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

  • Re: Luck so far

    Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
    Didn't even quote me right. I didn't say "nothing has changed". I said you haven't learned. So basically you're admitting that you don't learn, but we already know that based on the extremely low level of intellect exhibited by your posts.

    And Green Bay should pound the daylights out of the Colts --- they're a better team. They have a veteran quarterback and a champion-ship level roster. We're rebuilding. Duh.
    Green Bay will NOT pound the Colts. This will be a very competitive game. Not going to predict a Colts win though it will not surprise me. Colts should move the ball on GB easily.

    Comment


    • Re: Luck so far

      Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
      This is just false.
      I guess there has to be a Yin-Yang you know. Coop on one side and Blu on the other.
      You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

      Comment


      • Re: Luck so far

        Originally posted by RWB View Post
        I guess there has to be a Yin-Yang you know. Coop on one side and Blu on the other.
        Lol it'd be different if this were able to be debatable. But to each their own....

        Comment


        • Re: Luck so far

          Originally posted by troyc11a View Post
          Green Bay will NOT pound the Colts. This will be a very competitive game. Not going to predict a Colts win though it will not surprise me. Colts should move the ball on GB easily.
          They SHOULD pound the colts. If they do not, then GB has some SERIOUS issues. They should win by at least 2 touchdowns. AT LEAST

          Comment


          • Re: Luck so far

            Yea, GB has the tools to make it ugly, we might keep it interesting, but we're going to have our issues. My post was mainly to Blu, since he thinks he's some sorta genius for predicting the Packers are gonna do this and that to the Colts. GB is the better team, they're favored to win, they're comin off Russell Wilson's game-winning interception and will take it out on the NFL for at least 6 weeks.
            Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 09-28-2012, 12:20 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: Luck so far

              Are you still there, travmil?

              Comment


              • Re: Luck so far

                Originally posted by Coopdog23 View Post
                RG3 can't throw it 70 yards. Luck can
                Seriously? This is absurd as the O.B. comments as of late.

                And I hate to do this, but like others said above who can throw it 70 and 80 yards is over-rated. I would rather have accurate then rocket arm, though I did/do love Farve and Big Ben (his game, not him as a person)

                I would ask if I can bump this when RG3 throws a 80 or 90 yard bomb, but frankly I hope he doesnt any time soon. I would rather we calm down and start running the ball more (not the tripple option)

                I would also like for the crazy, redundant RG3 and Luck comparisons to cease. Then again, I want to poop out fairs and lolli pops, and to not have to pay taxes and live in a mansion with a giant pool on the roof.....

                Comment


                • Re: Luck so far

                  Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
                  I would also like for the crazy, redundant RG3 and Luck comparisons to cease. Then again, I want to poop out fairs and lolli pops, and to not have to pay taxes and live in a mansion with a giant pool on the roof.....
                  The comparisions won't stop since a lot of Colts fans would have rathered held on to Manning and picked up RG3 and a few draft picks.

                  Never mind the salary cap and never mind the fact that Manning is not the same Manning as we use to know.

                  Some Colts fans just refuse to get it so why try. I am glad RG3 is doing well but its sad to see coaches use him the way they are just to hold on to their jobs.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Luck so far

                    Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
                    Seriously? This is absurd as the O.B. comments as of late.

                    And I hate to do this, but like others said above who can throw it 70 and 80 yards is over-rated. I would rather have accurate then rocket arm, though I did/do love Farve and Big Ben (his game, not him as a person)

                    I would ask if I can bump this when RG3 throws a 80 or 90 yard bomb, but frankly I hope he doesnt any time soon. I would rather we calm down and start running the ball more (not the tripple option)

                    I would also like for the crazy, redundant RG3 and Luck comparisons to cease. Then again, I want to poop out fairs and lolli pops, and to not have to pay taxes and live in a mansion with a giant pool on the roof.....

                    Luck has better arm strength and accuracy than RG3.
                    Smothered Chicken!

                    Comment


                    • Re: Luck so far

                      Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
                      Seriously? This is absurd as the O.B. comments as of late.

