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 Peyton Manning thread

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

  • Re: 2013 Peyton Manning thread

    I love Peyton, but I want to win that Broncos game more than any other regular season game. Beating Peyton in the playoffs would be even better (and probably more likely, maybe not this year but next year).

    Comment


    • Re: 2013 Peyton Manning thread

      Originally posted by idioteque View Post
      I love Peyton, but I want to win that Broncos game more than any other regular season game. Beating Peyton in the playoffs would be even better (and probably more likely, maybe not this year but next year).
      I want it badly too. Winning that game would be a huge symbolic victory for the Colts.

      Comment


      • Re: 2013 Peyton Manning thread

        It's awesome watching him work and that team in general. He is in maybe the best stretch of his career, and good for him. He is absolutely lights out.

        HOWEVER.

        I see a lot of timing routes... and we *all* know what happens to this stuff in the playoffs. In the playoffs, teams with actual defenses make it in. Not only that.... they increase their intensity and level of play. Not only that... but defenses adjust and start taking away options. Denver's offense is running at 100% right now, we're seeing their peak. They're peaking too early. The opposition they're facing now will not be the opposition they see in the playoffs, and they *will* have way more struggles. We're seeing another one of those amazing regular seasons unfold. It's the peaking team going *in* to the playoffs that usually goes all the way.
        Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 09-24-2013, 12:50 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: 2013 Peyton Manning thread

          Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
          It's awesome watching him work and that team in general. He is in maybe the best stretch of his career, and good for him. He is absolutely lights out.

          HOWEVER.

          I see a lot of timing routes... and we *all* know what happens to this stuff in the playoffs. In the playoffs, teams with actual defenses make it in. Not only that.... they increase their intensity and level of play. Not only that... but defenses adjust and start taking away options. Denver's offense is running at 100% right now, we're seeing their peak. They're peaking too early. The opposition they're facing now will not be the opposition they see in the playoffs, and they *will* have way more struggles. We're seeing another one of those amazing regular seasons unfold. It's the peaking team going *in* to the playoffs that usually goes all the way.
          I am inclined to agree. I still remember the last game I ever attended in the RCA Dome, Week 16 of 2004 when Peyton led a comeback to beat the Chargers. Leaving the stadium I was sure it was going to be our year. Then we toasted Denver at home in the first playoff game and it seemed even more likely. What happened next? We had to play a divisional game in Foxburo in terrible conditions, the Patriots defense interrupted all of our timing routes, Peyton got happy feet in the pocket, and we lost 20-3. The Colts offense was historically good in the regular season that year, but it didn't matter in New England in January. I would love to see Peyton overcome that this year (if it isn't against the Colts) but I don't have faith in it happening. The difference of course is Denver's elite defense, but really with as good as our offense was you would expect us to beat the Patriots if the defense only gave up 20.

          Comment


          • Re: 2013 Peyton Manning thread

            Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
            I want it badly too. Winning that game would be a huge symbolic victory for the Colts.
            How would it really be symbolic? I mean it was the right decision(I just thought Jim was a total tool in how he handled it but I digress) long term.

            I guess its like how Montana beat the Niners when he returned but in the end the Niners got another SB out of Steve Young and Montana had decent years in KC but no ring.

            Nobody really cares that Montana beat them upon his return but they will always remember the SB victory.

            That's how I hope it turns out for us regardless of the Colts/Broncos outcome.

            Comment


            • Re: 2013 Peyton Manning thread

              Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
              How would it really be symbolic?
              C'mon, are you kidding????

              Comment


              • Re: 2013 Peyton Manning thread

                Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                C'mon, are you kidding????
                No I'm not look while it doesn't seem like it to some people the Colts in general along with the fans have moved on from Manning and vice versa. At this point its really the media that's keeping this going with this manufactured drama of Manning wanting to prove Irsay wrong(on some level its true but its not as if he's bitter like Grandpa Favre)

                It doesn't seem like it because he's still playing and at a high level no less.

                I know the hype for the Colts/Broncos game will be beyond obnoxious and its not until late October but if we win great I hope it happens but if we lose that doesn't mean our season was over or its the wrong decision. We just lost a game to a good team.

                It didn't affect the Packers when they got swept by Grandpa Favre they won the SB a year later in a place he never could win .. Dallas.

                Or the Niners who won an SB with Steve Young and Montana didn't win anything in KC.
                Last edited by Basketball Fan; 09-24-2013, 08:37 PM.

                Comment


                • Re: 2013 Peyton Manning thread

                  Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
                  I know the hype for the Colts/Broncos game will be beyond obnoxious and its not until late October but if we win great I hope it happens but if we lose that doesn't mean our season was over or its the wrong decision. We just lost a game to a good team.
                  I'm not saying that it's going to completely define the season, nor am I saying that the season is over if we lose the game. Also, I'm not saying that the game is going to prove one side or the other right. I don't think that the Colts will win and I will be able to move on just fine if we don't. All I'm saying is that it would be a nice symbolic victory with the entire country watching. It would be an absolutely huge win for the franchise. No, we aren't going to get the Lombardi trophy if we win that game, but it would be a statement that said we were fine without Manning.

