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

Colts-Broncos

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

  • Re: Colts-Broncos

    Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
    Yes but its not just him its going to be the Broncos team with him there's the rub here. That's why I would prefer retirement for these tributes because its just them and them alone.

    Last night was just Peyton. His teammates got out of his way and let him enjoy that moment to himself. That was a special and classy tribute by the Colts, and I'm so glad that they did it the way they did. There's no way that they could have just ignored the situation. Both the fans and Peyton deserved it. I don't see how anyone could possibly criticize that after seeing how perfectly it played out.

    It's already been three years since he last took a snap here. If we would have waited until he retired to do a tribute, then it would have been 6-7 years. We had to take advantage of the moment last night and give him a tribute while his time here was still fresh. Besides, he'll get a Ring of Honor ceremony someday. Last night wasn't his final ovation at Lucas Oil.

    Comment


    • Re: Colts-Broncos

      Passing game looked like straight crap in crunch time. Luck had almost 200 at the half and ended with like 229? By no means poor play, just bad timing for the poor play. Still, to play that well for a good chunk and have to fell like you escaped with the win. Yikes!

      Thanks to the D and ST (fumble force and recovery) and home field in this one! Personally, I'm completely unimpressed by Richardson so far. I can count his decent plays on one hand. The remainder are just "meh" or worse. Can't say I'm totally surprised how much action Brown saw last night. Hope Richardson comes around at some point this year, or maybe with a complete off-season in our program.

      Great win! More than made up for the SD dud last week.
      I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

      -Emiliano Zapata

      Comment


      • Re: Colts-Broncos

        ^^ I'm glad to see you realized that the Colts won the game.

        They don't ask HOW, they just ask WHO.

        Comment


        • Re: Colts-Broncos

          What?!!? Peyton Manning throws a pick at a critical juncture and comes up short in a "big game"?? Geez, say it isn't so. I didn't see that coming. I just don't know what to say or how to feel, because that's SOOOOO unexpected from him~


          Name-calling signature removed

          Comment


          • Re: Colts-Broncos

            I'm like Vontae, thank goodness the Colts got that Tom Brady game out of the way.
            You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

            Comment


            • Re: Colts-Broncos

              Originally posted by Banta View Post
              What?!!? Peyton Manning throws a pick at a critical juncture and comes up short in a "big game"?? Geez, say it isn't so. I didn't see that coming. I just don't know what to say or how to feel, because that's SOOOOO unexpected from him~
              Yes, because getting hit while throwing had nothing to do with the INT.

              Comment


              • Re: Colts-Broncos

                Originally posted by Banta View Post
                What?!!? Peyton Manning throws a pick at a critical juncture and comes up short in a "big game"?? Geez, say it isn't so. I didn't see that coming. I just don't know what to say or how to feel, because that's SOOOOO unexpected from him~
                That would be funny if you hadn't missed the whole context of that play like Eleazar described it.
                Never forget

                Comment


                • Re: Colts-Broncos

                  Originally posted by PacersHomer View Post
                  LOL at all of the Manning fans who showed up. That's what you get for being a fake fan.
                  Who knew you couldn't be a Manning fan AND a colts fan at the same time

                  Comment


                  • Re: Colts-Broncos

                    Originally posted by Johanvil View Post
                    That would be funny if you hadn't missed the whole context of that play like Eleazar described it.
                    Of course I know he was hit. And my comment on the game has no validity because there is no body of evidence showing any propensity for throwing picks at key moments or finding a way to lose in big games. At least he avoided the signature pick-6, though there were a few times you could see he was trying to work that in.

                    Yards, TDs, missed blocks, hits, whatever-- my only point was that it simply was no surprise. I know he's the best to ever lace 'em up, but after a decade+ of watching him, it just wasn't a surprise. Like the pick in the playoffs last year in OT. Not shocking.


                    Name-calling signature removed

                    Comment


                    • Re: Colts-Broncos

                      You know what also wouldn't have been shocking? A fourth quarter comeback.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Colts-Broncos

                        Originally posted by Banta View Post
                        Of course I know he was hit. And my comment on the game has no validity because there is no body of evidence showing any propensity for throwing picks at key moments or finding a way to lose in big games. At least he avoided the signature pick-6, though there were a few times you could see he was trying to work that in.

