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

Colts will black out if not sold out.

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

  • #31
    Re: Colts will black out if not sold out.

    The games are almost 98% sold out with months to go until the first game. Probably a non-issue.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Colts will black out if not sold out.

      Originally posted by beast23 View Post
      I still like Jim Irsay, but then again... I probably know of many, many more things this man has done for Indy behind the scenes than most of you. To say that he doesn't care deeply for his adopted city is more than a wee bit misguided.

      If I might suggest, try a little to separate his primary business (Colts) from his other pursuits.

      If you are going to stand up for him in this way give us some examples please. This post holds little merit without them.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Colts will black out if not sold out.

        You guys realize they've already sold 96% of the tickets, and everything over that 85% number for every game they have to share revenue with the visiting team, right? They're already 11% over that threshold. He has to share a high enough revenue that it will equal 1-2 million per game. So essentially he is giving away 10-16 million if he doesn't do this.

        The fact of the matter is, if he bought the tickets himself or found a company (Eli Lilly) who would buy those tickets at an extreme discount he would lose a fraction of that 10-16 million in doing so.

        There won't be blackouts, and this is a big stink over nothing. He's saving himself millions of dollars. One Luck signs and camp starts there will be a surge of buying tickets. The Colts know they won't black anything out. Chill people, chill.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Colts will black out if not sold out.

          Grow the hell up.

          If you're wondering if I mean you, then yes I mean you.

          I realize I'm being more blunt than I probably should be, but I just don't have tolerance for such pettiness anymore.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Colts will black out if not sold out.

            Holy moo cow, what happened here?

            I'm guessing that was ugly considering Hicks response! Wow.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Colts will black out if not sold out.

              The reason people are taking this seriously and getting upset is because Colts games were blacked out back in the pre-Manning days and even at times early in his career. So it's not like it's some unheard of thing around here.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Colts will black out if not sold out.

                Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                The reason people are taking this seriously and getting upset is because Colts games were blacked out back in the pre-Manning days and even at times early in his career. So it's not like it's some unheard of thing around here.
                There was a two year honeymoon when they got off the Mayflower, then they had far more blackouts from '86-'98 than televised games. The empty Hoosier Dome really screwed up television viewing patterns of NFL fans that had established allegiances to other teams. Thank God the Sunday Ticket came along in '94, and I've been a subscriber whether living in Indy or here since '95 to watch the Steelers, because those blackout Sundays were brutal. That's why the idea of a larger stadium, after Manning is gone, was always a questionable political/ business decision. Even when Harbaugh and Dickerson before him were leading the Colts to the playoffs, it was easy to walk up to the box office on game day and get a good seat for a game that was blacked out locally. It took a once-in-history QB to fill the stadium consistently, and I still think the franchise is back in LA during Jim Irsay's lifetime. To me, the question is whether the Irsay family gets the Rams name back after trading it away all those years ago.
                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                And life itself, rushing over me
                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Colts will black out if not sold out.

                  I gotta give it to you Chicago J... You pretty much called this a while ago. But in my defense, THIS is NOT how I pictured the Manning era ending. I didn't picture a large percentage of bandwagon fans with little understanding of the NFL business model being disenfranchised with the team like this.

                  I saw Manning playing out his career and riding into the sunset as a Colt. Possibly returning to the team in some coaching or management capacity. Certainly hanging around as an ambassador or sorts. Maybe with a declining career, or maybe we a re-invented team giving him one last Super Bowl run and retiring at or near the top. All with a bridge into the next Colts' era.

                  But it wasn't to be.... Instead, there's a sizable chunk of the fanbase that think Manning got shafted and that think Irsay is the devil for doing it.

                  That's why I said, for the Colts, it's probably best if Manning's Bronco career either never gets off the ground or is quickly grounded due to lingering effects of his injury and surgery. At least that he be an obvious shadow of his former self. If he comes out looking like a league MVP then many bandwagon Colts fans are just not going to get it. It will just fuel their anger further. The more he sustains that, the worse it will be. They will feel whatever the Broncos do, it could've been the Colts. In fact, they'll figure with the Colts it would've been even better.

                  I would prefer those fans being blindsided by an obviously lame Manning proving the Colts right in not only the long term, but the short term as well.

                  Otherwise, Lord Help Our Colts!
                  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


                  • #39
                    Re: Colts will black out if not sold out.

                    Originally posted by Bball View Post
                    Otherwise, Lord Help Our Colts!
                    Does Duke still do that bit on Bob & Tom?

