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

Chad Johnson and Albert Haynesworth are Patriots ....

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

  • #16
    Re: Chad Johnson and Albert Haynesworth are Patriots ....

    Im getting frustrated watching all the moves going on because a lot of teams that the Colts will have to contend against are going out and getting better, making some good moves. While the Colts seem to be just sitting there content with the roster they have. That aggrivates me because i know we are not good enough to just keep the same team we have right now. We don't have as much cap as many of the teams out there which i can understand is a big reason why we cant just go sign a big name player, but i would still like to see us more active making moves.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Chad Johnson and Albert Haynesworth are Patriots ....

      Originally posted by Ownagedood View Post
      Im getting frustrated watching all the moves going on because a lot of teams that the Colts will have to contend against are going out and getting better, making some good moves. While the Colts seem to be just sitting there content with the roster they have. That aggrivates me because i know we are not good enough to just keep the same team we have right now. We don't have as much cap as many of the teams out there which i can understand is a big reason why we cant just go sign a big name player, but i would still like to see us more active making moves.
      Thats pretty much the only reason IMO. The only deal that bothers me is holding on to Hayden for 8 mill. THe guy is not worth that much money and he should restructure his deal if he wants to play for the team.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Chad Johnson and Albert Haynesworth are Patriots ....

        Originally posted by Ownagedood View Post
        Im getting frustrated watching all the moves going on because a lot of teams that the Colts will have to contend against are going out and getting better, making some good moves. While the Colts seem to be just sitting there content with the roster they have. That aggrivates me because i know we are not good enough to just keep the same team we have right now. We don't have as much cap as many of the teams out there which i can understand is a big reason why we cant just go sign a big name player, but i would still like to see us more active making moves.
        Let's hear who the Colts should have signed. Start naming some names. I'm curious who this mysterious X factor is going to be.

        You make it sound like the Colts are going backwards.

        How many injuries did they have last year? They should be more worried about staying healthy than going and and spending money just to say you've spent money.
        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Chad Johnson and Albert Haynesworth are Patriots ....

          Chad Johnson should change his name to 'Ochocinco World Peace' and start an act with Metta.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Chad Johnson and Albert Haynesworth are Patriots ....

            Originally posted by Ownagedood View Post
            Im getting frustrated watching all the moves going on because a lot of teams that the Colts will have to contend against are going out and getting better, making some good moves. While the Colts seem to be just sitting there content with the roster they have. That aggrivates me because i know we are not good enough to just keep the same team we have right now. We don't have as much cap as many of the teams out there which i can understand is a big reason why we cant just go sign a big name player, but i would still like to see us more active making moves.
            Yeah.. atleast we could make a couple of trades though... that is what I think... shouldn't affect your cap that much if you put together the right deal... Colts have to be on their stuff if they really want to compete...
            Why so SERIOUS

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Chad Johnson and Albert Haynesworth are Patriots ....

              I want us to trade Hayden to Tampa for a pick. Either that or just massively restructure his deal, straight cutting him barely saves us a million dollars, it's not worth it, Hayden's not terrible, just really overpaid.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Chad Johnson and Albert Haynesworth are Patriots ....

                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                Let's hear who the Colts should have signed. Start naming some names. I'm curious who this mysterious X factor is going to be.

                You make it sound like the Colts are going backwards.

                How many injuries did they have last year? They should be more worried about staying healthy than going and and spending money just to say you've spent money.
                Technically if your standing still and others are moving forward, your moving backwards. I think we will have a better record than last year but that's because of all the injuries.

                And there are a lot of interesting targets that could help improve our team.. Haynesworth, Asomugha, Johnathan Joseph and to name a random player that would improve our team, i think a J. Lee Higgins would be in interesting add for his speed and special teams play if nothing else.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Chad Johnson and Albert Haynesworth are Patriots ....

                  Originally posted by Really? View Post
                  Yeah.. atleast we could make a couple of trades though... that is what I think... shouldn't affect your cap that much if you put together the right deal... Colts have to be on their stuff if they really want to compete...
                  Let's hear some specific names on trades. Who goes, who comes in, etc.

                  Right now all you guys are doing is wanting changes, just in order to make changes. How does overspending in FA workout for the Redskins?

                  In the past 5 years, there has been one team with two SB appearances. Guess who that is? The Colts.

                  I used 5 because it's a nice round number, but I fully acknowledge if you move that number to 6years there's two teams with two SB appearances. If you move that number to 7 years, there are three.

                  Let's not act like the Colts are the Ravens. A team that has been pretty good, but has never made the jump. The Colts are contenders year in and year out.
                  Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Chad Johnson and Albert Haynesworth are Patriots ....

                    I just took a look at updated FA moves... I think i am going to pick the Texans to win the division this year. They got real close to getting us last year and they have really improved with the draft and FA moves they have made thus far. Very dangerous team.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Chad Johnson and Albert Haynesworth are Patriots ....

                      Originally posted by Ownagedood View Post
                      Technically if your standing still and others are moving forward, your moving backwards. I think we will have a better record than last year but that's because of all the injuries.