                        Yards, TDs, missed blocks, hits, whatever-- my only point was that it simply was no surprise. I know he's the best to ever lace 'em up, but after a decade+ of watching him, it just wasn't a surprise. Like the pick in the playoffs last year in OT. Not shocking.
                        For every late pick/bad throw he has he has a game winning TD drive or two. The truth is Manning is the most clutch QB in football, but just like in basketball where clutch players miss more last second shots than they make, when you are put in a situation where you need to be clutch enough times you are going to put up some duds. Manning has been in the position enough times that he has put up some duds, just like Tom Brady and every other "clutch" QB. The only difference is people focus on Manning's duds more than the focus on Tom Brady's. I have no idea why except maybe they expect more out of Manning, as they should, or because Tom Brady got a reputation for being clutch because he had a super clutch kicker.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Colts-Broncos

                          Post-game thoughts:

                          - Awesome post-game speech by Pagano. I agree about Irsay; I knew what he was trying to say about the Manning era; I think the wrong message was taken from it; I think he's a really great owner; he's absolutely right in the "adjustments" and corrections he's made to this organization; and the efforts he went to to commemorate an opposing player went beyond what most normal owners would do.
                          - Indy has now beaten, in my opinion, the other 3 top teams in the league --- San Fran, Seattle, and Denver. Hole. Eee. Cow. (And then loses to SD and Miami....)
                          - A lot of *****ing about our running backs, specifically Richardson. I'm telling you now... you have got to start looking at the atrocious run-blocking of our line as Culprit Numero Uno and Alpha and Omega. They are terrible. You don't like Rich's runs --- of course you don't. The line is getting absolutely eaten alive. They aren't opening holes, they're getting pushed back on every run play --- it's a rare occurrence when our backs have any room. DBrown is fun in those quick-hitting long runs, but is absolutely terrible in tough yardage situations. TRich is the opposite. Don't get fooled by the fact that DBrown busts a big run more often --- he's gotten a few more wide open holes to run through, and he also is more capable of bumping it outside when our line gets owned as usual. Overall, he's been no better than TRich. The O-LINE absolutely has to be our top priority this off-season (and this season)... Luck is getting pressure, also. Too many rushed throws and scampers. They are worse than last year, and were considered bad last year. I can tell from just straight observation, but if ya don't believe me, read this: http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/story...cent-continues. I'm extremely disappointed by our line... it's amazing we won this game with how bad they played. There is no argument you can make that tells me DBrown is playing well or above TRich, so we need to stop this charade. Both backs are struggling because our line is absolutely losing every play. I guarantee you; we fix this line, and *somehow* keep TRich and DBrown healthy, and you'll see one heckuva backfield tandem, but TRich absolutely needs to be the workhorse. He was up around 4ypc well into the game before our line went into the tank and he got stuffed behind the line about 6 straight runs, coincidentally, right about the time Satele went out, which leads me to...
                          - Vickerson needs to have his *** suspended for his absolutely massive breakdown in judgement the entire game, but SPECIFICALLY for his absolutely ridiculous, intentional, malicious straight-up right-hook *punch* to Satele's knee. I.... I can't remember seeing anything so terrible in an NFL game. Satele is likely to see extended time on the sidelines because of that absolutely ridiculous act of maliciousness.
                          - Manning's throws looked OFF after Mathis' sack... they fluttered and floated and looked weak. I hope there's nothing more to that.
                          - Manning... love that guy. Great pre-game warm-up tribute.
                          - Mathis --- God I love that man. What a perfect football player. What a model citizen. What a veteran and locker-room presence. Legend. I never would've thought he'd surpass Freeney, but he absolutely has. To switch positions so late in his career and have the impact he's having is phenomenal. This is a defensive end, who switched to linebacker at age 32, and is leading the league in sacks. Sometimes a guy is just a beast no matter where you stick him.
                          - Stop trying to get short, tough yards with DBrown. Stop expecting DHB to make difficult catches 40 yards downfield or along the sideline. Reduce the 3rd-and-1 throw attempts.
                          - Vinatieri --- looks like he's 25 again.
                          - Liking Havili, what a nice addition.
                          - Sergio Brown turning into a STs beast.
                          - Fleener --- you caught some balls. Thanks.
                          - Vontae Davis, Darius Butler, thank you. Our secondary, when healthy, is serious.
                          - Andrew Luck --- You all know what I think of this guy. Been saying it since before we drafted him, he's the best player I've ever seen. He just beat an undefeated Peyton Manning at LOS. Seriously. Seriously. No...... seriously. What did you do at age 24?
                          - Reggie --- get well, bro.
                          - New linebacker --- Pat MacAfee?
                          Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 10-21-2013, 11:08 AM.
                          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: Colts-Broncos

