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

    He looked "exacerbated"?

    Kellen Clemson?

    I'm not Graham R Nahtzi, but a writer (even for a blog) needs to check stuff
    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

    Comment


    • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

      Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
      He looked "exacerbated"?

      Kellen Clemson?

      I'm not Graham R Nahtzi, but a writer (even for a blog) needs to check stuff
      I thought those were the comments section.

      Comment


      • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

        Brad Wells is a moron.

        Comment


        • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

          He does come across as the stereotypical New York d-bag but putting that aside I thought what he said was rather well reasoned considering how he doesn't care for Pagano's coaching to begin with. I expected him to be a lot more irrational about the whole thing after yesterday's game

          Comment


          • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

            If Pagano is baffled he needs to look in the mirror. This is a guy that never does anything different and won't bench players who are under-performing? Can't be too stubborn as a coach. Be flexible....shake it up. C'mon Chuck.
            Last edited by presto123; 11-25-2013, 02:56 PM.

            Comment


            • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

              Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
              Here is a great observation from the poster GoBigBlue88 at coltfreaks.com:

              Look, Trent Richardson just isn't a good RB. I'm sorry some of you need this spelled out for you every week, but he's not. Great example today -- off-tackle run where TE drives his man wide, Castonzo seals off the interior defender. Wide open hole for Richardson. He hits it running hard in one direction, he goes 10 yards before he encounters a defender. Instead, he stutter steps in the hole. There is no reason for doing this, no defender around. He just stutter steps because he's unsure. And he's so slow, he gets tripped up from behind. Gain of 2. This guy is slow, and turns 10-yard gains into 2-yard gains. It was a terrible trade. No amount of practice, coaching or offseason will make it a good trade. At best, his future is a 3rd down or goal line back.

              http://coltfreaks.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=508

              Perfectly said.

              That's not the first time where he has stutter stepped and turned a potential long gain into a 2 yard one. This guy is just not any good. Yes, we all know the line is bad, but Ahmad Bradshaw and Donald Brown each have/were able to have a couple of shinning moments this season. T-Rich hasn't. He's slow and is not a good running back.

              I tried to sip the Koolaide on this. I supported the trade when it first happened because I was under the impression that we were getting a somewhat decent RB, so I guess I'm guilty of some Monday morning quarterbacking. But who cares what I think? I'm just some Joe Schmo on a message board. Those who run this team should be held accountable for trading a first round pick for a bad running back. I'm not even going to watch the draft next year. It's going to be too irritating when we see Cleveland picking for us.

              At this point, it's a massive flop of a trade. Even though not everything is T-Rich's fault, he's added absolutely nothing of value. At some point throughout a season, any good running back can find ways to sometimes compensate for a bad line. T-Rich never does, and he misses holes even when the line does their job. We could play one of the yellow jacket CSC event staff workers and have the same results.
              This cannot be correct kid minneapolis said it's the line's fault and always has been the line's fault.
              Counting down the days untill DJ Augustin's contract expires.

              Comment


              • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                Originally posted by Hypnotiq View Post
                This cannot be correct kid minneapolis said it's the line's fault and always has been the line's fault.
                .

                Also, it is how we use Trent and that is how you explain Bradshaw doing well this year, Brown doing well this year, and Ballard running behind a worse offensive line last year and doing a much better job.

                There was a play that Luck found Trent in the flat. Trent had his back to the defender when he caught and did this spin move to break the tackle and I am thinking this is going to be a big gain. The defender quickly recovers and tackles Trent for a minimal gain. The guy just does not have that burst at all.

                I did have to laugh when Herron came in and ripped off 33 yards on four carries. I know it was garbage time, but it was nice to see a RB on our team gain some yards.

                Comment


                • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                  There is a huge lack of a playmaker in the WR corp. Hell, screw the playmaker. Someone who will will show some consistency in catching the ball bar Hilton who will help us get a first down. We have reached a point that most of the time, we hope for a penalty to get us a first down because otherwise there is no much chance. It's that bad at the start of the games and even later on. I see the current corp and I am in despair.

