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 vs Griffin - let it begin.

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

  • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
    The price we paid to get him? What price did we pay to get him? Do you really think this team is winning games with Peyton Manning before?

    I forgot that Peyton was never ever blown out by the Jets....oh wait....41-0.
    I think this team with some vets back and a whole boat load of draft picks that we don't have would be a winner with Peyton. I think they would be wining ten games this year and might even make the playoffs...... Sure, Peyton had bad games. I agreed with you that you just write off the Jets game and try to win the games you should win.....

    Comment


    • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

      RG3 isn't half the runner that Vick was when he entered the league. He might be a faster straight-line runner, but even then I doubt it. Vick was faster in acceleration, was dynamic in his lateral shiftiness and stop-and-go, and then when he lit up the afterburners, was a 4.2-4.3 runner. RG3 is fast, but I've watched them both --- he's no Vick. Vick is maybe the 2nd most dynamic runner I've ever seen in this league, behind Barry Sanders. And Vick still throws an absolutely beautiful laser. To the right person and accurately? Debatable.

      That's why I've said that if Mike Vick can't find any deep playoff success in this league, what makes anyone think RG3 will? He's behind Vick in both running and passing. I do see similarities on the whole between the two, however; they are both electrifying players. They have a similar throwing style, and can absolutely wing it. But that play style is not conducive to post-season success, because flash and electricity get absolutely shut down in the playoffs. Kordell Stewart, Randall Cunningham... I'm not saying this because they all were black, I'm saying it because they all played a very similar style of ball. You *never* see those guys pull off in the playoffs what they do in the regular season. Those types of players are regular season show-offs, and then get blasted in the playoffs, if they even make it in to the playoffs. You only make those plays against half-baked defenses, and there are no half-baked defenses in the playoffs.

      I still think Washington is absolutely playing with fire with how much they let the kid run.... he's gonna get blasted again. I'm not saying that with glee, I'm saying it with concern, they need to not simplify the playbook just because he's not picking it up as fast. They need to challenge him and keep him in the pocket and grow him as a passer, not just dumb things down and make it simple for him to have success as a rookie. They're hurting his long-term growth.
      Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 10-15-2012, 09:54 AM.
      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


      • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

        That was weird?? I was trying to quote Ol Blu and Trader's name came up instead....
        You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

        Comment


        • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

          Originally posted by OlBlu View Post

          He is a superstar but as another poster correctly mentioned, they have pared the playbook down for him and added plays that give him familiar options. As he progresses and he is certainly doing that, he will have a more complex playbook to work with. The Colts would do well to do the same thing for Luck...... Might become better than a 50% passer that way.....
          Passing percentage of Peyton Manning through week 6 of his NFL rookie season...53.8% oh and for funsies...Peyton had 6 TDS and 14 picks at this time as well. He had thrown for 1364 yards (In 6 starts)

          Passing percentage of Andrew Luck through week 6 of his NFL rookie season...53.4%....also for funsies...Luck has 7 TDs and 7 picks at this time. Luck has thrown for 1488 yards (in 5 starts)

          Luck is playing maybe the most complicated downfield offense we have ever seen a rookie run in addition to this. Keep ripping on Luck's completion percentage all you want, just know that it is another area where you look silly since Peyton struggled with the exact same thing.


          Comment


          • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

            Originally posted by RWB View Post
            That was weird?? I was trying to quote Ol Blu and Trader's name came up instead....
            For some reason that always happens when you try to quote OlBlu. I always have to go in and fix it, because in the post above it quoted OlBlu as you


            Comment


            • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

              Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
              RG3 isn't half the runner that Vick was when he entered the league. He might be a faster straight-line runner, but even then I doubt it. Vick was dynamic in his lateral shiftiness and stop-and-go,a nd then when he lit up the afterburners, was a 4.2-4.3 runner. RG3 is fast, but I've watched them both --- he's no Vick. I do see similarities on the whole between the two, however; they are both electrifying players. They have a similar throwing style, and can absolutely wing it. But that play style is not conducive to post-season success, because flash and electricity get absolutely shut down in the playoffs. Kordell Stewart, Randall Cunningham... I'm not saying this because they all were black, I'm saying it because they all played a very similar style of ball. You *never* see those guys pull off in the playoffs what they do in the regular season. Those types of players are regular season show-offs, and then get blasted in the playoffs, if they even make it in to the playoffs. You only make those plays against half-baked defenses, and there are no half-baked defenses in the playoffs.