                      And I hate to do this, but like others said above who can throw it 70 and 80 yards is over-rated. I would rather have accurate then rocket arm, though I did/do love Farve and Big Ben (his game, not him as a person)

                      I would ask if I can bump this when RG3 throws a 80 or 90 yard bomb, but frankly I hope he doesnt any time soon. I would rather we calm down and start running the ball more (not the tripple option)

                      I would also like for the crazy, redundant RG3 and Luck comparisons to cease. Then again, I want to poop out fairs and lolli pops, and to not have to pay taxes and live in a mansion with a giant pool on the roof.....
                      1. 30 pass att/game isnt a lot, especially in this day and age where some QB's have close to 25-30 att in the first half. Plus at nearly 200 yards a game, I think you guys are running the ball pretty well. Now I agree 100%, they need to stop with the triple option and with the QB draws before they get RG3 killed.
                      2. People are ALWAYS going to compare these two, no matter what happens. It's just like the way that the Brady vs Manning debate always came up. The fact that we had a chance to draft RGIII gives colts fans some extra incentive to be interested in his progression in comparison to Luck. It's just natural as a sports fan, and a human.

                      Also, I'm with you on the lack of taxes and living in a mansion...buuut idk about pooping out fairs and lolli pops. Lol

                      Comment


                      • Re: Luck so far

                        Originally posted by Coopdog23 View Post
                        Luck has better arm strength and accuracy than RG3.
                        You got 1 out of 2, anyway.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Luck so far

                          The notion that Luck doesn't have arm strength needs to be put to rest. He threw a 70 yard bomb to the end zone at the request of the scouts who attended his pro day.

                          http://espn.go.com/nfl/draft2012/sto...rdinal-pro-day

                          Luck completed 46 of 50 passes, and three of those incompletions were drops by his receivers, including a perfect 70-yard-plus spiral that Chris Owusu mishandled in the end zone. It was the final pass of the day, requested by scouts to test Luck's arm strength, which might be about the only thing some have questioned.

                          "Maybe arm strength isn't his weakness after all," joked tight end Coby Fleener,

                          __________________________________________________ _______________________________________

                          This is a FACT not an opinion. Witnessed by hundreds of people in attendance and reported by ESPN (so you KNOW it must be true...)


                          BTW, Luck chose to throw INTO the wind at his pro day. That's also a FACT covered in the article. This means that Luck threw a ball from his own 30-35 yard line to the end zone into the wind. Can we please stop bagging on Luck's arm now?
                          Last edited by travmil; 09-28-2012, 06:27 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Luck so far

                            Unbelievable that olblu has the nerve to criticize Luck when RGIII has the same 1-2 record even with a much better surrounding cast. Why can't RGIII figure out how to get rid of the football? Taking SIX sacks against the Bengals is inexcusable. You would never see Luck put himself in a position to hurt his team in that way.

                            Luck has played well enough to give the Colts a 2-1 record. It's not his fault that Vinatieri misses easy FGs or that his defense gave up an 80 yard TD in the final minute of the game.

                            If the Colts do lose to Green Bay, it won't be because of Luck. It'll be because the defense can't stop the Packers' offense and the offensive line can't block Clay Matthews. RGIII would be a human pinata if he went against the Packers.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Luck so far

                              Originally posted by travmil View Post
                              The notion that Luck doesn't have arm strength needs to be put to rest. He threw a 70 yard bomb to the end zone at the request of the scouts who attended his pro day.

                              http://espn.go.com/nfl/draft2012/sto...rdinal-pro-day

                              Luck completed 46 of 50 passes, and three of those incompletions were drops by his receivers, including a perfect 70-yard-plus spiral that Chris Owusu mishandled in the end zone. It was the final pass of the day, requested by scouts to test Luck's arm strength, which might be about the only thing some have questioned.

                              "Maybe arm strength isn't his weakness after all," joked tight end Coby Fleener,

                              __________________________________________________ _______________________________________

                              This is a FACT not an opinion. Witnessed by hundreds of people in attendance and reported by ESPN (so you KNOW it must be true...)


                              BTW, Luck chose to throw INTO the wind at his pro day. That's also a FACT covered in the article. This means that Luck threw a ball from his own 30-35 yard line to the end zone into the wind. Can we please stop bagging on Luck's arm now?
                              Oh, Luck can throw it a long way but it hangs up and floats at the end.... We will stop talking about Luck's arm when he makes a pass that shows that he has one. I agree with Parcells and Sims that he can't make a real NFL QB throw. But, don't worry, Chad Pennington won quite a few games with that kind of arm..... ...

                              Comment


                              • Re: Luck so far

                                Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
                                Yees, he throws those dink passes very well. He is going to have lots of yards, he is chucking it 50 times a game or so.... How about yards per attempt? I don't have to go to the Arena League to see a good long pass, all I have to do is tune in to RGIII...... ...
                                Yet the Colts are near the top of the league in long passing completions. If you want to see a QB more concerned with being in Subway commercials and getting sacked six times a game, tune in to RGIII.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X