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

The Broncos admit they plan to play dirty

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

  • The Broncos admit they plan to play dirty

    This is just unreal.

    http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,...631850,00.html



    Let the blood flow, the contempt seethe and the violence intensify. Let's put 100 angry men from the Broncos and Colts in the same room and, you know, see what happens. I will guarantee one thing when Denver and Indianapolis butt heads in the NFL playoffs:

    It's going to hurt.

    Did you see how Denver safety John Lynch tried to slobber-knock the teeth of tight end Dallas Clark through the back of his Indianapolis helmet?

    "If a team's playing basketball on grass, you've got to hit 'em in the mouth," Lynch said Sunday. "That's what New England did to them in the postseason last year. That's what we were trying to do to them today."

    Well, sir, the pain has only just begun.

    Denver has a hunch about Indianapolis and its pretty guys in blue all lined up in a row.

    The Broncos suspect these Colts are baby soft. Long on finesse. Short on guts.

    Denver wants to stomp on the dancing feet of running back Edgerrin James. The Broncos intend to be 50-grit sandpaper on the smooth hands of receiver Marvin Harrison. And, please, can't somebody shut the yada-yada mouth of quarterback Peyton Manning as he gesticulates like a choreographer staging a Broadway musical before every snap?

    "Their receivers are small guys. They don't like contact. You see them ducking on the ground a lot," Denver safety Kenoy Kennedy said. "You just go and try to be physical, as physical as you can. They start dropping balls. No matter how good your hands are and how fast you are, when you get hit, it hurts."

    This it's going to be. Bring bandages. And aspirin.

    Manning owns 49 touchdown passes in 2004, drop-dead beautiful statistics, as close as football ever resembles Waterford crystal.

    The Broncos are going to mess them up.

    New NFL regulations force a cornerback such as Denver's Champ Bailey to be sent to his room without supper for doing anything more malicious than playing patty-cake with Indy receiver Brandon Stokley.

    "The rules have changed. We pay cornerbacks $4 million a year and don't allow them to be shutdown corners," Kansas City coach Dick Vermeil recently told The Post. "We pay pass rushers a ton of money to knock the heck out of quarterbacks, but now, it's unbelievable. You can get fined $10,000 for a normal football play."

    Leading with his helmet, Lynch blasted Clark so hard in the first quarter it dislodged the football from the Indy tight end and knocked the referees senseless.

    "You try to play clean, but this is a physical game," said Lynch, making no apologies for his wicked shot. "I think that sparked this team."

    While Clark weaved a woozy path to the bench, the zebras needed five full minutes to regain their wits. Dazed and confused, the refs threw a flag, picked up the hankie with apology, gossiped nervously among themselves, stood around while instant replay made a fool of them all, then took it out on Lynch.

    In his debut with Denver way back in the opening week of this NFL season, Lynch smacked Kansas City receiver Dante Hall with such brute force it put a $7,500 dent in the safety's wallet.

    Will Lynch get fined even more money for laying the wood on Clark?

    "I plead the fifth," Lynch said. "I did tell the referee: 'C'mon, man. You're killing me. I've got three kids to send to school."'

    But no matter how much the smackdown costs Lynch, the fine will be money well spent.

    "You've got to find some way to slow them down. And I think the only way anyone has ever found is to be physical with them," Lynch said.

    A year ago, the Broncos exited the playoffs red-faced, spanked 41-10 at the RCA Dome with a defeat so humiliating coach Mike Shanahan overhauled his roster and changed the attitude of the way Denver approaches football.

    The play from that Indianapolis debacle seared in the memory is Harrison falling to the turf after a catch, then casually standing up and waltzing to the end zone for a touchdown, as stupefied Denver defenders watched.

    "We going to remember that game for how they did us," Kennedy said.

    Can an NFL team be intimidated? Have the Colts proved they won't back down from a fight? Behind all those pretty numbers on offense, does Indy turn softer than taffy if chewed?

    "I don't get intimidated by anybody. It doesn't matter who's over there on the other side. I don't think they intimidated us at all," Colts running back Dominic Rhodes said.

    Denver cannot run, dance or exchange scores with Indianapolis.

    It won't stop the Broncos from trying to beat the Colts black and blue.
    Apparently, a 31-point ***-whuppin' wasn't enough. Let's make it about...oh...50 or so this time...

  • #2
    Re: The Broncos admit they plan to play dirty

    Hit that *** Denver, GO BRONCOS

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: The Broncos admit they plan to play dirty

      Well I guess the Broncos have no class.Do you hear us saying s*** about them?They are trying to be intimidating to us.I guess they really don't remember the 41-10 *** whuppin' we gave them.And I guess they don't know how loud the Dome will be Sunday do they?I can tell you from a lot of experience that the Dome is a lot louder than it was last year.But believe me it was loud last year too but this year it has stepped up a notch.Jake the snake will have to love it.At the Charger game 2 weeks ago it got so loud Brees had to call 2 timeouts.I remember last year about a week before the playoff game against the Broncos on Ch.13 Dave Calabro was talking via a sattelite to a Denver sports anchor.The Denver anchor said that the Colts will and should be afraid of the Broncos. Really, they were the scared ones.How about another 5-6+ TD game from Peyton and have no mercy on Jake, Dwight
      Super Bowl XLI Champions
      2000 Eastern Conference Champions




