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

Week 12: @ Cardinals

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

  • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

    ^ Agreed.

    Tennessee was stupid to go away from Chris Johnson. He looked like his 09 self against us in the first half. I think they would have won that game if they kept going with him.

    Before the massacre in the desert, I tried to remain optimistic. After all, the road division games are always tough and we lost our fair share of them with Manning. So you can't ever be too upset when you come out of Houston and Tennessee with a win. But after the atrocity in Arizona, there was really no way to ignore that this is a bad football team right now. When an old Carson Palmer carves you up like he's Tom Brady, you know you're in trouble. And that Michael Floyd guy abused us as if he was Calvin Johnson.

    I'll give them one more shot. If we win against Tennessee, then we will be 8-4 and have the division wrapped up unless we lose out with Tennessee winning out. It would be tough to complain after that. But if we lose and Tennessee closes the gap to just one game, then it will be officially time to panic.

    Comment


    • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals




      No. What I do is share the blame on both parts and exactly because the line hasn't been bad on every damn snap and some times there was a gap but Rich failed to take advantage, I won't blame the OL only and let Richardson off the hook like you do. I understand his line doesn't help him a lot but he hasn't showed pretty much anything for us to be hopeful of. If you are good enough and even running behind a bad OL, you'll show something, even a small glimpse of your talent. At least a couple of times. He hasn't.
      No one has.
      Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 11-26-2013, 04:56 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: Week 12: @ Cardinals

        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
        If people are going to try and claim that playcalling and the oline are criticized just as much as Trent, you betcha. The good thing about the internet, is we have the ability to go back and look at exactly what is said, and it doesn't need to be a "he said, she said" debate. We've got the record.
        Yeah but what do you gain by pointing out how many posted negative things about one thing and the other? What will it change if indeed more people moan about Richardson and not the OL? That OL's struggles are overlooked? No, they are not. As I explained further down on my post, the complaints about the OL have been on HERE way before and after TR came in Indy.


        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
        That's nice that others have, but this forum hasn't. Instead, this forum thinks pointing out how ****** they are is the beginning to a joke.

        That's fine that you don't care about his 40 time, but when we're talking about things that can be backed up with cold hard numbers, I like to go with facts as opposed to people throwing crap against a wall and hoping it sticks.
        I am not disputing he had a good time in the combine. How does that translate in an actual game? How has it helped him so far? You haven't told me yet. I said that cause you keep saying it like we are supposed to be wowed and forget everything else we have seen in his games so far. All we have seen is lack of acceleration, hesitation to hit the hole when presented from his side. I know I know. It can't be backed. It's just throwing crap against the wall. That or we don't see the game, we just read other people's opinions and we just share them here.

        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
        Goodness....

        No one has ever said Trent doesn't have any blame, let's not go the route like on the Pacers forum and start building strawmen armies again.


        This goes especially to the first part.

        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
        The complaint is that pretty much ALL the focus on the running game, goes towards Trent. That was the point in me counting how many posts criticized the line. Not one single poster brought up the oline problems, nor play calling when it comes to specifically running the ball, before Kid did. Not one. So it's pretty disingenuous to try and say that by putting blame on two other areas that deserve it, is really saying that they're the only ones that deserve it.
        Because we pretty much have exhausted complaining about the line. We already knew. It goes without saying. You want people to start with a "The OL sucks but" before every related Rich post to feel OK? You go on a single game thread and single out posts like it was the first time someone spoke about Rich and the line. Richardson and what goes with him (traded our 1st pick and I don't care if it's in the 20's. It's still a 1st round pick.) makes you want to see way more from what he has already showed.
        Never forget

        Comment


        • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

          BTW I apologize to anyone who will rightly see it as boring reading cause I have the sense we're going in circles the last weeks around Richardson. Everyone has his opinions on this matter so personally Ill leave it at that.

          I just don't want you to think I'm that guy who wants to see someone fail miserably to prove his point. I honestly hope the kid comes good for us.
          Never forget

          Comment


          • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

            Originally posted by Suaveness View Post
            Can we just say everybody is sucking? Nobody is playing well (outside of Vinatieri and Mathis) and everybody has to get better. Trent, oline, Luck, whatever.

            What's bothered me the most over the course of the past few weeks isn't the offense. We knew the line sucked and having lost our best WR, we knew we were going to struggle. The most infuriating thing about the last few weeks has been the defense. They have absolutely no excuse to be playing this poorly all of a sudden. Poor running teams are running all over us and ****** QBs are playing like Manning against us. If the defense was playing like a competent bunch, that would allow the offense time to get things going better. But we get no TOs or stops whatsoever unless the other team makes mistakes, which doesn't seem to happen when you don't get pressure and their WRs are running free all over the field. Disgusting.
            Very good post.

            I posted it in the game thread that if your offense wants to get a 3rd down conversion, call the Colts D now. Seems that some things never change and this particular one is the most frustrating for me cause 1) it just sucks giving up 3rd and long after 3rd and long and 2) 3rd down conversion on both ends is one of the 3 main elements that decide a game alongside who wins the turnover battle and the redzone efficiency.
            Never forget

            Comment


            • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

              And we haven't exhausted railing on TRich???

              The thing that frustrates me is the general dismissal of the impact of the line. I'm not saying you guys don't acknowledge it... it's that you dismiss it. Even partially. Let's call it not fully appreciating it.

