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

Non-Colts thread

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

  • Re: Non-Colts thread

    I'll even say this about Cousins.... they're on their way to ruining that kid, too. I actually think Cousins has NFL-caliber abilities, a possible good starter in this league down the road, hell maybe even for the 'Skins. He gets thrown into the worst situations because of their lack of game-planning and Griffin's propensity to miss time. Poor kid, gets thrown in tonight halfway through the 4th quarter of a playoff game, into a no huddle that he apparently has had very little practice with, in a run-option type offense that clearly doesn't suit his skillset, down 2 scores. I mean... talk about just absolutely shoving the kid out in front of a bus on an interstate. He still managed to make a few completions.

    I'll tell ya what, man.... by the end of that game, it felt like a circus to me.
    Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 01-06-2013, 11:52 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


    • Re: Non-Colts thread

      Wait, what?

      They are going to ruin him because he got put in a bad situation

      was he ruined when he was winning the Games he won earlier this tear as well?


      yeah in a perfect qorld that injury woulda happened earlier in the game but its not like they planned on him coming in with 5 minutes left.

      The kid still gets repa in practice. Just not as much as RG. You know, the starting qb....

      Comment


      • Re: Non-Colts thread

        Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
        Earlier this yr. sure. But today he got hurt of a late hit and on two scrambles cause our line ant block. Oh, and bc for whatever reason our center couldn't snap today.

        I woulda pulled RG3. Hindsight is 20/20. But it was funny troy kept saying pull RG3 and the same play ran for 8 yards then threw a strike for a first down.

        He looked decent, but e has looked decent the last 5 or 6 weeks.

        He is definitely hurting, though he walked ofd the field fine (then could barely walk in the locker room)

        i agree the field was a joke
        I don't mean to be a jerk here VA, but when I see you complain about the Skins line all I can do is chuckle a bit. I would give anything to have that line compared to ours.


        Comment


        • Re: Non-Colts thread

          IMO Shanahan is taking advantage of RGIII's competitive fire which I think is really dangerous. Andrews is a known expert so I am going to go with him and I think Shanahan is being really reckless. He needed to save his job this year more than anything else.


          Comment


          • Re: Non-Colts thread

            Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
            I woulda pulled RG3 two games ago. The way he dragged his leg at the end of out-of-bounds runs.... his loss of mobility.... it's been clear to me that he was injured more than they were letting on, and the article disclosed by his doc this morning just confirms it.

            Shanahan is pullin some shenanighans. He's saying this, when reality is that isn't true. He said the doc told him to let him go out there, when in fact the doc said the exact opposite. Now he's saying he let RG3 stay in because RG3 "wanted to". Dude, you're the head honcho --- if you 1) can't recognize that your guy is badly hurt, and 2) don't realize that he's hurting your team's chances, and/or 3) don't have the balls to stand up to a rookie, or 4) is pressured from above to put the "money maker" on the field --- then the process is f'd from the start.

            http://espn.go.com/blog/nfceast/post...ut-of-the-game

            This guy sums me up perfectly --- as I watched the game and watched how ineffective he was becoming and how much he was hobbling, I kept saying yank him. He's going to really hurt that knee, you watch. And then that fumbled snap and knee buckling occurred and I told my buddies "Yup" they just ruined this kid. Horrible management by the 'Skins of the entire scenario. I still doubt the entire system they stuck him, instead of trying to develop him, they catered to what he knew, and that style is gonna get him killed.... just puts him in positions to get hurt. He got hurt a LOT this year. A LOT. It wasn't just his knee. I'm pretty certain he suffered at least 2 concussions, also. And he has no idea how to slide or take a hit properly, which is just a recipe for disaster. Combine that with his coaches and management's propensity to prop him up out there for God knows what reason (probly $$$) when he's clearly injured ---- it was an assinine situation. This didn't have to happen. They have Cousins back there, who proved on multiple occasions that he's at least capable of comin' in and doing something, RG3 was not the only and clear answer. Hell, their play down the stretch wasn't even hinged on RG3 anyway --- it was their D and Morris. They actually averaged less points per game during that stretch than they did in the first half of the season.