                  I am also pissed off with not using Rogers. I know there is an anticipation and a bit of hype around the kid and possibly will expect the second coming but ffs give him a freaking chance and at least let him blew it first. He cannot be worse than that bum DHB. I don't care if he has character issues. If he is gonna help this team now, use him. We would welcome any help in the WR's.
                  Never forget

                  Comment


                  • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                    Teams that aren't good still find ways to get their best receiver the ball, yet we can't seem to figure a way out to consistently get it to T.Y. Look at Cleveland with Josh Gordon. Sure, Gordon is better than Hilton, but Weeden is certainly worse than Luck. Yet Cleveland consistently finds a way to get the ball to their most talented receiver.

                    This is yet another reason why I think Pep Hamilton is a bad offensive coordinator. We know that opponents are going to try to take T.Y. out of the game, yet we don't seem to even try to adjust. Why can't we try some new plays designed to get T.Y. open? He's by far the best play maker in this offense, yet we are still treating him like an afterthought. We're still making David freaking Reed the target of plays. I just see no creation and adjustments from Pep. It's the same boring formations and plays which defenses have studied. T.Y is easy to take out of the game when the opponent knows exactly what's coming. We need to mix it up and make getting him the ball the main point of our offense through a mixture of short and long plays. He can do a better job of being more physical with defenders, but most of the problem is with the awful offensive coordinating.

                    I was really excited about T.Y. after the Houston game, but it's been a buzz kill since then.

                    Does anyone honestly think that T.Y. would be this irrelevant if Arians was still here? Hell no. He would figure out a way to consistently get T.Y. the ball. Pep is a complete joke of a coordinator compared to Arians. I'd do anything to have Arians back.
                    Last edited by Sollozzo; 11-25-2013, 05:06 PM.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                      We have too many coaches and a GM with too little experience.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                        Originally posted by thewholefnshow31 View Post
                        .


                        There was a play that Luck found Trent in the flat. Trent had his back to the defender when he caught and did this spin move to break the tackle and I am thinking this is going to be a big gain. The defender quickly recovers and tackles Trent for a minimal gain. The guy just does not have that burst at all.
                        Except he actually runs faster than Donald Brown, someone who every one talks about how quick he is. And before it's pointed out that burst was said, not speed, I'll just point to their 40 times, which is a measurement of how fast a guy gets out of the blocks (burst) and gets up to speed.

                        Trent made that play, with the spin move. I'm all for complaints, hell I do it a lot, but I just hate it when things are made up.
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                          You all are hilarious. You jump on any running back that comes in for a 30 yard game. DBrown, Herron, whoever. This offense sucks right now, there is very little to take from any individual run that some lucky ******* breaks off. DBrown had 1 yard last game, after you all were saying how great he is. You have to realize this offense sucks right now.
                          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 Hypnotiq View Post
                            This cannot be correct kid minneapolis said it's the line's fault and always has been the line's fault.
                            Are you saying the o-line is playing well? What did I say that wasn't correct? It was the o-line that started this downward spiral, they still are sucking. Now the rest of the team is following suit. I just don't see the point of your snide remark.
                            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 would think after the stinkers the entire offense has laid for the past three weeks, that the complaints would finally start broadening more instead of staying so focused on just one guy. Guess not.
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Week 12: @ Cardinals

                                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                                I would think after the stinkers the entire offense has laid for the past three weeks, that the complaints would finally start broadening more instead of staying so focused on just one guy. Guess not.
                                There is plenty of broad criticism throughout this thread. Poor coaching, bad offensive coordinating, awful defense, pitiful receiving corps, bad quarterback decision making, bad O-line, and lousy running game have all been mentioned.

                                The T-Rich trade is always going to be a big issue though.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X