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

  • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
    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.
    You most definitely can charge someone under these circumstances, but the charges won't stick. Any good defense attorney would get those dropped in a hot minute.

    Comment


    • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

      Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post


      It would be an actual punishment and show that others are affected by his actions fair or not.

      If Goodell goes soft on him he'll be shown as an empty suit(which I think he is regardless) I mean if a player does this there's not much sympathy for him being an addict and he'd be suspended.
      By that same token the player does get reinstated and will eventually play. The only way taking away a draft pick would be comparable is say the Colts lose a 4th rounder this year. However they are given back that 4th rounder (reinstated) the following year. Thus the Colts were punished by not having that player available for this coming season.
      You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

      Comment


      • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

        What is still bewildering to me is that possession of a Schedule IV controlled substance (not Schedule I or II or III) is a felony, while operating while intoxicated (OWI) is a misdemeanor.

        Comment


        • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

          Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
          Detroit was 8 years ago not that long ago.
          But it didn't leave the impression that the Indy SB did.


          Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
          It would be an actual punishment and show that others are affected by his actions fair or not. Fining him won't do much he's a billionaire who probably won't serve any jailtime either will probably get probation after he pleads guilty pays a fine and he'll go back to drugs after that. Suspending him won't either I mean he's still the owner regardless.

          If Goodell goes soft on him he'll be shown as an empty suit(which I think he is regardless) I mean if a player does this there's not much sympathy for him being an addict and he'd be suspended for a few games whether he gets charged or not. If a player has to be held to that high a standard then what about an owner?
          Again, it had nothing to do with the team. Taking draft picks away from the team is completely separate from 1 person getting into legal problems completely unrelated from the organization. League personal misconduct usually only results in personal fines and suspensions. They have stated he is subjected to the same rules. I really think you're taking it way farther than logically reasonable.
          Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 03-18-2014, 02:16 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: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

            Apparently he checked into rehab last night. I hope he is able to have success defeating this.

            Comment


            • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

              Originally posted by Stryder View Post
              One can still be charged with OWI/DUI while under the effects of a medication for which he was prescribed legally. I see it quite a bit. The issue is now how impaired he was (and you are correct, this can and will probably be used in his defense, if he was legit prescribed the meds). One can correlate blood levels with a dose of drug and dosing regimen. So, with the help of a forensic toxicologist, they will be able to tell (with some caveats and assumptions) how inebriated he was and if his blood levels correlate with the prescribed medication regimen. Did he take too much medication? It will be able to be determined, if necessary. Of course, tolerance must always be taken into account.
              Also the defense can argue an unanticipated reaction to drug interaction IF we're talking legally prescribed meds. Having legally prescribed meds does give you a legal defense to an OWI charge if no other factors are there (like a .08 BAC). But a legal defense isn't the same as a get out of jail free card (it just means you have an argument that can be made). OTOH, a billion dollar nest egg will give you access to the best legal defense, including attorneys and experts, that money can buy. As well as an excellent PR firm to spin the story for the jury pool. And make sure that the doors are always open to political power brokers too.
              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


              • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                Originally posted by Believe_in_blue View Post
                Apparently he checked into rehab last night. I hope he is able to have success defeating this.
                Listening to the talking heads, they're saying how wonderful this is and how strong Jimmy is for doing this and .....................

                B.S.. He checked in because he got caught. He wouldn't have done this if he got home without incident last nite. The people that I have respect for are the ones that realize their problem by themself. Not with the assistance of the law. Didn't we hear about him going thru rehab 6-8-10 whatever years ago ?? And not too long ago, he tweeted that he hasn't had a drink in 15 years.

                Yeah - sure Jimmy. Ok.

                Whatever he goes thru has about a 5% chance of sticking.

                Comment


                • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                  Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
                  Listening to the talking heads, they're saying how wonderful this is and how strong Jimmy is for doing this and .....................

                  B.S.. He checked in because he got caught. He wouldn't have done this if he got home without incident last nite. The people that I have respect for are the ones that realize their problem by themself. Not with the assistance of the law. Didn't we hear about him going thru rehab 6-8-10 whatever years ago ?? And not too long ago, he tweeted that he hasn't had a drink in 15 years.

                  Yeah - sure Jimmy. Ok.

                  Whatever he goes thru has about a 5% chance of sticking.
                  A wakeup call is a wakeup call though.
                  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


                  • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                    Originally posted by Bball View Post
                    A wakeup call is a wakeup call though.
                    Yeah. His wakeup call is the damage this does to whatever image he has left over and the image of the Colts.

