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

    Peyton used to go to some games back in the day. It seems as though he stopped going once his fame reached a sky high level. Or maybe it was just because the Pacers were complete crap during the prime years of his career here. Here's a pic of him and Eli at a game in 04. I don't remember ever seeing any pics/mention of him at a game in his later years here.



    http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/larry...012_03_07.html

    Comment


    • Re: Colts-Broncos

      Originally posted by bunt View Post
      Says a guy who I'm guessing has never met or spoken with Peyton, his family, his friends, or anyone with even a remote connection to the guy. Mmmmkay
      Having been close friends with his former personal assistant's fiance, and hearing the stories of how much of a ****weed PM was in private, it wouldn't surprise me at all to know that his tears were forced. People have propped Peyton Manning up as if he's some sort of God and he is not. "if Peyton weren't a Colt LOS might not have been built". Yeah and Peyton was getting paid pretty handsomely (including $26 million to not play a single snap his last season with the Colts) the whole time too, so let's not act like he was just here building the fan base out of the goodness of his heart. I actually heard someone recently try to give him credit for buying the "down on their luck" Papa John's locations in Colorado to help out the store owners. Give me a freaking break! Peyton Manning is a business man and a politician. If he truly wanted to end his career with the Colts he could have renegotiated his damn contract so that we could have afforded to keep Reggie, Robert, draft Luck, etc. He didn't. He happily accepted his release so that he could go auction off his name to the highest bidder in free agency.

      I've been sick of the Peyton Manning worship in this state since he was still slinging TDs for the Colts. Crazily enough, it has gotten worse since he put on a different team's jersey. I hope the Colts annihilate the Broncos and Peyton has the worst damn game of his career, and on top of that I hope the Broncos continue to lose so that the Colts have home-field advantage in the playoffs. Screw Manning and the Doncos!

      Comment


      • Re: Colts-Broncos

        Originally posted by SMosley21 View Post
        Having been close friends with his former personal assistant's fiance, and hearing the stories of how much of a ****weed PM was in private, it wouldn't surprise me at all to know that his tears were forced. People have propped Peyton Manning up as if he's some sort of God and he is not. "if Peyton weren't a Colt LOS might not have been built". Yeah and Peyton was getting paid pretty handsomely (including $26 million to not play a single snap his last season with the Colts) the whole time too, so let's not act like he was just here building the fan base out of the goodness of his heart. I actually heard someone recently try to give him credit for buying the "down on their luck" Papa John's locations in Colorado to help out the store owners. Give me a freaking break! Peyton Manning is a business man and a politician. If he truly wanted to end his career with the Colts he could have renegotiated his damn contract so that we could have afforded to keep Reggie, Robert, draft Luck, etc. He didn't. He happily accepted his release so that he could go auction off his name to the highest bidder in free agency.

        I've been sick of the Peyton Manning worship in this state since he was still slinging TDs for the Colts. Crazily enough, it has gotten worse since he put on a different team's jersey. I hope the Colts annihilate the Broncos and Peyton has the worst damn game of his career, and on top of that I hope the Broncos continue to lose so that the Colts have home-field advantage in the playoffs. Screw Manning and the Doncos!


        Comment


        • Re: Colts-Broncos

          Originally posted by cdash View Post
          Yeah when you think about it, it only makes sense. Denver is jumping all over teams so quickly that they really don't have any choice but to throw the ball to catch up.

          Weird question to pose but: What would you do if we won the coin toss? Would you want the ball first so that your offense could set the tempo and (with any luck, no pun intended) grab an early lead? The risk there is that we all know Peyton is the master of the two minute drill before halftime, and if he successfully completed that and then they got the ball to start the second half it could put us in a hole. The other side is to defer and let Manning and the offense go out first, hope they are sluggish and you can get a stop, but run the real risk of going down 7-0 and then having to worry about the offense playing with a sense of urgency to score because they know Denver is going to pile on the points.
          I say give Denver the ball first and hope that the emotions get the best of Manning and he throws a pick on that opening drive.

          Comment


          • Re: Colts-Broncos

            Originally posted by SMosley21 View Post
            I say give Denver the ball first and hope that the emotions get the best of Manning and he throws a pick on that opening drive.

            Yeah, and even if he scores 7, I still think it would be the right call. As slow as our offense starts, I feel that electing to receive would just be shooting ourselves in the foot. It would be nice to have the peace of mind of knowing that Manning wasn't getting the ball back to start the second half.

            Comment


            • Re: Colts-Broncos

              I'm not sure that even Peyton would have expected himself to come back and play at the level he has this year. Simply incredible.

              That said, the Colts made the right move long-term to go with Luck, who will likely lead the Colts to multiple Super Bowls in his own right. Peyton also has a better team around him in Denver than he would have here. The rare win-win scenario for everyone.

              Comment


              • Re: Colts-Broncos

                Originally posted by Shade View Post
                I'm not sure that even Peyton would have expected himself to come back and play at the level he has this year. Simply incredible.

                That said, the Colts made the right move long-term to go with Luck, who will likely lead the Colts to multiple Super Bowls in his own right. Peyton also has a better team around him in Denver than he would have here. The rare win-win scenario for everyone.
                Hopefully. But "multiple" is very very hard. Manning is one of the GOATs, but he led us to the lowest number that quantifies as "multiple". And it took him 9 seasons to get there.

                Manning didn't win a playoff game until his sixth season. Can you imagine if it takes Luck that long? People will be incredibly restless.

                Comment


                • Re: Colts-Broncos

                  Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                  Hopefully. But "multiple" is very very hard. Manning is one of the GOATs, but he led us to the lowest number that quantifies as "multiple". And it took him 9 seasons to get there.