                    My all-time favorite...

                    Little Bobby Irsay
                    Bought a football team
                    And brought that team to Indianapolis and fulfilled that city's dream
                    Now Bobby loves his football team
                    Its obvious, of course
                    'Cause he gave his wife fifty-two million bucks and kept the Colts in his divorce.

                    Lord... Help our Colts.

                    = = = = = = = = =

                    And I think you're right about Manning and the Broncos. LaMarr, James, Lawrence and Larry get a shot at him in week #1, and you know they're salivating over the chance to put a real hit on him. I certainly would be if I were a LB. I think he walks away no later than the 2013 offseason, and maybe during the season. He's done, the situation with his health is incredibly risky, and I think little Jimmy might have gotten that part right.
                    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                    And life itself, rushing over me
                    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Colts will black out if not sold out.

                      Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                      Does Duke still do that bit on Bob & Tom?

                      My all-time favorite...

                      Little Bobby Irsay
                      Bought a football team
                      And brought that team to Indianapolis and fulfilled that city's dream
                      Now Bobby loves his football team
                      Its obvious, of course
                      'Cause he gave his wife fifty-two million bucks and kept the Colts in his divorce.

                      Lord... Help our Colts.

                      = = = = = = = = =

                      And I think you're right about Manning and the Broncos. LaMarr, James, Lawrence and Larry get a shot at him in week #1, and you know they're salivating over the chance to put a real hit on him. I certainly would be if I were a LB. I think he walks away no later than the 2013 offseason, and maybe during the season. He's done, the situation with his health is incredibly risky, and I think little Jimmy might have gotten that part right.
                      He is at no more risk than any player getting hit and with that fusion, perhaps less. I expect him to play all four years of that contract....

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Colts will black out if not sold out.

                        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                        Grow the hell up.

                        If you're wondering if I mean you, then yes I mean you.

                        I realize I'm being more blunt than I probably should be, but I just don't have tolerance for such pettiness anymore.
                        Sorry, Hicks, it is hard not to respond when someone starts calling me names. I don't do it unless I am provoked and perhaps I should not do it then. Thank you for stepping in and putting an end to it....

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Colts will black out if not sold out.

                          It looks like the Colts threat to blackout games worked:

                          http://www.stampedeblue.com/2012/7/1...oday#storyjump

                          It is important to note that 87% of season ticket holders did renew for the coming season. People have been acting like half the season ticket holders left, but the overwhelming majority renewed. They are now 97% sold out with two months to go before the season starts, so it looks like there won't be any blackouts.

                          Things couldn't be any worse than last season and for the most part people supported the team. We have to see just how good Luck is and if our front office has the ability to surround him with a complete team before we make absolute statements about the long term future of the franchise and fan base.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Colts will black out if not sold out.

                            Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                            It looks like the Colts threat to blackout games worked:

                            http://www.stampedeblue.com/2012/7/1...oday#storyjump

                            It is important to note that 87% of season ticket holders did renew for the coming season. People have been acting like half the season ticket holders left, but the overwhelming majority renewed. They are now 97% sold out with two months to go before the season starts, so it looks like there won't be any blackouts.

                            Things couldn't be any worse than last season and for the most part people supported the team. We have to see just how good Luck is and if our front office has the ability to surround him with a complete team before we make absolute statements about the long term future of the franchise and fan base.
                            Yes, they can be worse than last year and they will be. They might win a game or two more but they won't be as good a team. The Colts had 5000 people on a waiting list for season tickets. Those are all gone now and they are calling former season ticket holders trying to get them to buy. My niece was one of them and she told then she wouldn't have time because she was going to be watching Denver games. So will I but I will also watch the Colts if they are televised.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Colts will black out if not sold out.

                              Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                              Does Duke still do that bit on Bob & Tom?

                              My all-time favorite...

                              Little Bobby Irsay
                              Bought a football team
                              And brought that team to Indianapolis and fulfilled that city's dream
                              Now Bobby loves his football team
                              Its obvious, of course
                              'Cause he gave his wife fifty-two million bucks and kept the Colts in his divorce.

                              Lord... Help our Colts.
                              I actually have an MP3 of that one mixed in some other B+T material, LOL
                              "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


                              • #45
                                Re: Colts will black out if not sold out.

                                I wonder how many teams will dare Manning to throw deep, gambling he won't be able to resist the temptation and wondering if he will be short-arming those type of throws?
                                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

                                Working...
                                X