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

2013 non-Colts thread

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

  • #16
    Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

    I agree

    Weirdly, I used to like NCAA more. I am not sure if it is just me aging, or what, but I feel like I enjoy the NCAA less now (I feel it is more a business, as seen with the 2 quarter Johnny M suspension)

    Anyways, I agree. I am super excited for this year

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

      Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
      I dont watch ESPN much any more, but I do find it funny hearing Colts fans complain about Robert Griffin getting exposure. Not like Peyton did not eat up the camera (to his credit Luck has not yet, but I expect that to change. at least I hope it does for his sake)

      I expect the Eagles to take as many shots at Robert Griffins knee, but then again they may be overly busy fighting each other...

      (not sure why the trend became to call him "Bob", but I thought it was funny the Giants and Cowboys called him that last year, and both teams STFU after they played us. OH well)
      Peyton earned it. He laid low for years before he started becoming more visible. Once he started becoming more visible (after he had accomplished a lot in the NFL), he was producing funny commercials and positive messages in his pressers. Bob The Third has splashed himself all over every media channel, good or bad. Constant pressers about his health, his relationship with his coach.... tons of commercials, tweets speaking his mind on the topics of the day, right or wrong, wedding announcements. They went about it entirely different. Bob comes across as an attention-seeker. He hasn't "earned" it yet; he's just striking while the iron's hot, which just cheapens the entire presentation. I also think this is partly why you see these defensive guys hitting him just a little bit harder.
      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


      • #18
        Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

        That was cute how you called him Bob......I have not noticed him getting hit harder, either, but maybe I just missed it. I also dont see Roberts as a attention seeker, just someone who has the spotlight.

        I will admit he is all over the media, but IMO that has more to do with him being our only good QB is a zillion years then anything he has done. He also came in and was our best player as a rookie, and won rookie of the year (and won the NFCE and took us to our first playoffs since 1999). I will see he earned it plenty, with plenty more to come

        As for the wedding stuff, I am not sure what that has to do with anything. He did not send out any announcements, the fans (I knew the first 2) found it via a online search and started sending him gifts.

        About the only part I agree with is he is all over social media. But he is far from the worst off. IMO I think a lot (most) of modern athletes would do good to stay off of social media, but I am also not going to begrudge them for being on it. At least they arent saying stupid things like "when I wake up I am Lebron james and you are still you"

        EDIT: As for the contant pressers, you cant win for losing. If he said no comment he would take **** from some people. If he doesn't give an answer he is rude. If he answers he is an attention whore. Seems he cant win for losing on most fronts of your argument.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

          I know he's your QB so you're gonna defend him to the hilt, va.... the dude is over-exposed, and getting worse so by the day. I think RG3 has some positive qualities on the field, although there are also things he does that make me cringe. I wish he'd just shut up and go away for awhile and start producing something on the field for awhile before he starts splashing himself all over every damn media outlet. All the exposure he's had over the summer has done nothing except create drama. No new information was ever released. Just "he's rehabbing and hoping to start day 1". And yet we had to have the daily Robert updates. And his mouthing off to the media about his coach. And then we take a commercial break and see 2 RG3 commercials. It's gettin' bad, man. If he'd just focus on kicking *** on the football field and reducing his mouth and exposure, I'd take a liking to the guy. As he's currently going about it, I'm just annoyed. I'm sorry if that offends you. Of all the QBs from that class, including Kap, RG3 gets on my nerves by far the most. There was nothing he did above and beyond what any of the other three did last year, in fact he probly exposed the most flaws... but he absolutely dominates the media channels and hype machine. I understand he's "brought hope" to a franchise, but there's no reason he can't just clam it and play football, he'd be doing your team and the entire nation a favor.
          Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 09-06-2013, 02:16 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


          • #20
            Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

            Once again, you blame him, I blame sports nation and the media.

            As for the commercials, I have no problem with them as long as he is still focusing on football.

            Once again, he is getting asked questions on a daily basis about his injury. Unless you know for a fact he set each and every one of those up, your arguments makes no sense to me. He gets asked a question, he answers it. The irony to me is if he "clams" it half the world will be *****ing at what a stuck up prick he is.

            Like I said, damned if he does, damned if he doesnt.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

              I don't blame the media, they're just doing what they're paid to do! You don't see the same circus around Luck, Wilson, even Newton all of whom *could* have a circus around them, but they deflect it! Luck especially; he has the complete opposite stance, he exudes privacy and politely deflects and always takes attention *away* from himself and onto his teammates and coaches.... that's no accident, man. That's a conscious path he chose to reduce the circus around himself. It's like saying Terrell Owens wasn't to blame for the circus around him... it was all the media. The blame is on the person at the center of it, they are the ones who ultimately control what's going on. Wilson is hardly ever heard from. He conducts himself tremendously in interviews. Kap is sorta iffy.... he's not near as attention-seeking, but he's cashed in on some endorsements and posted a few dumb tweets... but his exposure is not near the scale of RG3.
              Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 09-06-2013, 02:43 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