                  Manning didn't win a playoff game until his sixth season. Can you imagine if it takes Luck that long? People will be incredibly restless.
                  I think the advantage that Luck has (and hopefully will continue to have) over Manning is a more balanced team surrounding him. There were several years where it was basically just "let's see how far Peyton can take us this year."

                  Comment


                  • Re: Colts-Broncos

                    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                    Hopefully. But "multiple" is very very hard. Manning is one of the GOATs, but he led us to the lowest number that quantifies as "multiple". And it took him 9 seasons to get there.

                    Manning didn't win a playoff game until his sixth season. Can you imagine if it takes Luck that long? People will be incredibly restless.
                    I feel pretty confident in saying that I believe Luck will lead us to at least two SBs if he has anywhere near the longevity that Peyton has had.

                    By the time Peyton and Brady retire, I think Luck will be the best QB in the game.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Colts-Broncos

                      Originally posted by SMosley21 View Post
                      Having been close friends with his former personal assistant's fiance, and hearing the stories of how much of a ****weed PM was in private, it wouldn't surprise me at all to know that his tears were forced. People have propped Peyton Manning up as if he's some sort of God and he is not. "if Peyton weren't a Colt LOS might not have been built". Yeah and Peyton was getting paid pretty handsomely (including $26 million to not play a single snap his last season with the Colts) the whole time too, so let's not act like he was just here building the fan base out of the goodness of his heart. I actually heard someone recently try to give him credit for buying the "down on their luck" Papa John's locations in Colorado to help out the store owners. Give me a freaking break! Peyton Manning is a business man and a politician. If he truly wanted to end his career with the Colts he could have renegotiated his damn contract so that we could have afforded to keep Reggie, Robert, draft Luck, etc. He didn't. He happily accepted his release so that he could go auction off his name to the highest bidder in free agency.

                      I've been sick of the Peyton Manning worship in this state since he was still slinging TDs for the Colts. Crazily enough, it has gotten worse since he put on a different team's jersey. I hope the Colts annihilate the Broncos and Peyton has the worst damn game of his career, and on top of that I hope the Broncos continue to lose so that the Colts have home-field advantage in the playoffs. Screw Manning and the Doncos!
                      Forced tears? Come on.
                      Super Bowl XLI Champions
                      2000 Eastern Conference Champions




                      Comment


                      • Re: Colts-Broncos

                        anyone that has a problem with PG supporting the Broncos honestly kinda blows my mind. it's not like he likes them out of spite, or only became a fan once Peyton went there or something. hell, even if he got a suite at the Luke Sunday night and was wearing all orange I'd be fine with it. it's his favorite team, you don't just hide it, definitely not switch allegiances, because a city that drafted you in a different sport also has a football team.

                        not like he's rocking a Bulls hat on the team plane or something...

                        Comment


                        • Re: Colts-Broncos

                          oh, and we could have kept Peyton and kept Reggie and Mathis. no contract restructuring was needed. and not to rehash, but keeping both Peyton and Luck would have been one of the most dramatic wastes of resources in NFL history. that was never, ever, feasible.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Colts-Broncos

                            Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                            oh, and we could have kept Peyton and kept Reggie and Mathis. no contract restructuring was needed. and not to rehash, but keeping both Peyton and Luck would have been one of the most dramatic wastes of resources in NFL history. that was never, ever, feasible.
                            Yep, that just would not have worked. Would have been Jets-like drama every week.

                            You just don't sit players of Luck's caliber for years. All it is doing is hurting him. That really never was a choice, although I remember toying with the idea in my head, just because I didn't want to see Peyton go, and I wanted to be set for the future, but that's a perfect world, and was never going to be realistic.
                            Super Bowl XLI Champions
                            2000 Eastern Conference Champions




                            Comment


                            • Re: Colts-Broncos

                              Originally posted by SMosley21 View Post
                              Having been close friends with his former personal assistant's fiance, and hearing the stories of how much of a ****weed PM was in private, it wouldn't surprise me at all to know that his tears were forced. People have propped Peyton Manning up as if he's some sort of God and he is not. "if Peyton weren't a Colt LOS might not have been built". Yeah and Peyton was getting paid pretty handsomely (including $26 million to not play a single snap his last season with the Colts) the whole time too, so let's not act like he was just here building the fan base out of the goodness of his heart. I actually heard someone recently try to give him credit for buying the "down on their luck" Papa John's locations in Colorado to help out the store owners. Give me a freaking break! Peyton Manning is a business man and a politician. If he truly wanted to end his career with the Colts he could have renegotiated his damn contract so that we could have afforded to keep Reggie, Robert, draft Luck, etc. He didn't. He happily accepted his release so that he could go auction off his name to the highest bidder in free agency.

                              I've been sick of the Peyton Manning worship in this state since he was still slinging TDs for the Colts. Crazily enough, it has gotten worse since he put on a different team's jersey. I hope the Colts annihilate the Broncos and Peyton has the worst damn game of his career, and on top of that I hope the Broncos continue to lose so that the Colts have home-field advantage in the playoffs. Screw Manning and the Doncos!
                              Can you give us some examples of Manning's behind the scenes behavior? Don't leave us hanging.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Colts-Broncos

                                Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                                anyone that has a problem with PG supporting the Broncos honestly kinda blows my mind. it's not like he likes them out of spite, or only became a fan once Peyton went there or something. hell, even if he got a suite at the Luke Sunday night and was wearing all orange I'd be fine with it. it's his favorite team, you don't just hide it, definitely not switch allegiances, because a city that drafted you in a different sport also has a football team.

                                not like he's rocking a Bulls hat on the team plane or something...
                                But then again don't pull a George Hill (which he hasn't) and ***** when opposing team fans come into BLF to support who ever.
                                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

                                Working...
                                X