            And not to pile on... but I've said this season that RG3 says things on occasion that raise red flags for me, and he comes out after tonight and says this:

            ""I'm the quarterback of this team," Griffin said. "My job is to be out there if I can play. And to answer the next question, no, I don't feel like me being out there hurt the team in any way. I'm the best option for this team, and that's why I'm the starter."

            Who says that????? Those are the words of a conceited man. It's like RG has bought into his own Superman hype and really does think he's all that and a bag of chips. Could you imagine ANY other quarterback in this league saying that?? Luck? Manning? This comment floored me. It not only showed his incredible ego, but also threw his backup under the bus at the same time, saying he's teh "best option". If I was Cousins, I'd be like... givin' him the 1-finger salute.
            Eh, I think you are overreacting to the comment, but I agree with a lot of what you are saying otherwise. I just don't think Shanahan is the right guy to coach him. Shanahan has always been known to ride his stars into oblivion and I think RGIII could already be in jeopardy of that. We will have to see what the MRI shows.

            Griffin was being asked a lot of leading questions and he gave an honest answer on what he believes which I think is the kid's MO. I don't know he's still only what 22? He's got a lot of time to continue to develop how responds to questions.


            Comment


            • Re: Non-Colts thread

              Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
              The team doctor thing concerns me, but its also weird it comes out while he is touring for a new book.

              Be curious what shanny says in reply to that article. I bet he says he talked to one of the assistants who talked to the doc
              I mean Andrews is THE guy when it comes to joint injuries. He perfected Tommy John surgery and he is really become big on ACLs recently, didn't he do AP's reconstruction? He's the guy the Pacers brought into consult on Danny's knee. I mean he is a rock star, by himself he has probably moved orthopaedic medicine forward 20 years.

              Bayless on Twitter tried to pin Andrews as the bad guy, said his comments made RGIII nervous and is what caused the injury today, so the fact that Bayless is being a jackass should tell you that Andrews is probably in the right here.

              I don't know if you saw Andrews face as he walked off the field behind RGIII after he got hurt today but he looked like he wanted to be sick.


              Comment


              • Re: Non-Colts thread

                Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
                Wait, what?

                They are going to ruin him because he got put in a bad situation

                was he ruined when he was winning the Games he won earlier this tear as well?


                yeah in a perfect qorld that injury woulda happened earlier in the game but its not like they planned on him coming in with 5 minutes left.

                The kid still gets repa in practice. Just not as much as RG. You know, the starting qb....
                Yeah, but I think the big question right now is when did the injury really happen VA.

                Was it really that 4th quarter event or was that event just a result of an injury that had already happen? Was it in the 2nd quarter? Has the injury been worse than expressed to the media since the initial hit?

                That was a beefy brace, a really beefy brace, and for RGIII's knee to buckle like that with that kind of a brace on? Well I don't know, like I said I'm no medical expert, but I am having a tough time swallowing that it was just an LCL strain this whole. RGIII was dragging that leg around after he slid out of bounds. He had no pop and zero ability to cut, which is a sign of one specific injury that we all know about.


                Comment


                • Re: Non-Colts thread

                  Also, as a Skins fan you can't be feeling great right now about what the MRI is going to reveal, RGIII was pretty adamant in the post game after the first knee injury that it didn't feel like an ACL. Today we get "Honestly, it's up in the air for me right now".

                  My opinion? He tore the ACL in the first quarter when the knee caught and slid to a funny stop as he fell out of bounds. I thought then it looked like a typical way that an ACL goes. I think they took him in, gave him a pain killer, slapped that absurd brace back on and he went back out, he never really cut after that, indicating to me a failure of the ACL. A structurally sound knee doesn't not bend this way in a non-contact injury folks, JMO.



                  And that is with that crazy *** knee brace which is about twice as beefy as what Luck wears as a precaution.
                  Last edited by Trader Joe; 01-07-2013, 01:36 AM.


                  Comment


                  • Re: Non-Colts thread

                    Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post

                    And not to pile on... but I've said this season that RG3 says things on occasion that raise red flags for me, and he comes out after tonight and says this:

                    ""I'm the quarterback of this team," Griffin said. "My job is to be out there if I can play. And to answer the next question, no, I don't feel like me being out there hurt the team in any way. I'm the best option for this team, and that's why I'm the starter."