                            Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                            Who knew you couldn't be a Manning fan AND a colts fan at the same time
                            If you go to a game and cheer against the Colts you're not a Colts fan.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Colts-Broncos

                              All I got to say about TRich and Brown is that Ballard and Bradshaw were able to get yards behind this same OL.

                              Richardson seems to lack the vision and speed to be an every down back. He has the power you need in short yardage situations. He does a couple of things that made Edge great, blocking and always falls forwards. Good skills you want at RB, but I don't think it is likely he turns it around. He is a 4th round talent. I expect next year, if Ballard is healthy, Ballard will be our starter getting the majority of carries. With Richardson being the back-up and short yardage guy. Honestly, right now Carter looks like a better RB than Richardson.

                              Brown's problems should be well known by now. He is good in change of pace situations, and when he gets a hole that he can't miss he is 20 yards down field before the other team realizes it. If he doesn't get that hole he doesn't offer much.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Colts-Broncos

                                Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                                Post-game thoughts:

                                I'm telling you now... you have got to start looking at the atrocious run-blocking of our line as Culprit Numero Uno and Alpha and Omega. They are terrible. You don't like Rich's runs --- of course you don't. The line is getting absolutely eaten alive. They aren't opening holes, they're getting pushed back on every run play --- it's a rare occurrence when our backs have any room. DBrown is fun in those quick-hitting long runs, but is absolutely terrible in tough yardage situations. TRich is the opposite. Don't get fooled by the fact that DBrown busts a big run more often --- he's gotten a few more wide open holes to run through, and he also is more capable of bumping it outside when our line gets owned as usual. Overall, he's been no better than TRich. The O-LINE absolutely has to be our top priority this off-season (and this season)... Luck is getting pressure, also. Too many rushed throws and scampers. I'm extremely disappointed by our line... it's amazing we won this game with how bad they played. There is no argument you can make that tells me DBrown is playing well or above TRich, so we need to stop this charade. Both backs are struggling because our line is absolutely losing every play. I guarantee you; we fix this line, and *somehow* keep TRich and DBrown healthy, and you'll see one heckuva backfield tandem, but TRich absolutely needs to be the workhorse. He was up around 4ypc well into the game before our line went into the tank and he got stuffed behind the line about 6 straight runs.
                                The offensive line is likely the main culprit. But that goes back to why trading a 1st round pick for Richardson was a bad idea. Running backs are so dependent on the strength of their offensive lines. What has Richardson done that a guy off the street couldn't? Certainly not the yards per carry. He hasn't been terrible on 2nd or 3rd and short, but he hasn't been great either. He hasn't been involved as a receiver whatsoever. He's already fumbled twice and lost one. Basically all he's given over a replacement running back is good blitz pick up and some ability as a power runner. Am I missing something that he's doing out there?

                                So I agree that fixing the offensive line is the number one priority and that should help Richardson and Brown moving forward. That's one of the hardest tasks in football though, and now with the Richardson trade you have less assets to do it with. That's the problem with the Richardson trade, even if you go in with the assumption that Richardson is a great running back with a better line (which is reasonable but far from a guarantee). Right now though there would need to get quite a bit of improvement just to get back to average.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X