      Comment


      • #4
        Re: The Broncos admit they plan to play dirty

        Originally posted by Jermaniac
        Hit that *** Denver, GO BRONCOS
        You still can't be mad at the Colts for sweeping the Titans over the past 2 seasons can you?Hey at least you guys went to the Super Bowl a few years back whats the last time the Colts made it there?15-20 years?
        Super Bowl XLI Champions
        2000 Eastern Conference Champions




        Comment


        • #5
          Re: The Broncos admit they plan to play dirty

          Doesnt matter when we last made it, we still lost just like Stephon Marbury says we are both losers.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: The Broncos admit they plan to play dirty

            Originally posted by Jermaniac
            Doesnt matter when we last made it, we still lost just like Stephon Marbury says we are both losers.
            Yeah
            Super Bowl XLI Champions
            2000 Eastern Conference Champions




            Comment


            • #7
              Re: The Broncos admit they plan to play dirty

              Originally posted by Shade
              This is just unreal.

              http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,...631850,00.html


              Apparently, a 31-point ***-whuppin' wasn't enough. Let's make it about...oh...50 or so this time...
              I believe that Lynch is ANOTHER $75,000 poor today. Having already forked over $75,000 at the beginning of the season and now because of his hit on Dallas Clark. I guess he likes to donate those $75,000 checks to the NFL.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: The Broncos admit they plan to play dirty

                Their tough talk sure is impressive, especially when it is a safety talking about a wide-reciever.

                I guess the Colts don't need a lot of talk. Must be because they no that they have the best pass rusher in the league coming the other way.
                House Name: Pacers

                House Sigil:



                House Words: "We Kneel To No King"

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: The Broncos admit they plan to play dirty

                  F 'em. They can say how tough they played us when we are playing New England.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: The Broncos admit they plan to play dirty

                    It'll be funny to hear what they say after we kick their asses, not to mention when we beat NE too. Lets hear them talk after that.
                    Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Colts changing game plan for rematch

                      By MICHAEL MAROT, AP Sports Writer
                      January 8, 2005

                      INDIANAPOLIS (AP) -- Peyton Manning will replace the headset with a helmet, Edgerrin James expects a full workload, and Marvin Harrison should be catching passes well into the second half.

                      The Denver Broncos will see a very different Indianapolis Colts team Sunday.

                      ``I don't think last week has anything to do with this week,'' Manning said. ``It was just a game where we didn't make enough plays.''

                      The reason might have been that the Broncos weren't playing the ``real'' Colts.

                      Just one week after the Broncos (10-6) clinched the AFC's final wild-card spot with a 33-14 victory over the Colts, the two teams meet again under rather different circumstances.

                      Instead of snowy Denver, this game will be played in the controlled setting of the RCA Dome. And instead of the regular season, this is the playoffs, with the winner moving on to a game against New England or Pittsburgh.

                      The Colts (12-4) will look like a team that's added some ringers. Knowing they were likely to face a rematch with Denver, Colts coach Tony Dungy opted for a vanilla game plan and a makeshift lineup.

                      Manning and James departed after three plays, Harrison stuck around for the first half only, and tight end Marcus Pollard sat out with a sprained ankle. The Colts also started three rookies in the secondary, held out middle linebacker Rob Morris (concussion) and limited the playing time of their top pass-rusher, Dwight Freeney.

                      ``It was tough, something we wrestled with,'' Dungy said. ``It goes against your nature and your players' nature and it's difficult to play in and coach.''

                      Quarterback Jake Plummer took advantage of the Colts' inexperienced secondary by throwing for two touchdowns and running for another. Reuben Droughns and Tatum Bell each topped 75 yards rushing, and the Broncos dominated the watered-down Colts in the second half.

                      With the stakes higher this week, even the Broncos don't expect a repeat.

                      ``From watching film, we saw them play more man coverage than they usually do,'' Plummer said. ``Whatever they do, we have to adjust to it. Obviously, we have to be ready for anything.''

                      So how much did the Colts really hide?

                      Sunday's matchup will be the fourth meeting between the two teams in little more than a year. They also played in the first round of last season's playoffs.

                      Routs have been the norm.

                      In 2003, Denver dominated Indianapolis in a 31-17 regular-season win and two weeks later lost to the Colts 41-10 in the playoffs.

                      ``It wasn't a good way to end the season, obviously,'' Plummer said. ``But you've got to learn from it, you've got to learn what you've got to do to keep that from happening again.''

                      One twist this time around: How will the Colts react to a hit Pro Bowl safety John Lynch put on tight end Dallas Clark last weekend? Lynch said he wanted to send a message to the Colts; he was fined $75,000 by the NFL.

                      Throughout the week, the Broncos said Indianapolis' receivers are soft. But the Colts didn't take the bait.

                      ``I don't really have a verbal response to that,'' Manning said. ``We just have to go out and make plays.''

                      Denver has seen Manning do that all too much before. In last year's playoff game, he threw for five touchdowns and finished with a perfect passer rating of 158.3.

                      And the Broncos' recent playoff failures raise another issue: Can they win without John Elway? Since Elway retired after back-to-back Super Bowl victories in 1998 and 1999, the Broncos haven't won a postseason game.

                      ``We know not much has been happening since he left,'' Plummer said. ``Obviously, we want to get a win real bad.''

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X