                    Who says that????? Those are the words of a conceited man. It's like RG has bought into his own Superman hype and really does think he's all that and a bag of chips. Could you imagine ANY other quarterback in this league saying that?? Luck? Manning? This comment floored me. It not only showed his incredible ego, but also threw his backup under the bus at the same time, saying he's teh "best option". If I was Cousins, I'd be like... givin' him the 1-finger salute.
                    I was pretty weirded out by the best option thing as well, though I wasn't really sure what the context was. It's not really his call to say who the best option is--that's on the coach. I don't want to say that makes him conceited or anything, but it's a very strange thing to say.

                    I would be calling for Shanahan's job if I were a Skins fan. I think he has put his own short term gain over the long-term health of that franchise. And hell, considering how important RG3 could be for this league, he's costing the NFL as a whole quite a bit with his stupidity.
                    You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                    Comment


                    • Re: Non-Colts thread

                      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                      Also, as a Skins fan you can't be feeling great right now about what the MRI is going to reveal, RGIII was pretty adamant in the post game after the first knee injury that it didn't feel like an ACL. Today we get "Honestly, it's up in the air for me right now".

                      My opinion? He tore the ACL in the first quarter when the knee caught and slid to a funny stop as he fell out of bounds. I thought then it looked like a typical way that an ACL goes. I think they took him in, gave him a pain killer, slapped that absurd brace back on and he went back out, he never really cut after that, indicating to me a failure of the ACL. A structurally sound knee doesn't not bend this way in a non-contact injury folks, JMO.



                      And that is with that crazy *** knee brace which is about twice as beefy as what Luck wears as a precaution.
                      THIS is a big part of what pissed me off. I thought it was clear that he was out there playing on a knee made of Jell-O. Absolutely no concern for his health or career. And then you have the reports about how uneasy Andrews is about the whole thing.
                      You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                      Comment


                      • Re: Non-Colts thread

                        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                        I don't mean to be a jerk here VA, but when I see you complain about the Skins line all I can do is chuckle a bit. I would give anything to have that line compared to ours.
                        The line that got blown the hell up yesterday? It may be better then the Colts, but it still has big issues.

                        Granted I think Lincenstein getting hurt also did not help.

                        As for your competitive fire comment, I agree. I dont think Shanny was looking to save his job as much as he just wants to win. But I agree

                        Comment


                        • Re: Non-Colts thread

                          Originally posted by SoupIsGood View Post
                          I was pretty weirded out by the best option thing as well, though I wasn't really sure what the context was. It's not really his call to say who the best option is--that's on the coach. I don't want to say that makes him conceited or anything, but it's a very strange thing to say.

                          I would be calling for Shanahan's job if I were a Skins fan. I think he has put his own short term gain over the long-term health of that franchise. And hell, considering how important RG3 could be for this league, he's costing the NFL as a whole quite a bit with his stupidity.
                          A weird comment, but the kid is honest.

                          More PC would be to say its not my decision, but we did mortgage our future for this kid.

                          I am OK with people being less PC, especially when you want your QB to be "that guy" and want all the pressure.

                          I actually said earlier, I think Shanny needed to put his foot down more. But I also have a lot of faith that RG3 woulda pulled himself if he felt he couldnt do anything and was really hurt.

                          To me the injury doesnt scare me as much as the future does. The injury can heal, but if they dont stop the option and QB draw stuff we will be right back here next year.

                          They need to still let him run, but rely on him to be more of a passes.

                          I have faith that will happen, but time will tell

                          Comment


                          • Re: Non-Colts thread

                            And i thought only in European soccer you can see plain stupid coaching decisions in a professional environment. What i witnessed yesterday, was probably the weirdest and fully inexplicable calls in pro sports. Honestly, what were they thinking?

                            You have a franchise QB that will make you competitive and part of the playoffs from many years to come. He is on his rookie year and you treat him like that? You have to think of his and the team's future, you know? I am not saying to throw the game away but it's even more mind boggling when you see that RGIII was hurting your team and you had on the bench a competent back up QB. Can't believe this happened on a pro level. Madness!
                            Never forget

                            Comment


                            • Re: Non-Colts thread

                              I keep hearing people talk about Cousins.

                              SEA would have destroyed cousins. Absolutely destroyed him

                              Comment


                              • Instead, they absolutely destroyed Griffin.

                                Sent from my KFJWI using Tapatalk 2
                                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

                                Working...
                                X