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

  • Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
    No disrespect to vapacerfan, but I'm getting extremely tired of hearing about the Redskins. We should be talking about the playoff races in December. I don't care about a 3-10 team, and I don't care about the dynamics of the relationships between RGIII, Shany, and Dan Snyder. Once Shanny actually gets fired, then you can talk about it. But right now they are just beating it into the ground. It reminds me of all of the talk the Jets got last year when they were imploding, Sanchez was playing terrible, and some fools were calling for Tebow. I know that big markets help drive the ratings, but the media just gets obsessed with these large market teams who become train wrecks. There are so many NFL stories out there that deserve far more attention than the Redskins right now. Talk about the Skins when the season is over and the franchise is making changes, but not now. I listened to Mike and Mike for a bit this morning, and it was as if I was listening to a local D.C. sports show.
    Its vapacersfan fan :P

    I agree, its annoying. Personally I have given up on the Redskins.....at least for this season

    P.S. Next time your in DC (or if I ever go back to Indy) Ill buy you a shot as well! lol
    Last edited by vapacersfan; 12-11-2013, 10:58 PM.

    Comment


    • Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

      Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
      I've been tired of hearing about the 'Skins since they drafted RG3. I have a lot of respect for vapacersfan, also... we had our back-and-forths last year. But everything I felt about that team has come true. I had serious questions about their management, their decision-making, the marketing-machine of RG3, the way they were constructing things, and finally, just the blatant, ridiculous over-hyping of RG3, who I also believe is selfish and self-centered. I said it back then, I still believe it --- he has flaws, a lot. And the hype was masking it. I said last year that I liked Luck, Wilson, Tannehill, Cousins and Foles. All five of those guys are showing their merit (well... Cousins hasn't had a lot of opportunity, but he's been good in his few appearances, and I'm confident that given the nod, he'll be an impressive QB).

      And now RG3 has dropped off the face of the earth, but he's still making selfish, unwise comments to the media, and Shanny and RG3 are making comments back and forth. Rumors... poor play. It's a disaster. And they traded away all those draft picks to get RG3, when I said all along that I liked and probably even preferred Kirk Cousins long-term prospects... They're talking about benching RG3 now, which I say, why haven't you done it yet? RG3 hasn't been good all year. They're hamstrung because of what they invested in RG3 and they will ride him into the dirt. As an organization, they mistakenly threw all their eggs into RG3, when the smart money would have been to play it cool, use the picks on other talent, go with Cousins, who was a great pick-up, and build a true team. Instead, they're left with this mess.

      What has happened to the 'Skins isn't something I "wish" on an organization, but I said it last year --- the paths they were taking were going to bite them in the *** down the road. This is why you don't run an organization like that. And I don't like a lot of attention being given to entities that are poorly managed or making bad decisions, which is exactly what we've been subjected to. It's a train-wreck, and everyone is rubber-necking to get a look. Everyone needs to drive on and let the crews get it cleaned up.
      Its all good. We have our disagreements (and sometimes passionately) and this time is no different. But I harbor no ill will, and if I met you in person Id gladly buy you a beer (or a shot, as I hate beer)

      I agree TPTB have screwed this season up, but it was aided by RG3's arrogance (and I think the hype machine was largely media driven...and our medias desire to build them up and tear them down sad but true) and also a lot by the 36M cap penalty. I think RG3 has some growing up to do, but the same as his success was overhyped last year I think his failure (and the teams, lets not act like RG3 missed blocking assignments or dropped passes) I think he is just as much, if not more, overhyped in his failure.

      And now RG3 has dropped off the face of the earth, but he's still making selfish, unwise comments to the media, and Shanny and RG3 are making comments back and forth

      I have not seen this at all. Maybe I just missed it (and I honestly could have) but what I have seen has been PC talk by all parties. The only exception as when RG3 said his stupid line about the Oline and Kyle. Which he is right Kyle is an idiot, but sometimes I wish RG3 would give short and sweet answers. When he starts going on long winded answers he gets picked apart, and he says stupid ****.

