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

    Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
    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
    The same line that was letting Morris run for 5 yards per carry? I don't know I can only dream of having a line that bad I guess as a Colts fan right now.


    Comment


    • Re: Non-Colts thread

      They werent terrible, but you like to make it sound like they had 5 pro bowlers.

      Morris had help from the line, but he also made a lot of plays himself (and got great help from the option and RG3, though last time I argued this I was told I was crazy because RG3 does not help Morris at all)

      Comment


      • Re: Non-Colts thread

        If Shanahan had pulled out RG3 at halftime and they lost, he would be getting lambasted all over the place today.

        If people as so upset about RG3 playing hurt in a playoff game, where was the criticism last week when he was worse and he played vs. Dallas as they tried to get into the playoffs?

        20-20 hindsight. Sure if you gaze into your crystal ball and tell me when the guy is going to blow up his knee, then I will take him out the play before.

        It's a gladiator sport. Everyone is banged up. If the doctor says he can play, if the player says he can play, if you as the coach thinks he gives you more of a chance to win than the backup does, then he plays. That's the way this game works and always has. The whining mediots second-guessing Shanahan today are only relying on that 20-20 hindsight, trying to make a name for themselves, or flat-out do not understand the game.
        The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

        Comment


        • Re: Non-Colts thread

          Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
          If Shanahan had pulled out RG3 at halftime and they lost, he would be getting lambasted all over the place today.

          If people as so upset about RG3 playing hurt in a playoff game, where was the criticism last week when he was worse and he played vs. Dallas as they tried to get into the playoffs?

          20-20 hindsight. Sure if you gaze into your crystal ball and tell me when the guy is going to blow up his knee, then I will take him out the play before.

          It's a gladiator sport. Everyone is banged up. If the doctor says he can play, if the player says he can play, if you as the coach thinks he gives you more of a chance to win than the backup does, then he plays. That's the way this game works and always has. The whining mediots second-guessing Shanahan today are only relying on that 20-20 hindsight, trying to make a name for themselves, or flat-out do not understand the game.
          Thank you. From my post in another thread replying to BBALL

          Originally posted by vapacersfan
          I said yesterday I bet Shanny comes out and says he talked to an assistant who talked to the Dr. He will chalk it up to a misunderstanding


          If RG3 had pulled himself he would be called a quitter and soft.

          I have no problem with him wanting to stay in, my problem is with the coach not pulling him.

          I never even played pro sports, but at the college and semi pro level I hardly ever see/hear of guys saying "Pull me out." Sometimes you gotta say "I know you think you are good, but you need to sit down". It is a tough decision to make, but that is the reason the coach gets paid 12M dollars a year

          I will leave the rest of your quote alone, as I have already said numerous times that the Redskins have changed the offense a lot, and RG3 has played a lot smarter since his first concussion
          Originally posted by vapacersfan
          I never said you did. I was more speaking in generals. I tend to agree with you, and like I said when you make 12M a year to make decisions.....well sometimes you gotta make unpopular ones

          Of course hindsight in 20/20. And remember Cutler pulled himself a couple of years ago. And all I remember is people calling him soft and saying he quit on the team.

          Of course hindsight being 20/20 I wish they woulda pulled Robert at the end of the 1st quarter up 14 points

          Comment


          • Re: Non-Colts thread

            Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
            If Shanahan had pulled out RG3 at halftime and they lost, he would be getting lambasted all over the place today.

            If people as so upset about RG3 playing hurt in a playoff game, where was the criticism last week when he was worse and he played vs. Dallas as they tried to get into the playoffs?

            20-20 hindsight. Sure if you gaze into your crystal ball and tell me when the guy is going to blow up his knee, then I will take him out the play before.

            It's a gladiator sport. Everyone is banged up. If the doctor says he can play, if the player says he can play, if you as the coach thinks he gives you more of a chance to win than the backup does, then he plays. That's the way this game works and always has. The whining mediots second-guessing Shanahan today are only relying on that 20-20 hindsight, trying to make a name for themselves, or flat-out do not understand the game.
            Nope. Completely and utterly incorrect. There are some injuries that are namby pamby, but RG3 had a visibly obvious injury and has had it since he suffered it. We all were watching the game at my house screaming to take him out of hte game, and he kept limping back up there. It was like watching a slow-motion train-wreck. Anyone watching that game and not making the realization that RG3 was on the verge of busting that knee literally at any minute needs to have an examination. I've been watching this guy for the past few weeks and wondering what the hell he was doing out there, medically. No one in their right mind would have questioned taking him out. He never should've come back from that injury, especially so soon. When it happened and then directly afterwards it was generally a 2-3 week recovery time, and then within 3 days all those "miraculous" reports of him walking just fine around the facility started surfacing. I could see from the very next game he wasn't "walking just fine". The way he was dragging that leg at the end of out-of-bounds runs last night was the biggest sign yet that they ignored. When a guy is dragging is damn leg out of bounds --- he should not be in there. Who knows how much pain-killers and whatever they had coursing through him not to mention a massive knee brace and he was still dragging that thing around and favoring it. There was the one sack where he ran straight back for 15 yards and set to throw a deep one, and he got sacked because he couldnt' even move, and he had about a 3 second lead on the guy. The "old" RG3 would've left that guy in the dust and he couldn't even begin to run. It was that play precisely that I said "he absolutely needs to come out", but nope, they kept him in there.

