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 so far

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

  • Originally posted by spazzxb View Post
    The Redskins certainly paid enough for RG3. Basicly, He was already traded once, price tag and all. The Redskins were already the high bidder, which means no one would offer them anything they would consider. Keep in mind, I never said they were disappointed in this specific investment.

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
    Rams are super pumped about it and hope they finish around 6-10...

    Comment


    • Re: Luck so far

      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
      So here's a question for the folks in the peanut gallery regarding Luck so far, what has been the single most surprising thing about his game that you did not expect when we drafted him or even after his fairly impressive preseason?
      How calm and collected he is in clutch situations (even ones when he did not perform as well as he probably would have liked, he still looked calm).

      I have also been impressed with how he has stepped up in the pocket and not been rattled by blitzes, though admitedly I have seen this mostly through highlights

      Comment


      • Re: Luck so far

        Originally posted by spazzxb View Post
        The Redskins certainly paid enough for RG3. Basicly, He was already traded once, price tag and all. The Redskins were already the high bidder, which means no one would offer them anything they would consider. Keep in mind, I never said they were disappointed in this specific investment.

        Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
        Didn't someone (CLE?) offer a higher price, but after the fact? Or did they match? I honestly cant remember.

        RG3 is like buying a house for us in the WMA. Everyone feels like you overpaid, and everyone wants a better deal, but when you have had rental for years, and your rentals have cockroaches, roof leaks, broken doors, and burglaries once a week you are willing to overpay to get the potential of living in a great neighborhood. Even if the Jonses buy a equvilent house down the street that is just as nice.

        Point being, I agree. I doubt the Redskins would trade RG3.

        Comment


        • Re: Luck so far

          If the playoffs started today, we would be playing the Broncos
          Smothered Chicken!

          Comment


          • Re: Luck so far

            Originally posted by Coopdog23 View Post
            If the playoffs started today, we would be playing the Broncos
            I vote for that. An easy first round draw for the Peyton and company.....

            Comment


            • Re: Luck so far

              Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
              Didn't someone (CLE?) offer a higher price, but after the fact? Or did they match? I honestly cant remember.

              RG3 is like buying a house for us in the WMA. Everyone feels like you overpaid, and everyone wants a better deal, but when you have had rental for years, and your rentals have cockroaches, roof leaks, broken doors, and burglaries once a week you are willing to overpay to get the potential of living in a great neighborhood. Even if the Jonses buy a equvilent house down the street that is just as nice.

              Point being, I agree. I doubt the Redskins would trade RG3.
              I am sure they would not trade him. Besides being the best football player in the NFL, he is a marketing dream....... I was just seeing that Peyton Manning has people watching the Denver team at a record pace. That is another thing the Colts lost. They are no longer in the limelight nationally. The game on Thursday night could be a horror show viewership wise....

              Comment


              • Re: Luck so far

                Originally posted by Mad-Mad-Mario View Post
                I do think he needs to be banned, since they have made it clear thats not an option. I was going with a Half Measure. Even though I don't believe in half measures. Its better than no measure.
                What would you ban me for? I have not broken any forum rules.... I have views that are different than yours and that is all.... It happens in the real world all of the time. Do you call for everyone you disagree with to be censored? I disagree with you but I don't ask for you to be banned....

                Comment


                • Re: Luck so far

                  Hey Blu, I figured you'd agree with this:

                  Andrew Luck gives himself C grade

                  http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/85...qb-gives-c-far

                  INDIANAPOLIS -- Andrew Luck is a fine quarterback and a pretty tough critic.
                  Less than 24 hours after leading the Colts to their fifth win while breaking one rookie record and tying another, the No. 1 overall draft pick walked into the Colts' locker room Monday and promptly described himself as average. Really.

                  SportsNation: Rookie QB Grades

                  How would you grade the Week 9 performance of Robert Griffin III, Andrew Luck, Ryan Tannehill, Brandon Weeden and Russell Wilson?
                  Cast your votes!




