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

Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

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

  • #91
    Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

    Originally posted by Cactus Jax View Post
    Where's the public outcry and people not being Colts fans anymore because the owner is out of control? I guarantee if Simon had this happen during the bad Pacer years recently, the Pacers would've been pretty much done for sure.

    Irsay shouldn't be so stupid, but it's not really a surprise to anyone that's seen him, heard him on twitter, etc.

    The story has been all over the national and local news, so I'd say it's been pretty embarrassing for the Colts. But as far as the Pacers are concerned, they put out a garbage product from 2004-10 that ran off their fans. If Hostess sold cupcakes with razors, then people would stop buying them. That's akin to the quality of Pacer basketball over that 6 year period. The Colts OTOH have an almost impeccable 15 year run of being one of the best run franchises in the NFL, which includes two Super Bowl appearances and a world championship. You reap what you sew, and the Colts have built up more than enough cred to easily absorb this. It's an embarrassing to Ir$ay, but the Colts will be unscathed. They are one of the best run organizations in sports.

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

      Originally posted by Cactus Jax View Post
      Where's the public outcry and people not being Colts fans anymore because the owner is out of control? I guarantee if Simon had this happen during the bad Pacer years recently, the Pacers would've been pretty much done for sure.

      Irsay shouldn't be so stupid, but it's not really a surprise to anyone that's seen him, heard him on twitter, etc.
      There is a big difference between guys being involved in shootouts in downtown Indianapolis or at strip clubs versus the owner being high as a kite and going 10 mph in a car. Leave the inferiority complex at the door. The Pacers made their bed during that time and they had to sleep in it.

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

        Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
        News blurb a bit earlier on WIBC said the pills in some of the bottles didn't match what was on the prescription label.
        Could easily say that they are used up pill bottles, and he splits his pills up so he can make sure he has them handy. Its not an indication of any crime. If the guy has a prescription for those pills, doesn't matter what he totes them around in.

        I think most people who abuse prescription drugs do not walk around with a pill bottle handy. They have them tucked away in ziplock bags in there pockets as to avoid any inquiry. Though most people are not billionaires either. So who knows what this cat does.
        You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

          Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
          Could easily say that they are used up pill bottles, and he splits his pills up so he can make sure he has them handy. Its not an indication of any crime. If the guy has a prescription for those pills, doesn't matter what he totes them around in.

          I think most people who abuse prescription drugs do not walk around with a pill bottle handy. They have them tucked away in ziplock bags in there pockets as to avoid any inquiry. Though most people are not billionaires either. So who knows what this cat does.
          I'm not 100% sure on the State of Indiana, but that would be illegally possessing a controlled substance, in some states. I'm pretty sure IN uses a similiar statute. Here it is for Texas.

          http://www.houstoncriminaldefender.c...ription-pills/

          You could get charged with a controlled substance for having pills from an expired prescription.
          Last edited by Since86; 03-17-2014, 03:49 PM.
          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

            I am sure the league is going to make an example of him which will be something of the order that he is suspended and has no involvement with the team for a good period of time. Just the same as any player. He has daughters who can be the face of the team so the Colts will not be affected. There is no reason to lose draft choices such that the team is punished for a guy who is medically incompetent.

            However he could get some jail time in a country club type facility or have to admit himself to a rehab center.
            Last edited by speakout4; 03-17-2014, 06:51 PM.

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

              Behind closed doors I'm sure these things are being mentioned/discussed...

              Nobody was injured
              No alcohol was involved
              Prescription meds are involved
              A legitimate medical procedure and rehab/recovery could be partially or fully to blame for falling off the wagon
              Charges and/or conviction would be a PR problem for the Colts that could include being an image problem for the city
              A conviction could lead to league sanctions that could hurt the team which would hurt the city
              And of course all of the good things the Colts have meant for the city will be mentioned as well as pointing out how charges and court would be a regular mention on Sunday football programs, Sunday football, Sunday Night Football, Monday Night Football, and Thursday Night Football as well as all of the cable sports programs. And it will be argued that negative PR for the Colts is negative PR for the city.
              A conviction, or prolonged legal battle, could negatively effect the city's SB bid

              There will be talk of a vigorous defense against the charges. There will be talk of the costs of taking this to trial on taxpayers in light of the defendant's ability to mount a legal defense. There will be talk and offers of preemptively enrolling in rehab. Donations to public programs will be mentioned (and implied that will happen only if that money doesn't have to be deferred for legal expenses).