                    Get the scriipt from the PR person: I'm sorry for what I have done, it's embarassing, it's a bad example, yada-yada ........... I just don't buy into it - pretty much when ANYBODY says it. Sadly, I say that from experience.

                    There are some that do recover and kudos to them. Addiction is a B.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                      Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                      But it didn't leave the impression that the Indy SB did.




                      Again, it had nothing to do with the team. Taking draft picks away from the team is completely separate from 1 person getting into legal problems completely unrelated from the organization. League personal misconduct usually only results in personal fines and suspensions. They have stated he is subjected to the same rules. I really think you're taking it way farther than logically reasonable.

                      But you said it was a long time ago 8 years to me wasn't that long ago that was my point.

                      As for what the punishment will be for Jim apparently the Giants co-owner Steve Tisch thinks that the NFL will punish him what that means I don't know. All I do know is that fining him won't do anything and neither will suspending him it won't be much of a punishment and he'll go back to what he did before. My point of the draft pick or maybe taking away part of the Colts salary cap is that it will be something that won't go away so easily for him. I don't get how you can say the owner getting popped for a DWI is unrelated to the organization when he owns said organization and the people working for him have to put out statements and talk to the press about what may happen to him.

                      Personally I think he'll just get probation and a fine but it is a distraction for the Colts just like if any player got arrested.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                        http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-sh...223505475.html



                        Report: Jim Irsay's daughter, Carlie, to take over Colts' day-to-day operations


                        Carlie Irsay-Gordon (middle) will take control of the Colts in her father's absence. (AP Photo/AJ Mast)
                        Indianapolis Star columnist Bob Kravitz wrote a heartfelt plea for Indianapolis Colts owner Jim Irsay to get help when he was arrested for driving under the influence, and Kravitz tweeted on Tuesday that Irsay will cede day-to-day control of football operations to his daughter, Carlie Irsay-Gordon, while the owner is in rehab getting help.

                        While Jim is in rehab, one of his daughters, Carlie, will fill Jim's role. Will sign off on trades, acquisitions, etc.
                        — Bob Kravitz (@bkravitz) March 18, 2014
                        So who exactly is Carlie Irsay-Gordon? She's the 33-year-old daughter of Jim and Meg Irsay — one of three from the couple (who divorced last fall) whom Jim has said previously will have equal shares of team ownership when he dies.

                        The most famous sister might actually be Casey Irsay, who is married to racecar driver A.J. Foyt IV.

                        But Irsay-Gordon, who has attended NFL owners meetings for nearly a decade, will be in charge while Irsay gets the help he needs. It will be interesting to see if she speaks at all at next week's owners' meetings in Orlando. Jim Irsay is typically very visible at the events, almost always stopping to speak to media members.

                        According to the bio on the team website, Irsay-Gordon interned with the Colts in the football and marketing departments while pursuing her undergraduate degree, later graduating with a Bachelor of Arts degree in religious studies with a minor in geoscience from Skidmore College in 2005.

                        She and her husband moved from Chicago to Indianapolis with their three children.

                        There has been speculation for the past few years that Jim Irsay might dial back his involvement in the team on a daily basis, even with as much as he loves the Colts. Perhaps Irsay-Gordon had been preparing for this day. Clearly, the team has faith in her abilities or she would not be overseeing this role.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                          Glad he checked in and is getting help. Hopefully his family stays strong and makes him complete it and not just go until this blows over. It is a shame it took this for him and his family to take his addiction seriously. I do not see how his family just ignored this as I am sure this is not the first time he has done this.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                            Originally posted by thewholefnshow31 View Post
                            Glad he checked in and is getting help. Hopefully his family stays strong and makes him complete it and not just go until this blows over. It is a shame it took this for him and his family to take his addiction seriously. I do not see how his family just ignored this as I am sure this is not the first time he has done this.
                            Addiction + a ton of money is a really toxic combo and a lot of them hire enablers they probably didn't want to be cut out of the Colts fortune either.

                            Fortunately for Irsay if he's seriously committed to sobriety that is its not over because he's still alive can't say the same for Whitney Houston, Phillip Seymour Hoffman and so many others.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                              When your star quarterback hurts his neck you lose a lot of games.
                              When you lose a lot a games you fire your president.
                              When you fire your president, you hire a first time general manager.
                              When you hire a first time general manager you trade your first round pick for Trent Richardson.
                              When you trade your first round pick for Trent Richardson you do drugs.
                              When you do drugs you end up lost in front of Adam Vinateri's old house.
                              Don't end up lost in front of Adam Vinateri's old house.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                                Except I think Irsay was doing drugs way before Manning was gone for the 2011 season. Although I can see why someone would be on drugs after watching that debacle.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X