              I still think Washington is absolutely playing with fire with how much they let the kid run.... he's gonna get blasted again. I'm not saying that with glee, I'm saying it with concern, they need to not simplify the playbook just because he's not picking it up as fast. They need to challenge him and keep him in the pocket and grow him as a passer, not just dumb things down and make it simple for him to have success as a rookie. They're hurting his long-term growth.
              I actually ready RG3 ran a 4.2 40, and even a 4 flat. But he kept looking back on that last TD run. Maybe he did not have the afterburners on, IDK.

              Regardless, I agree. I actually think Vick was faster coming into the league.

              I still think Washington is absolutely playing with fire with how much they let the kid run.... he's gonna get blasted again. I'm not saying that with glee, I'm saying it with concern, they need to not simplify the playbook just because he's not picking it up as fast. They need to challenge him and keep him in the pocket and grow him as a passer, not just dumb things down and make it simple for him to have success as a rookie. They're hurting his long-term growth.
              [/quote]

              I agree. I hate how Kyle is using him.

              I disagree with dumbing it down. I think you need to simlify things to grow confidence, but there is a fine line of when to try to progress and accept growing pains

              Comment


              • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                RGIII ran a 4.41 at the combine. Luck ran a 4.6 and also did incredibly well in the agility tests, which RGIII chose not to take part in for whatever reason.

                Vick ran a 4.33 in 2001 and also skipped the agility tests.

                All three of these guys have mind numbing athletic numbers for a QB. The fact that Luck and RGIII were in the same draft is even more mind numbing. The fact that we can't even enjoy the greatness of both players without being bludgeoned to death is the most mind numbing thing of all.


                Comment


                • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                  The fact that Luck moves as well as he does at his size is amazing. Tim Tebow has made a living in this league running the ball, and Luck is actually bigger and more athletic than him, and I'm basing that off actual combine results. Luck topped him in almost every category.

                  The highlights of him plowing defenders over after his team turned it over, or his 1-handed catch on the sidelines... makes you think there's no skill position he couldn't play with some success in this league. I could see him playing tight end very well. I could maybe even see him playing linebacker. The tackles he's made after his team turned the ball over are textbook.... lowers/squares his shoulder, drives his legs, and goes through guys. His tackles look very natural, as if he's not getting jarred. When he's made those tackles, you think that it was someone else, a natural tackler, and then you see him get up and you think "OMG that was the quarterback!" He's just an all-around footballer.

                  When he's off the field in street clothes, he looks goofy, a lil awkward, doesn't even really seem that athletic, has that disheveled hair that is just bad. But then he dons that football helmet and jersey and it's like "Okay, football player." And then you see him move and throw like he does, and you think "Okay, wasn't expecting that." It's like he just enters a whole different mode once it's game time. He sort of reminds me of Jeff Foster athletically, in that you're just not expecting it. Foster looked so pedestrian. But the guy was a strength freak, and could dunk from the free throw line.
                  Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 10-15-2012, 10:11 AM.
                  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


                  • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                    Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
                    It is my opinion that RGIII will put a lot of distance between himself and Luck over the next three years and Colts management will not be effective at putting a team around him as they are currently constructed. The coaches illness doesn't help this but even good coaches rarely survive a complete rebuild......
                    This is just a bias claim made by a biased man. You say you haven't seen good results from a teams that drafted their franchise QB before they had a good offensive line. At this point there is little difference between the Redskins line vs. the Colts line when it comes to pass protection. They now have the same number of QB hits and sacks although the Colts had their bye week and RG3 didn't play an entire game already. The Colts have also faced better pass rushers than the Redskins as well.

                    You didn't think the Colts should draft Luck then why should have the Redskins drafted RG3? You do this a lot and its quite funny to me. You say I believe this...... and then make an argument against your own opinion.

                    You say the Colts won't be as effective at putting a team around Luck as THEY ARE CURRENTLY CONSTRUCTED... How laughable is that comment.. So if the Colts make no improvements to the team then they still will be bad? No WAY!