              This all assumes Irsay doesn't destroy his own case on Twitter.....
              Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

              ------

              "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

              -John Wooden

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                Originally posted by Bball View Post
                Behind closed doors I'm sure these things are being mentioned/discussed...

                Nobody was injured
                No alcohol was involved
                Prescription meds are involved
                A legitimate medical procedure and rehab/recovery could be partially or fully to blame for falling off the wagon
                Charges and/or conviction would be a PR problem for the Colts that could include being an image problem for the city
                A conviction could lead to league sanctions that could hurt the team which would hurt the city
                And of course all of the good things the Colts have meant for the city will be mentioned as well as pointing out how charges and court would be a regular mention on Sunday football programs, Sunday football, Sunday Night Football, Monday Night Football, and Thursday Night Football as well as all of the cable sports programs. And it will be argued that negative PR for the Colts is negative PR for the city.
                A conviction, or prolonged legal battle, could negatively effect the city's SB bid

                There will be talk of a vigorous defense against the charges. There will be talk of the costs of taking this to trial on taxpayers in light of the defendant's ability to mount a legal defense. There will be talk and offers of preemptively enrolling in rehab. Donations to public programs will be mentioned (and implied that will happen only if that money doesn't have to be deferred for legal expenses).

                This all assumes Irsay doesn't destroy his own case on Twitter.....
                No alcohol, no one got hurt, Irsay wasn't speeding, and did not act in a manner that indicated he would be a threat to anyone. I think this will be looked at more as a medical situation and i just don't see this as hurting the Colts that much. Yes there will be sanctions but irsay will bear the brunt rather than the Colts. Likely no SB but irsay's worst reputation is that he is an addicted twitterer rather than an arrogant fool. Most people will see this for what it is , a man addicted to prescription drugs and a good lawyer with a good PR firm will generate lots of sympathy for him.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                  Still don't see why any logical person would flip their opinion of a SB in Indy because of this. He's a small part of the overall effort, if at all.
                  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


                  • #99
                    Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                    Listening to a report on tv last evening said it wouldn't hurt Indy's chances at all, but Indy has a slim chance anyway. New Orleans is front runner to get it since they'v e held so many and it ties in with some anninversary down there. They didn't think we had much chance for the next one either as Minnesota is due a reward for building a new taxpayer funded stadium.

                    I just wish I could remember where I heard that.
                    Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                      Yeah I can agree with that. It shouldn't hurt our chances much, but our chances weren't great to begin with.
                      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: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                        Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                        Still don't see why any logical person would flip their opinion of a SB in Indy because of this. He's a small part of the overall effort, if at all.
                        I could see the NFL spinning it as their excuse to not give Indy the SB even though they probably weren't planning for it to begin with but it will be spun as "See Irsay's actions caused Indy to lose the SB bid" even though they probably weren't going to get it anyways.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                          Why though. By all accounts, they loved having it in Indy. Doesn't make sense that they'd need an excuse.
                          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: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                            I don't think Indy will get this Super Bowl (has nothing to do with Irsay), and I honestly don't think we will get it for a long time. The NY one working out well opened the door for outdoor cold cities like Chicago, Boston, Washington, etc, to place bids. My guess is that there will be a rash of new cities bidding on Super Bowls. Cherish the memories from 2012 because it might be a long time before Indy gets it again.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                              I'm okay with Indy not getting the SB I rather the Colts win it than host it.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                                Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                                I don't think Indy will get this Super Bowl (has nothing to do with Irsay), and I honestly don't think we will get it for a long time. The NY one working out well opened the door for outdoor cold cities like Chicago, Boston, Washington, etc, to place bids. My guess is that there will be a rash of new cities bidding on Super Bowls. Cherish the memories from 2012 because it might be a long time before Indy gets it again.
                                I wasn't under the impression NY did near as well as Indy.
                                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

                                Working...
                                X