                  "A 'C' is average, so I think I'd give myself a `C'," Luck said when asked for a grade.
                  Had Luck used a similar standard in the classroom, he might not have an architectural design degree from Stanford yet.
                  But there's nothing average about Luck's fast start.
                  After spending the previous two seasons being billed as the NFL's next big thing, the two-time Heisman Trophy runner-up has exceeded the hype over his first eight pro games.
                  He's already won three more games than Indy did last season with three veteran quarterbacks. On Sunday, against a good Miami defense, Luck broke Cam Newton's single-game record for yards passing (432) by throwing for 433 in a 23-20 victory. He also tied the rookie record set by his predecessor, Peyton Manning, for most 300-yard games in a season (four) and continues to maintain the pace for a historic season.
                  Through eight games, he is 190 of 336 for 2,404 yards with 10 touchdowns and eight interceptions. At this rate, he would shatter Sam Bradford's rookie marks for completions (354) and attempts (590) and Newton's record for yardage (4,051). With a slightly stronger second half, he may even challenge Manning's rookie record for TD passes (26) and he's still a long way from approaching Manning's first-year record for interceptions (28).
                  He's already beaten two of the other five rookie starters (Brandon Weeden and Ryan Tannehill) and has surprisingly pushed the Colts into the playoff discussion.
                  Numbers alone can't tell the tale. Despite being under heavy pressure, Luck has managed to elude defenders and even shake off Green Bay's Clay Matthews to make a key pass in a game-winning drive, and he's rallied the Colts to three fourth-quarter wins.
                  To teammates, Luck has been everything they expected -- and more.
                  "That guy is mature far beyond his years," defensive end Fili Moala said. "You can't say enough good things about him, from him as a human being to him as a football player to him as a teammate. He's the kind of guy you really want your kids to grow up and become. He's a professional, he does it with class and he'll be a good one for years to come."

                  AFC South blog


                  ESPN.com's Paul Kuharsky writes about all things AFC South in his division blog.• Blog network: NFL Nation


                  The toughest part of this season was supposed to be the endless comparisons to Manning. So far, Luck has had little trouble measuring up.
                  Manning has exactly the same amount of wins and yardage as Luck this season, though Denver's quarterback has thrown for twice as many touchdowns and leads the NFL with a quarterback rating of 108.6.
                  But Luck has had a better rookie season than Manning did.
                  Luck has thrown and completed more passes in his first eight games, has thrown for 531 more yards, completed a higher percentage of passes than Manning (56.5 percent to 55.1), thrown half as many interceptions (16 to eight), just one fewer touchdown (11 to 10) and has a better quarterback rating than Manning did at that time (79.0 to 64.5).
                  Of course, the game has changed over the last 14 years. There's now a bigger premium on passing, rookie quarterbacks play earlier and are expected to win earlier than they did then, too.
                  While some now contend Luck has more talent around him than Manning did then, they might forget that in '98, Manning had Hall of Fame running back Marshall Faulk, receiver Marvin Harrison, two veteran tight ends and two tackles who became longtime cornerstones in the Colts' offense.
                  Luck, in comparison, has relied primarily on the sure hands of Reggie Wayne; Donnie Avery, who is trying to come back from two lost seasons, an offensive line that is finally rounding into form and a large cast of other rookies.
                  He's also had to learn more than Manning did then. Interim coach and offensive coordinator Bruce Arians, Manning's position coach in '98, has said the Colts' didn't use the no-huddle offense extensively until Manning's second season. Luck is already running that this season.
                  "There are probably only a few throws he'd like to have back," said Arians, a 20-year NFL assistant. "He's kept us in games. He's won games. The way he's played in the two-minute phase and now the no-huddle phase has been excellent. He's been dynamite on third down the last two games."
                  Now can he keep it up? The second half of this season begins Thursday at Jacksonville (1-7).
                  Arians remembers that's when Manning really took off in 1998, and Luck knows there's plenty he can improve upon, too.
                  "The victories are what I judge things on. I think I've got to cut down on the turnovers and putting touchdowns on the board," Luck said. "I think perfect would be to win every game, and not have any incompletions or interceptions."
                  If that's the grading scale, good luck.
                  But Arians has no problem giving Luck an "A."
                  "That doesn't surprise me," Arians said with a chuckle when asked about Luck's own grade. "He's comparing him to himself. I'm comparing him to all the other guys I've ever had."
                  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 so far

                    Originally posted by Jessen View Post
                    I think this holds a lot of truth. He certainly makes it interesting...but he has gone too far at times. It's awesome to have discussion topics and alternative opinions. But those opinions should be A) respectful and B) coherent. A lot of his posts have been neither and it usually results in poor sports discussion that his off topic. Moderating is a tough job in any form. I don't think he should be banned, but I hope a mod tells him to play better with others or that he learns to do this himself.
                    You can always count on me to be the ***hole who gives you a reality check instead of telling you what you want to hear.....