              We all know the line is transparent when it's working well. No one notices when they do good, only when they do bad. It's absolutely true, because when the line is doing their jobs, it allows us couch coaches to focus on the truly entertaining parts of the offense --- the "skill" players. The problem is... even the most skilled players can't function when the line is bad.

              This line wasn't a good line last year. They weren't good at the beginning of this year. But our skill players were so good, it masked it. After the San Fran game, the o-line went from "not good", to "not existent". And then we lost a few more skill players. Now the few studs we have (Luck, TRich, Hilton, Fleener), are barely keeping their head above water. Let's face it, they aren't even doing that.

              Our line has reduced Andrew Luck to being some dude with a neck beard. Think about that. This is Andrew Luck, we all know what he can do. He hasn't done anything of acclaim in a month. More, even. Our receivers --- nada. Our backs --- nope. You all get excited when DBrown gets 60 yards in a game. That's how bad things are. Your perception is so skewed that you get *excited* about a once-a-game 10-yard run by our backup.

              We haven't had a chance to see what TRich can do. This is the situation that most of you aren't realizing. We really can't even see what Luck can do. Luck isn't the Luck of last year.

              I'll go further though and lump on our offensive coordinator. It's the combination of Pep and our absolutely failing o-line that is the problem with this offense. The o-line is getting beat literally almost every play. It's not like the sun is shining on a dog's *** every 3-4 plays or so. They go multiple series before they "win" a play. Couple that with Pep's absolute inability to find ways to work around his atrocious o-line, and what you have is a disaster. Arians can play-call around a bad line. Pep hasn't shown the ability to do so.

              Pep's philosophy is probably a fine way to go WHEN things are falling in place. But right now, the bottom (o line) has dropped out of this offense, and he doesn't look like he has a f'n clue how to work around it.

              Yea, I harp on the o-line -- because I know how truly important they are to the function of the offense. And I watch these games, and I see them getting utterly dominated, which ripples down to the quarterback having no time to make his reads, no time to set and throw, no time for running plays to develop, no time for receivers to get separation. And then come on here and listen to everyone hilariously proclaim TRIch a bust. It's hilarious. You absolutely are not looking at the right things. You're observing a SYMPTOM and not the CAUSE. And we have MULTIPLE symptoms (not just TRich's production... look at everyone's production. Luck, Hilton... ), and for some reason, you all are focusing on ONE symptom.

              That's the frustrating thing for me. And then when I stand up and say, "Sigh... it's the o-line, guys." All I get is, "Dude, shut up about the line, so we can incessantly rail on TRich."
              Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 11-26-2013, 06:58 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: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                My only hope is looking at the Giants. They started the season in a systematic failure. Now they're on a 4-game win streak. Teams do get it together. (Well I guess they lost the last one.)
                Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 11-26-2013, 07:04 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: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                  Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                  My only hope is looking at the Giants. They started the season in a systematic failure. Now they're on a 4-game win streak. Teams do get it together. (Well I guess they lost the last one.)
                  But look at who the Giants played on that four game winning streak:

                  Vikings - Complete jokes. That was the game that Josh Freeman played.

                  Eagles - Matt Barkley took most of the QB snaps for Philly that game.

                  Raiders

                  Packers - were on their third string QB at that point.


                  Their four game winning streak was a complete mirage. They played against a bunch of joke quarterbacks. Once they ran into a real quarterback in Romo, they went back to losing.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                    But they put together some winning football after looking completely lost.
                    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: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                      I see even without my involvement we are still beating the everlasting **** out of that Trent Richardson/O-Line horse. I was really hoping I would be eating crow by this point on that trade :/

                      Comment


                      • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                        Welp guess what. The line still sucks. I hope my car will move forward on four flat tires.
                        Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 11-27-2013, 08:08 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: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                          Originally posted by Johanvil View Post
                          Because we pretty much have exhausted complaining about the line. We already knew. It goes without saying. You want people to start with a "The OL sucks but" before every related Rich post to feel OK? You go on a single game thread and single out posts like it was the first time someone spoke about Rich and the line. Richardson and what goes with him (traded our 1st pick and I don't care if it's in the 20's. It's still a 1st round pick.) makes you want to see way more from what he has already showed.
                          But you're not tired of complaining about Trent, even thought that's where the complaints started. That's exactly my point.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                            Originally posted by cdash View Post
                            I was really hoping I would be eating crow by this point on that trade :/
                            I was really hoping to eat crow about how awful the line is.

                            Looks like the 49ers game was just a flash in the pan.
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                              The Donald Thomas injury is symbolic of our poor luck this season. He wouldn't solve everything, but he sure as hell would help. Our four year $14 million LG goes down in the second game of the season. That's our season in a nutshell.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                                Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                                Yea, I harp on the o-line -- because I know how truly important they are to the function of the offense. And I watch these games, and I see them getting utterly dominated, which ripples down to the quarterback having no time to make his reads, no time to set and throw, no time for running plays to develop, no time for receivers to get separation.
                                Yep. Luck is "regressing" back to closer to how he played last year. The only real difference, which is a big one, is that he's not turning the ball over but his completion percentage has started to take a dive and his yardage is really starting to take a hit. Do we honestly think that Luck hasn't gotten much better, or that he's putting up crappy numbers because he's not getting enough support?
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X