            That's the thing about ligaments, when one is damaged you're no longer supported fully, so your other tendons and ligaments are then put into bad situations, and you risk doing damage to a ligament/tendon other than the one you had already injured.
            Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 01-07-2013, 12:00 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

              Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
              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.
              I'm sure Elway never complained about how much Shanahan rode Terrell Davis into oblivion, since it allowed Elway to piggyback his way to his only two Super Bowl victories. You see, there's also something to be said about maxing out the capabilities of your star players, too. Davis only played seven seasons, and only made three pro bowls. And then he only gained 1200 yards total in his last three seasons. Yes, that is oblivion, but how many other running backs with only 7 seasons and only 7600 yards are even gathering a single hall of fame vote?
              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


              • Re: Non-Colts thread

                Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
                They werent terrible, but you like to make it sound like they had 5 pro bowlers.

                Morris had help from the line, but he also made a lot of plays himself (and got great help from the option and RG3, though last time I argued this I was told I was crazy because RG3 does not help Morris at all)
                Personally I think you under sell your line quite a bit. Their push was pretty good against a top ranked run defense and that has nothing to do with the style of offense they run. IT mostly disrupts the DE but the other 3 guys were getting man handled by the Redskins line.

                Comment


                • Re: Non-Colts thread

                  You guys seriously overrate our line, IMO

                  Comment


                  • Re: Non-Colts thread

                    Once again, why the hell was the doctor not telling (who is the doctor? I keep hearing doctors?) the HC or whoever to pull the QB is a bigger concern for me.

                    Granted the last artcile implied Shanny ignored his opinion (or did not seek it) but if the injury was so bad why were other doctors not saying pull him out.

                    And why were people not saying this last week when we beat Dallas?

                    Comment


                    • Re: Non-Colts thread

                      Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
                      You guys seriously overrate our line, IMO
                      Have you watched the Colts? I've watched Wash on a number of occasions since the media is all over RG3's nutsack and he's on nationally way more often, and their line routinely seems better than what I'm used to watching Indy use. It may not be a great line, but you got it good it would seem to me, compared to Luck's line. Luck did everything he did with half the line that Wash has, and most teams for that matter. He's constantly got dudes draped all over him, chasing him, jumping in his face. The one throw a game he got that was uncontested, he usually did some pretty cool things.
                      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

                        Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
                        Once again, why the hell was the doctor not telling (who is the doctor? I keep hearing doctors?) the HC or whoever to pull the QB is a bigger concern for me.

                        Granted the last artcile implied Shanny ignored his opinion (or did not seek it) but if the injury was so bad why were other doctors not saying pull him out.

                        And why were people not saying this last week when we beat Dallas?

                        My impression from Andrews was that he wasn't even conferred with by the coach when RG3 was first injured, and Shanahan fed everyone a line. It also sounds like Andrews was never comfortable sticking RG3 back out there this season, period, and has been walking on pins and needles ever since... and like Trader Joe said, the expression on his face as he walked off with RG3 last night was one of sickness, like his fears had just come true.
                        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

                          Here's the quote:
                          "[Griffin] didn't even let us look at him," Andrews said. "He came off the field, walked through the sidelines, circled back through the players, and took off back to the field. It wasn't our opinion. We didn't even get to touch him or talk to him. Scared the hell out of me."
                          While Andrews eventually gave Griffin the green light to play in the Redskins' wins over the Philadelphia Eagles and Dallas Cowboys, and Griffin is closer to optimal health for Sunday afternoon's wild-cardgame against the Seattle Seahawks, Andrews is still uncomfortale with the way Griffin's injury was handled.
                          "He's doing a lot better this week, but he's still recovering and I'm holding my breath because of it," Andrews said. "He passed all the tests and all the functional things we do, but it's been a trying moment for me, to be honest with you."
                          Doesn't sound like the words of a guy who's real comfortable sticking RG3 out there.

                          He may have been at a much more stable condition right before this playoff game, but what about the few weeks before? When he re-tweaked it in the 2nd quarter or whatever, why didn't they yank him? We may hear more yet from Andrews about this game.

                          It definitely sounds like this situation was mostly controlled by the coach and player

                          Docs: "Ehhhhh ya, he technically passes, but I'm not all that comfortable sticking him out there".
                          Shanahan: "Griffin, you good to go?"
                          RG3: "Yea"
                          Shanahan: "Well then, get out there."
                          Docs: *cringe*
                          Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 01-07-2013, 01:32 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

                            People can play with ACLs gone. Ask Dejuan Blair. It is about how your body reacts, swelling, pain tolerance, it's possible, but it's not advised. I think that is what happened yesterday after the 1st quarter. I'll be shocked if his ACL is in one piece, to me the bigger question right now is that status of his MCL and PCL.


                            Comment


                            • Re: Non-Colts thread

                              Tired of double posting. I updated in the other thread. Mixed reviews. Official word at 1500 PC

                              Comment


                              • Re: Non-Colts thread

                                Yea let's move this discussion to the other thread haha.
                                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