                      And there are a lot of interesting targets that could help improve our team.. Haynesworth, Asomugha, Johnathan Joseph and to name a random player that would improve our team, i think a J. Lee Higgins would be in interesting add for his speed and special teams play if nothing else.
                      No team ever stands still. Every year teams change, even if their roster stays 100% the same. Players age. With aging means they get better, or they get worse.

                      Haynesworth? The way overpaid, lazy, cancerous fatass is the first player you name? Oh goodness..... I'm actually HAPPY that the Pats picked him up.

                      Asomugha is asking MORE than Revis, who makes 11.5mil a year.

                      But regardless, the two biggest weakness areas of the Colts is an OL that can run block, and a DL that can stop the run.

                      Haynesworth isn't the answer, for obvious reasons, and DBs/ST players don't address either need.

                      And cover corners like Asomugha and Joseph aren't the ideal players for a Cover 2 scheme. You're overpaying for their services, and playing them in a system that doesn't utilize their strengths.

                      EDIT: And please don't think I'm some type of Polian kiss ***. I think he's made plenty of mistakes, and he's built the team the wrong way. I just don't think overpaying for FA is the answer. That's what bad teams do in order to get better.

                      I hate the Cover 2, but I can live with it. I just don't know why he thinks the entire DL needs to be fast. If we could get Chicago's cover 2, I'd be more than happy.

                      But I really want an OLine that can get yards on the ground.
                      Last edited by Since86; 07-29-2011, 01:53 PM.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Chad Johnson and Albert Haynesworth are Patriots ....

                        If Ochocinco can stay with it, he and Brady will pair up well together.

                        For Haynesworth, he just needed to get the hell away from Shannahan and Redskins. He's a good tackle and will do well for them.

                        The Patriots will make these guys valuable which will make them a great team once again.
                        In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Chad Johnson and Albert Haynesworth are Patriots ....

                          Originally posted by Sandman21 View Post
                          I think its going to blow up in New England's face. You can only get so many malcontents to behave before one continues their act.

                          I hope you are right.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Chad Johnson and Albert Haynesworth are Patriots ....

                            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                            Let's hear some specific names on trades. Who goes, who comes in, etc.

                            Right now all you guys are doing is wanting changes, just in order to make changes. How does overspending in FA workout for the Redskins?

                            In the past 5 years, there has been one team with two SB appearances. Guess who that is? The Colts.

                            I used 5 because it's a nice round number, but I fully acknowledge if you move that number to 6years there's two teams with two SB appearances. If you move that number to 7 years, there are three.

                            Let's not act like the Colts are the Ravens. A team that has been pretty good, but has never made the jump. The Colts are contenders year in and year out.
                            I just posted yesterday that the Colts could trade Anthony Gonzales and a 4th to Houston for Amobi Okoye their 24 yr old DT who is still young, very strong and prefers a 4-3 defense... Houston is switching its defense to a 3-4 and said they would take offers for him.

                            They are always looking for wideout help so that definitely wouldn't hurt.... We have a lot of wideouts that have shown up in this previous year and could stand to let him go. Okoye would be an upgrade over the group we already have and he still has tons of room to grow...

                            We could possibly do the deal for a 3rd and a 6th if we really wanted to. Plus I will say that his contract is pretty inexpensive so it wouldn't hurt us if we did it for picks... if we traded Gonzo it might actually give us even more cap space... I am sure I could think of other trades but this is one that came to mind...
                            Why so SERIOUS

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Chad Johnson and Albert Haynesworth are Patriots ....

                              Originally posted by Scot Pollard View Post
                              If Ochocinco can stay with it, he and Brady will pair up well together.

                              For Haynesworth, he just needed to get the hell away from Shannahan and Redskins. He's a good tackle and will do well for them.

                              The Patriots will make these guys valuable which will make them a great team once again.
                              He was at odds with the Redskins/Shannahan because they went from a 4-3 system, which Albert wanted to play in, to a 3-4.

                              Guess what system the Pats use.....

                              A 3-4.
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Chad Johnson and Albert Haynesworth are Patriots ....

                                Well i think or am hoping that this draft we finally got it right with the OL, thats why i left off some of the bigger OL names that are out there. And i agree that Cover 2 wouldn't utilize those Corners as much as they could, im just not happy with our CBs play and it would be a big upgrade to have a playmaker back there. I personally hate how we play the Cover 2.. If your gonna play it you should let your Corners play up tight and shadow the recievers as best as possible, unless its an extremely talented guy that you need to back off and then attack right when the ball is thrown towards him. But unfortunately a lot of the time thats how we play against all of the recievers and we just let them catch the ball without much contesting. That is my biggest complaint about our team. But also as i stated im worried because i don't feel we are improving like the other teams are and with peytons neck surgery it just makes me think we are going to start going downhill these next couple years.

                                I also think we need bigger DT's and at least one big LB, speed is nice but when you get trucked its pointless.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X