      I could go on a tangent on how that is the media twisting some things to get what they want, but frankly I have zero respect for anyone who doesnt man up. So I will agree with that.

      The only other thing I will agree with is they should have benched him all season. Or at least after week 3-4. I still think its nuts to say Cousins will be half the QB RG3 will be, but time will tell.


      Sadly the Redskins got screwed by the 36M cap penalty and by the injury of RG3. IDK if its his fault for playing through it, MS's fault for letting him call the shots (and I dont buy that for a second, Shanny only came here if he had 100% control, and last year he even said he LOVED having Snyder not involved at all).

      To me it all boils down to one thing. Everyone, top to bottom, has failed. Period. End of story. But I will bet anyone here that is the Redskins were winning, even .500, none of these stories are out and no one is even talking about RG3. Im so confident in that I will say if we had a way to get a time machine I would wager if you go back you would not see one of these stories. And if I was wrong I would gladly pose nude pics of myself on PD. Not that anyone would want that!

      Winning cures all. and I think winning (and RG3's legs) covered up a lot of holes last year, including the OL. If we start winning, this is all a non story.

      That said, I agree with Sollozzo. Lets stop talking about the Skins. Lets talk about the teams in contention.....

      Comment


      • Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

        I want to see RG3 under a different coaching staff, which should happen next year.

        Actually as an Eagles fan, please keep Shanny forever. Hopefully Jerry Jones keeps himself GM forever too. I can deal with Eli being good once every 4 years.

        Comment


        • Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

          Never forget

          Comment


          • Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

            Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
            I want to see RG3 under a different coaching staff, which should happen next year.

            Actually as an Eagles fan, please keep Shanny forever. Hopefully Jerry Jones keeps himself GM forever too. I can deal with Eli being good once every 4 years.
            Wait, you mean like how we won the NFCE and made the playoffs last year with him as coach?

            The guy drives me nuts (especially with his clock mgt) but it seems many have forgot last year and the success he had.

            Personally, I dont think Shanny is going to get fired. I bet he is back next year
            _______

            On topic, KC had some great deep passes.

            Sadly, as I typed that, we stopped ATL on 4th down at the 1 inch line and then Kirk throws a horrible interception.

            Both teams have sucked, however. At one point there were like 3-4 fumbles in a row (back to back to back)

            Comment


            • Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

              WP: Daniel Snyder did not raise objection to benching of Robert Griffin III because he felt it was coach’s decision to make, sources say


              Daniel Snyder did not raise objection to benching of Robert Griffin III because he felt it was coach’s decision to make, sources say
              Washington Redskins owner Daniel Snyder was informed of Coach Mike Shanahan’s plan to sit down quarterback Robert Griffin III and did not raise an objection to it largely because he took the position that it was a coaching decision that should be made by Shanahan, according to several people familiar with the situation
              .

              It also appeared Friday that financial considerations have become the most significant issue determining Shanahan’s future with the organization. Multiple people close to the matter said Snyder has been unwilling so far to pay the full amount he would owe Shanahan and his coaching staff under their contracts if he fired them.

              When he announced Wednesday that Kirk Cousins was taking over as the team’s starting quarterback, Shanahan said Snyder and General Manager Bruce Allen were in agreement with the move. Shanahan said he wouldn’t have made the move if Snyder and Allen did not support the decision.


              Several people with knowledge of the deliberations confirmed that Snyder did not object when told by Shanahan of the prospective move. But those people, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the topic, said it is not clear whether Snyder endorsed the maneuver.


              Snyder’s approval was not the main issue, those people said, because Snyder took the view that the matter was Shanahan’s responsibility and that he should not intervene.

              http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports...medium=twitter

              ______________

              Just because we dont have enough drama in DC:

              NBCWashington:Kyle Shanahan May Be at Center of Redskins Coaching Drama

              There's reason to believe that Kyle Shanahan is what is driving Mike Shanahan to want out as head coach of the Washington Redskins, a couple of strong sources within the organization told News4 Sports.