              • #22
                Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

                Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                I don't blame the media, they're just doing what they're paid to do! You don't see the same circus around Luck, Wilson, even Newton all of whom *could* have a circus around them, but they deflect it! Luck especially; he has the complete opposite stance, he exudes privacy and politely deflects and always takes attention *away* from himself and onto his teammates and coaches.... that's no accident, man. That's a conscious path he chose to reduce the circus around himself. You gotta remember, RG3 wasn't always a hot prospect --- Luck has been deflecting media mobs for years; he was the center of college football analysis, but he never let that circus develop around him. The blame is on the person at the center of it, they are the ones who ultimately control what's going on.
                That's part of it the rest is that Luck is has a rather bland personality. RG3 is a lot more engaging thus the media is more willing to flock to him and DC is also a bigger market the NFC East is always going to get a lot of press than other teams.

                Rarely does a small market team get coverage in comparison unless there's a superstar on the team....

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

                  There are a couple instances where Griffin is clearly wanting all the attention on himself:

                  1) Him wearing Adidas instead of Nike during warmups on multiple occasions. He knows the cameras are always on him and this will get talked about on Twitter and TV.

                  2) When he had ESPN follow him around the weight room a few weeks ago. His teammates say there's no way he can beat the locker room record. So Griffin has to tell everyone how competitive of a person he is, how he's out to prove people wrong, does some pushups and pullups and voila, he breaks the locker room record on Sportscenter.

                  The commercials and endorsements: if it doesn't affect his play and preparation for football, which it clearly didn't last year, why not take the money?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

                    Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
                    That's part of it the rest is that Luck is has a rather bland personality. RG3 is a lot more engaging thus the media is more willing to flock to him and DC is also a bigger market the NFC East is always going to get a lot of press than other teams.

                    Rarely does a small market team get coverage in comparison unless there's a superstar on the team....
                    I don't buy that... if RG3 were in Indy (which could have happened, imagine if Luck had entered the year before like everyone thought he would), he'd be creating the same circus (and I'd be pulling my hair out...)
                    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


                    • #25
                      Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

                      The nice thing about the NFL starting is that ESPN can now dote on players outside of RG3...slightly
                      Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

                        Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                        I don't buy that... if RG3 were in Indy (which could have happened, imagine if Luck had entered the year before like everyone thought he would), he'd be creating the same circus (and I'd be pulling my hair out...)
                        It depends on how he would've done his first season in Indy though. I think he would've gotten media coverage black QB can pass and run has an engaging personality but you don't know how he would've related to Pagano etc either. The local media is totally different than the DC media.

                        I just never heard of any of these issues at Baylor but I never really followed him either back then.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

                          Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
                          It depends on how he would've done his first season in Indy though. I think he would've gotten media coverage black QB can pass and run has an engaging personality but you don't know how he would've related to Pagano etc either. The local media is totally different than the DC media.

                          I just never heard of any of these issues at Baylor but I never really followed him either back then.
                          RG3'd also be freaking dead behind last year's offensive line, especially if we tried to run Arians' offense with him, talk about a poor fit in every way. Anyway, I'll admit I don't really like RG3 in general, definitely not a guy I'd want to sit down and have a beer with (because he'd probably order Jager Bombs or something at a dive bar). Obviously a great player but just rubs me the wrong way I guess. Just comes off as kind of bratty and showy. But whatever, there're far worse personality traits to have, I imagine he'll grow up eventually. Hell, if I had his life I'd probably be a dickhead too lol.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

                            Originally posted by idioteque View Post
                            in fact I probably watch more college football and premier league
                            Pardon my off topic, but your Spurs made some good moves in the transfer market this summer. Still hope we (Liverpool FC) will finish above you in the hunt for the top 4.
                            Never forget

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

                              I love jager bombs!

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

                                http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...8ef_story.html

                                Five myths about Redskins quarterback Robert Griffin III



                                1. He’s a publicity hound who wants to be a pop-culture icon.
                                In terms of exposure, Griffin’s entry into the NFL was unprecedented: He had four national commercial campaigns (Adidas, Gatorade, Nissan and Subway) airing before he took his first regular-season snap. That was the start of a push, driven by his agents at Creative Artists Agency, to make him the future face of the league — an effort that, by all measures, appears to have succeeded. Now, Griffin is everywhere, his image appearing on ESPN’s “SportsCenter” roughly once every seven nanoseconds, and there is a paparazzi-like infatuation with his personal life.


                                Griffin is certainly comfortable with his celebrity, and there is no question that his natural magnetism is a marketable asset his agents have capably exploited. But Griffin has described himself in interviews as a “loner”or even a “weirdo” at heart, and his standard evening routine remains a home-cooked meal and a rented movie from Redbox.

                                The “selfish” label, which arose in news reports quoting anonymous NFL scouts before the April 2012 draft, may be a misreading of two other Griffin traits: his enormous confidence and his aloof manner around people he doesn’t know. But he also signs autographs tirelessly and was voted captain by his teammates in 2012 and 2013.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X