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

Mort says we are parting ways with Peyton

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

  • #46
    Re: Mort says we are parting ways with Peyton

    Yeah letting him go for nothing is also stupid.
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Mort says we are parting ways with Peyton

      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
      I hope he goes to a good team and wins two superbowls so he can show Irsay that keeping Polian and the stupid defense was a huge mistake.
      Several people wondered about the speed in which Irsay fired the Polians... Well, considering the Colts never should've been in this position in the first place except for the Polians' (mis)handling of the team. And considering everybody and his brother had been saying the defense and ST's were a problem (yet Ol' Bill ignored and shrugged off those complaints from "non football people" season after season), I don't blame Irsay for showing them the door when he did. It seems the 'non football people' were more right than Polian.

      I'm sure if Irsay had his druthers he'd rather this team at least been able to tread water without Peyton, hover around .500, and look like they would've been a contender with him. Instead, they challenged for an 0-16 record and painted Irsay into a corner that I doubt he ever could've imagined he'd be in. Truth be known he'd probably rather not be in this position because economic realities and the state of the team pretty much tie his hands.

      With a middling first round pick and a decent, competitive team he'd probably re-sign Peyton and hope for the best. But since Polian never saw fit to surround Peyton with a balanced, solid squad or a reliable B/U there's just no practical option if Peyton doesn't want to renegotiate. When you really think about it, how could there have been any question the Polians would be fired? The only question should've been if they'd be fired before or after the last game.
      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


      • #48
        Re: Mort says we are parting ways with Peyton

        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
        Do the Jets still have a really good defense? If so, I'd kind of like to see him go there to see what he can do with that kind of support on D that he rarely had here.
        OMG! Two Mannings in NY??? The press wars would be hilarious!! PLEASE, if he's to leave here, make this happen!!!



        (BTW....the worst would be if he went elsewhere and won multiple SBs.)
        Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Mort says we are parting ways with Peyton

          I have a lot of faith in Luck being a great quarterback, but I do think Manning will haunt us for the next few seasons.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Mort says we are parting ways with Peyton

            Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
            (BTW....the worst would be if he went elsewhere and won multiple SBs.)
            I would think that the worst would be if Andrew Luck were the next
            Ryan Leaf,
            Tim Couch,
            Akili Smith,
            Joey Harrington,
            Jack Thompson,
            David Carr,
            Rick Mirer,
            Heath Shuler,
            Vince Young,
            Jeff George,
            Jamarcus Russell.

            The list of top 5 picks at QB that did nothing to speak of for the team that drafted them, expecting a 15 year fix at QB, is quite long.

            If you go down to top 10 picks, you can add
            Matt Leinart,
            Byron Leftwich,
            Richard Todd,
            Rich Campbell,
            Kelly Stouffer,
            David Klingler,
            Todd Blackledge,
            Andre Ware.

            I don't expect Luck to be on a list like that, but an awful lot of people expected each one of those listed above would never be on a list like that.
            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


            • #51
              Re: Mort says we are parting ways with Peyton

              That's one of the things I've been trying to urge caution on about Luck. Even if he's very good, the odds that he's going to be as good as Peyton are not high. The odds that one team drafts two all time greats at QB consecutively, ending up with 25+ years of star level QB play? Astronomical.

              Then, the other side of that coin is to remember that you don't have to have an all time great QB to win a title. You have to have an all time great TEAM.

              What the Colts are doing is like walking up to the roulette table and betting it all on double zero.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Mort says we are parting ways with Peyton

                I really hope we find out exactly what we offered Manning.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Mort says we are parting ways with Peyton

                  Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                  I really hope we find out exactly what we offered Manning.
                  We are not going to find out details. This will be a press conference where both Irsay and Manning put on their good faces for the media and they will part ways.

                  I really doubt we will find out about the details for awhile.

                  This just plain sucks. The idea of Manning wear a different color just makes me sick.

                  Hopefully though everyone will rally around Luck and support him like they did Manning. I just worry we have to many Manning fans in Colts nation and they will turn on Luck the moment he has any struggles.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Mort says we are parpting ways with Peyton

                    Originally posted by CreekShow View Post
                    Bad Move
                    I would say it is a great move. Sad, but still needs to be done. It needs to be done for everyone involved, both the Colts and Manning.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Mort says we are parting ways with Peyton

                      It is a very bad and sad move.

                      No matter what they offered Manning, it is irrelevant, he already structured and lowered a deal so it fit the Colts and they could keep/sign others, you now require him to revisit that?
                      I am 100% sure the insurance took care of his salary this passed season, so he wont have cost the Colts that much.

                      If he is gone I seriously hopes he goes to a team that can win it all, which would be almost any team in the league with him on it, just look at what the Colts were without him.

                      Luck ? you need a lot of Luck for him to succeed, and if it happens, how long, at what cost?

                      No matter what happens, unless Luck is on Manning's level this coming year, or the one after, there wont be any playoffs for the Colts for the next 3 or 4 years, and perhaps even longer if Luck works out less well than you all hope.
                      So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                      If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                      Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Mort says we are parting ways with Peyton

                        Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                        We waited so many years to cut Bob Sanders, yet cut Manning after one injured season....
                        Sanders was never going to cost the Colts $28M in bonus + $7M in salary for one single season. Big difference in "do-ability" there, money wise. Not to mention the cap hit the next four years that would have happened.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Mort says we are parting ways with Peyton

                          Welp, the bandwagon sure got lighter with a pretty big percentage of Colts fans with one leg off already.

                          We live in one of the most fickle sports markets in the nation. I don't know how many examples needs to be made, but the Colts better hope that they don't get stuck on the list.

                          The IU bandwagon got a lot lighter when Bob left, got full again when they went to the NCAA finals, and has been pretty depleted since outside of the Bloomington area. The Pacers? We all know that story. I know it's local, but no one in Muncie gives a crap about Ball State unless they're already winning. People in this area just shift to whomever is winning, or they simply don't go.

                          Irsay better be praying that Luck is as good as advertised, and PM doesn't go win somewhere else, or he better get used to looking at an empty stadium.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Mort says we are parting ways with Peyton

                            Originally posted by able View Post
                            I am 100% sure the insurance took care of his salary this passed season, so he wont have cost the Colts that much.
                            I'm not sure about that Able. Actually I would be very surprised if it did and believe usually that only kicks in if someone has to retire from injury.
                            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


                            • #59
                              Re: Mort says we are parting ways with Peyton

                              The one good thing out of this is Luck has a passion for football just like Peyton. Luck will at least put in the effort to be an elite QB.
                              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


                              • #60
                                Re: Mort says we are parting ways with Peyton

                                Originally posted by Tom White View Post
                                Sanders was never going to cost the Colts $28M in bonus + $7M in salary for one single season. Big difference in "do-ability" there, money wise. Not to mention the cap hit the next four years that would have happened.

                                I understand the differences in the money. But we don't yet know what went down. Could the two sides just not reach an agreement, or did Irsay just flat out say we are going in a different direction regardless of what the numbers are? That's what I want to know. We probably won't find out today as it will be all about sentiment and remembering the past. But sooner or later I think some details will get leaked

                                Manning is a practical guy and I just have a hard time believing that he wasn't willing to restructure the contract.

                                I was a bit optimistic over these last few weeks, especially when the video was released of him throwing. I just had a hard time believing Irsay would allow a healthy Manning to go somewhere else.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X