              Kyle Shanahan's role in the organization as offensive coordinator may be putting the head coach in a position where he has to choose between his son and his job.


              Sources told us that the coach is not being fired Tuesday and will be at practice Wednesday when the team begins work for Sunday's game against the Atlanta Falcons.


              We also just confirmed with the Redskins that Dan Snyder will not be involved in any player decisions and will allow the head coach to make the call as to whether Robert Griffin III or Kirk Cousins starts at quarterback Sunday against the Falcons.

              http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/sports/Kyle-Shanahan-May-Be-at-Center-of-Redskins-Coaching-Drama-235287111.html

              Comment


              • Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

                I know Seattle has the best record but honestly they don't seem formidable on the road the Giants just really suck.

                Glad to see the Pats lose though.

                The Vikings game was a shocker.

                Comment


                • Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

                  I think that Eli has had the most bizarre career of any QB in NFL history.

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

                    Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
                    Wait, you mean like how we won the NFCE and made the playoffs last year with him as coach?

                    The guy drives me nuts (especially with his clock mgt) but it seems many have forgot last year and the success he had.

                    Personally, I dont think Shanny is going to get fired. I bet he is back next year
                    _______

                    On topic, KC had some great deep passes.

                    Sadly, as I typed that, we stopped ATL on 4th down at the 1 inch line and then Kirk throws a horrible interception.

                    Both teams have sucked, however. At one point there were like 3-4 fumbles in a row (back to back to back)
                    you won the NFCE because RG3 was fantastic last year, the Eagles sucked, and the Cowboys are the Cowboys. Same goes for the Giants. Shanny might not need to be fired, he might just quit like he nearly did last year.

                    No idea wtf the Eagles were doing today, didnt see the game so can't comment much on it, but holy **** that is just bad.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

                      I was fully expecting the referees to bail the Patriots out once again. I'm happy to see it didn't happen.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

                        The Cowboys are choking away a 23 point second half lead to the Matt Flynn led Packers.

                        Why Dallas gets so much attention every year is mind boggling. Winning and success aren't enough to justify attention in today's media environment. It's all about big markets and drama.
                        Last edited by hoosierguy; 12-15-2013, 07:56 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

                          Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                          you won the NFCE because RG3 was fantastic last year, the Eagles sucked, and the Cowboys are the Cowboys. Same goes for the Giants. Shanny might not need to be fired, he might just quit like he nearly did last year.

                          No idea wtf the Eagles were doing today, didnt see the game so can't comment much on it, but holy **** that is just bad.
                          You mean the rumor the "sources" leaked that everyone is Ashburn denied. Not to mention MS homself said he keeps three things in his office (an IPaD being one).

                          Never denied the NFCe sucked last year

                          Missed the Eagles game as well. Man, Eli is mind boggling on how up and down his career goes

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

                            Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                            I think that Eli has had the most bizarre career of any QB in NFL history.
                            You could say he's the modern day Jim Plunkett won 2 SBs and yet is not in the HOF(and I don't think Eli will unless he manages to win another and with him its highly possible) or considered to have an HOF career ironically enough he was drafted one spot ahead of Archie.

                            As for Dallas getting the attention they're in a division that's part of a big media market the NFC East. Who as much as I like to rag on is a far better division than the AFC South this year how anyone would dispute that is beyond me.

                            Winning does get attention I mean we got attention when Manning was here and Indy is as small market as you can get considering. We get attention with Luck but the on the field product is rather dull these days compared to the Manning era.

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

                              Guys you won't believe it!

                              Romo picked with the game on the line and Dallas up front by 5. Ball at Dallas' 13.
                              Never forget

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2013 non-Colts thread

                                Originally posted by Johanvil View Post
                                Guys you won't believe it!

                                Romo picked with the game on the line and Dallas up front by 5. Ball at Dallas' 13.
                                Why throw one when you can throw TWO crucial interceptions! That's your $100 million QB Jerruh.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X