                    Comment


                    • Re: Luck so far

                      http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/po...ks-record-game

                      Detailing Andrew Luck's record game

                      By Paul Kuharsky | ESPN.com

                      We’ve discussed Andrew Luck vs. Robert Griffin III in this space.


                      Luck
                      Sunday’s excellent performance by Luck requires no mention of RG3.

                      Luck passed for 433 yards, breaking the NFL single-game record for pass yards by a rookie, set a year ago by Cam Newton.

                      Per ESPN Stats and Info, two more Colts wins will help Luck match Sam Bradford’s record for wins by a rookie quarterback drafted No. 1 overall (seven in 2010) and could become the first QB drafted No. 1 overall to have a winning record in his rookie season.

                      Luck now has four 300-yard passing games this season, tying Peyton Manning’s rookie record.

                      Some notable things about what Luck did against Miami:
                      1) Luck took advantage of a Dolphins defense that sent four or fewer pass-rushers on more than 60 percent of his dropbacks on Sunday. Despite struggling against such a pass rush in his first seven games, Luck rebounded to complete nearly 70 percent of his attempts including a go-ahead touchdown pass to T.Y. Hilton late in the third quarter.

                      Most notable was the difference in completion percentage. Against four or fewer rushers before Sunday, he was connecting on 56.7 percent of his passes. Against the Dolphins it was 69 percent.

                      2) Luck completed eight of 11 (72.5 percent) passes using play-action, including a 36-yard go-ahead touchdown pass to T.Y. Hilton. Entering Sunday, Luck had only one touchdown and completed 59.1 percent of his passes on play-action.

                      3) He continues to throw the ball down the field. His average completion was thrown 9.8 yards downfield against Miami, his highest in a game this season and more than a yard better than his league-high average entering Week 9 (8.4).

                      4) When he’s shifting around or on the move, he’s deadly. Luck completed all six of his passes on throws outside the pocket, and has completed 11 of 12 such passes over his past two games, averaging 14 yards per attempt. Entering Sunday, the league average completion percentage on throws outside the pocket was 51.9 percent.

                      5) He’s got the highest QBR (76.1) for a rookie through nine weeks since 2008.

                      He gets better and better. Now we'll see Luck and the Colts prepare on a short week. They make their one national TV appearance Thursday night in Jacksonville, where they will look to beat a team that beat them in Indianapolis back on Sept. 23.
                      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


                      • Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
                        I am sure they would not trade him. Besides being the best football player in the NFL, he is a marketing dream....... I was just seeing that Peyton Manning has people watching the Denver team at a record pace. That is another thing the Colts lost. They are no longer in the limelight nationally. The game on Thursday night could be a horror show viewership wise....
                        If Luck keeps it up, attention won't be an issue.

                        Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

                        Comment


                        • Re: Luck so far

                          Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
                          You can always count on me to be the ***hole.....
                          You said it, not me.
                          Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Luck so far

                            I think both players have been fun to watch, frankly. What a lucky year we've had with QBs, all 5 really.
                            Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Luck so far

                              Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                              So here's a question for the folks in the peanut gallery regarding Luck so far, what has been the single most surprising thing about his game that you did not expect when we drafted him or even after his fairly impressive preseason?
                              His poise and pocket awareness are out of this world. Aside from the Bear's game, his awareness in the pocket has been absolutely incredible. The Miami game was a great example of this. He looked like Peyton Manning out there, stepping up and throwing like he has eyes in the back and sides of his head. I mean, it's unreal to see a rookie doing that and still staying focused down field and going through his progressions.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Luck so far

                                Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
                                I vote for that. An easy first round draw for the Peyton and company.....
                                It would be a shootout
                                Smothered Chicken!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X