff and do something about the people calling names left and right here. I don't do that no matter how idiotic the post I am commenting on really is. I don't appreciate being called Bball by you either. I am right in saying the Colts will not win six games this year and I am right that they rate to be the worst team in the NFL. I don't care if you or your little group of cheerleaders agree with that or not. I have read dozens of polls and expert opinions that agree with me but I haven't seen one that thinks the Colts will win six game.......

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Luck hits field to rave reviews

                            Nobody knows what this team will do yet, Blu, that's the entire flaw in your thinking. You're guessing, and with conviction. The managment is all new. The coaches, all new. The players, almost all new. We can sit here and speculate all summer long, but the reality of things is we don't know if this team will go 1-15 or 15-1. A 5-win season is just as realistic as a 1-win or 12-win season.

                            But the sad part for me is that you've just given up on 'em. You have resigned yourself to the fact that we are going to be awful. Is it possible that we'll be awful? Sure. And if we are, are you going to root for them less? They are your team after all, right? They've just given you over a decade of excellence, so is it really that bad for you as a fan? Does it suck so much that we have the best young QB prospect in years? Will a season or two of mediocrity prove that you are really just another fairweather fan?

                            I hope not. And I hope you actually have a response for all this, instead of not responding whenever someone makes good counter-points to your arguments.

                            Why not just sit back and see what happens, instead of peeing in everyone's cheerios anytime something positive is posted about our favorite team. Heaven-forbid a fan has a positive outlook.
                            Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 06-14-2012, 03:46 PM.
                            There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Luck hits field to rave reviews

                              Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                              Nobody knows what this team will do yet, Blu, that's the entire flaw in your thinking. You're guessing,and with conviction. The managment is all new. The players, almost all new. We can sit here and speculate all summer long, but the reality of things is we don't know if this team will go 1-15 or 15-1. A 5-win season is just as realistic as a 1-win or 12-win season.

                              But the sad part for me is that you've just given up on 'em. You have resigned yourself to the fact that we are going to be awful. Is it possible that we'll be awful? Sure. And if we are, are you going to root for them less? They are your team after all, right? They've just given you over a decade of excellence, so is it really that bad for you as a fan? Does it suck so much that we have the best young QB prospect in years? Will a season or two of mediocrity prove that you are really just another fairweather fan?

                              I hope not. And I hope you actually have a response for all this, instead of not responding whenever someone makes good counter-points to your arguments.
                              What counter-point? I can post, if you like, a host of expert opinions and polls that say the Colts will be the worst team in the NFL this year. Could they be wrong? Sure. What are the odds? I would give it about one in ten thousand that they do better than the expert predict. You don't make counterpoints just by saying something. Show me something to back that up. Show me a poll or an expert that says they may win that many games. The team has been completely torn down and it will take YEARS for them to get competitive again if all of these moves work. Look at all the teams that are never competitive or have not been for ten to twenty years...... It is not as easy to build a winner as some pseudo-experts here claim... They all point to the 49ers. The 49ers were one hell of a lot better team when Harbaugh inherited them than the Colts are now or will be for years. This is not being negative, this is being realistic. Rebuilds take time and the coaching staff that starts a rebuild is usually history by the time they do start winning......

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Luck hits field to rave reviews

                                Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
                                Do you think I am a troll? Why don't you get off of your duff and do something about the people calling names left and right here. I don't do that no matter how idiotic the post I am commenting on really is. I don't appreciate being called Bball by you either. I am right in saying the Colts will not win six games this year and I am right that they rate to be the worst team in the NFL. I don't care if you or your little group of cheerleaders agree with that or not. I have read dozens of polls and expert opinions that agree with me but I haven't seen one that thinks the Colts will win six game.......
                                y do u comment on your on posts?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X