                    The Colts will have more money and more picks than the Redskins and considering there is no big track record of Grigson to go off of then I just chalk these type of comments up to a jaded Peyton fan that can't accept change.
                    Last edited by Gamble1; 10-15-2012, 11:16 AM.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                      I don't know if you're exactly going to help RGIII by comparing him to Vick. Vick has had a pretty "Meh" career for a first round draft pick. No conference champ appearances, lots of turnovers, and lots of injuries. RGIII will have to be more of a pocket QB as his career wears on. He is built more like Vick, not like Steve McNair for example.
                      Vick actually led the Falcons to the conference championship against the Eagles in 2004

                      Comment


                      • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                        Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                        Vick actually led the Falcons to the conference championship against the Eagles in 2004
                        Good call.


                        Comment


                        • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                          Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                          This is just a bias claim made by a biased man. You say you haven't seen good results from a teams that drafted their franchise QB before they had a good offensive line. At this point there is little difference between the Redskins line vs. the Colts line when it comes to pass protection. They now have the same number of QB hits and sacks although the Colts had their bye week and RG3 didn't play an entire game already. The Colts have also faced better pass rushers than the Redskins as well.

                          You didn't think the Colts should draft Luck then why should have the Redskins drafted RG3? You do this a lot and its quite funny to me. You say I believe this...... and then make an argument against your own opinion.

                          You say the Colts won't be as effective at putting a team around Luck as THEY ARE CURRENTLY CONSTRUCTED... How laughable is that comment.. So if the Colts make no improvements to the team then they still will be bad? No WAY!

                          The Colts will have more money and more picks than the Redskins and considering there is no big track record of Grigson to go off of then I just chalk these type of comments up to a jaded Peyton fan that can't accept change.
                          I believe the Redskins line is light years ahead of the Colts line. They actually make a pocket for RGIII to pass in. Yes, he has taken sacks but that was more because he needed to spot his receivers a little quicker and get rid of the ball a little faster. He will do that, he has a quick release. He isn't doing as much running all over the field to avoid be sacked. I am a jaded Peyton fan and so is my small extended family (my brother and his grown children). We used to have four season tickets to the Colts games. When it was clear that Irsay was lying to the fans about keeping Peyton, we let those tickets go and the rest of my family has found other things to do with their Sunday afternoons. I bought those tickets and I field a call or two per month from the Colts wanting to sign me back up. We had those tickets for more than 15 years. I always ask them if we have a new owner that won't lie to the fans. That ends that conversation. So, yes, they lost my financial support over all of that. I would have maintained interest if they had taken all of the wild offers for Luck and used that to replace some talent around Peyton and resign some of the vets like Saturday and Garcon'. I think they would have won ten plus games and they could have taken a QB later in the first round to develop. Several are doing quite well, better than Luck for instance. I might have even been a fan of using some of the picks to take RGIII and develop him over a couple of years and still have more draft picks left over. I think that is what New England might have done given the same circumstances. Brady will be ending his career in the next five or so years and I'm willing to bet the Pats don't miss a beat... The difference between a great owner and a very poor one an the difference between a great front office and coach and a bunch of newbies working.... But, Ol Jim saved a lot of money with the purge and he is laughing all the way to the bank with it.....

                          Comment


                          • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                            The fact you want Saturday back says it all. I love the guy to death, but he is so bad now it is not even funny.

                            Please tell us about all these rookie QBs doing much better than Luck.


                            Comment


                            • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                              Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                              The fact you want Saturday back says it all. I love the guy to death, but he is so bad now it is not even funny.

                              Please tell us about all these rookie QBs doing much better than Luck.
                              I think the one in Seattle is better. I think the one in Phoenix is better but he has been hurt. I even think the one in Miami is better and you better get ready to defend one coming in from Cleveland because he might be better too.....

                              Comment


                              • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                                Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                                The fact you want Saturday back says it all. I love the guy to death, but he is so bad now it is not even funny.

                                Please tell us about all these rookie QBs doing much better than Luck.
                                I agree with you about Saturday but he would only have been brought back because Peyton was comfortable with him. It was certainly time to replace him....

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X