                  Skip Bayless tweet last night:

                  For last year, this year and the next 2 years - Peyton or Luck, Colts fans? Not even close. PEYTON.

                  https://twitter.com/RealSkipBayless/...28100832305152

                  Now, it's fine to dismiss Bayless as a lunatic, but plenty of people agree with him that the Colts made a mistake when they cut Manning. This would be a HUGE symbolic win. It's going to be one of the most hyped regular season games in recent history. The guy who won us a Super Bowl, saved our bottom feeder franchise, and practically built that palace of a stadium, is going to return after being CUT from the team.....all while being as good as ever. That's a big deal. It just counts as one game, but it's one that we likely won't ever forget.......

                  The first two regular season wins against the Pats in Foxboro were just regular season games, but they were also symbolic victories which showed that the Colts were finally able to beat the Pats.

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2013 Peyton Manning thread

                    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                    I'm not saying that it's going to completely define the season, nor am I saying that the season is over if we lose the game. Also, I'm not saying that the game is going to prove one side or the other right. I don't think that the Colts will win and I will be able to move on just fine if we don't. All I'm saying is that it would be a nice symbolic victory with the entire country watching. It would be an absolutely huge win for the franchise. No, we aren't going to get the Lombardi trophy if we win that game, but it would be a statement that said we were fine without Manning.

                    Skip Bayless tweet last night:

                    For last year, this year and the next 2 years - Peyton or Luck, Colts fans? Not even close. PEYTON.

                    https://twitter.com/RealSkipBayless/...28100832305152

                    Now, it's fine to dismiss Bayless as a lunatic, but plenty of people agree with him that the Colts made a mistake when they cut Manning. This would be a HUGE symbolic win. It's going to be one of the most hyped regular season games in recent history. The guy who won us a Super Bowl, saved our bottom feeder franchise, and practically built that palace of a stadium, is going to return after being CUT from the team.....all while being as good as ever. That's a big deal. It just counts as one game, but it's one that we likely won't ever forget.......

                    The first two regular season wins against the Pats in Foxboro were just regular season games, but they were also symbolic victories which showed that the Colts were finally able to beat the Pats.

                    Skip's not a lunatic a sensationalistic tool yes but not a lunatic... he's way too media savvy for that one and people buy into it.

                    I mean he also says Tebow should still be the Broncos QB even though Manning is clearly the better option regardless of logic. I mean there are some 49ers fans who think Montana was a better choice over Steve Young to this day they are people you can't change their opinion no matter what.

                    I really think at this point nobody(with a rational thought) thinks the Colts live and die by Manning anymore because of Luck if anything most Colts fans were over him when we were in the throes of possibly getting Luck to begin with wearing jerseys rooting for every loss until we drafted Luck.

                    Just goes to show how fans easily move on when you have a future to look forward to.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2013 Peyton Manning thread

                      dude's playing a video game out there. 28/34 for 327 and 4 scores. that's just another game for this guy.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2013 Peyton Manning thread

                        There's still some arm strength there too. Those you didn't see it, you should check out the pass down the middle to Decker. Excellent.
                        Never forget

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2013 Peyton Manning thread

                          The greatest regular season quarterback in National Football League history.

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2013 Peyton Manning thread

                            We should all be glad the Manning never went to the Texans

                            http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/rumors...113058734.html


                            Peyton Manning interested in joining Texans?
                            Mark J. Miller February 14, 2012 6:30 AM
                            Scoop Du Jour
                            View gallery
                            .
                            US Presswire
                            Four-time NFL MVP Peyton Manning is still a member of the Indianapolis Colts, but that's not stopping plenty of other teams from salivating over the possibility that the folks in Indy are going to let him loose soon.
                            Houston Texans fans suddenly have the idea that Manning could be coming their way due to a report from KTRK Houston. "Someone … who is close friends with the Manning family says Peyton is definitely interested in possibly coming to the Texans," the station reports. "The person who knows the Mannings says Peyton wants to play on a team that has a chance of going to a Super Bowl, and the Texans fit that description."

                            The fact that the Texans play in the same division as the Colts is said to be a plus, KTRK reports, since Manning already knows all of the teams involved well.

                            The Texans won the division last season while the Colts went 2-14 without Manning, good enough to be worst in the league and qualify the Colts for the top overall draft pick this year, which will likely be Manning's successor.

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2013 Peyton Manning thread

                              It breaks my heart to see him do it with Denver, but I would love to see him break that TD single season record, because we all know he could have easily had more than 49 that year.

                              Still happy with Andrew, but seeing this makes me pine for Manning a little. Until January.

                              Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2013 Peyton Manning thread

                                This Broncos team is identical to the 04 Colts team. Demarius Thomas is Marvin Harrison. Decker is Wayne. Welker is Brandon Stokley. That 04 Colts team had a better running back, Edgerrin James. I would expect this Broncos team to also lose in the playoffs. Peyton cannot be trusted in the post season
                                Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X