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

Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game (and Deflategate discussion)

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

  • Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

    NFL speaks out

    http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/...ated-footballs


    FOXBOROUGH, Mass. -- The NFL's investigation into the New England Patriots' underinflated footballs began Sunday night immediately after the AFC Championship Game, has included nearly 40 interviews to this point, and is ongoing, the league announced in a statement Friday.

    The investigation is being led by NFL executive vice president Jeff Pash and independent attorney Ted Wells, who previously conducted the league's probe into the Miami Dolphins' bullying scandal. In addition, the league has retained Renaissance Associates, an investigatory firm with sophisticated forensic expertise to assist in reviewing electronic and video information.
    The league said in its statement that the Patriots "promptly pledged their full cooperation and have made their personnel and other information available to us upon request."
    On Thursday, quarterback Tom Brady said he had yet to be contacted by the NFL.

    "While the evidence thus far supports the conclusion that footballs that were under-inflated were used by the Patriots in the first half, the footballs were properly inflated for the second half and confirmed at the conclusion of the game to have remained properly inflated," the NFL's statement read.


    "The goals of the investigation will be to determine the explanation for why footballs used in the game were not in compliance with the playing rules and specifically whether any noncompliance was the result of deliberate action. We have not made any judgments on these points and will not do so until we have concluded our investigation and considered all of the relevant evidence."


    The investigation centers on Playing Rule 2, Section 1, which requires that the ball be inflated to between 12.5 and 13.5 pounds per square inch.

    "Prior to the game, the game officials inspect the footballs to be used by each that this standard is satisfied, which was done before last Sunday's game," the statement read.

    "The playing rules are intended to protect the fairness and integrity of our games. We take seriously claims that those rules have been violated and will fully investigate this matter without compromise or delay. The investigation is ongoing, will be thorough and objective, and is being pursued expeditiously. In the coming days, we expect to conduct numerous additional interviews, examine video and other forensic evidence, as well as relevant physical evidence.


    "Our investigation will seek information from any and all relevant sources and we expect full cooperation from other clubs as well. As we develop more information and are in a position to reach conclusions, we will share them publicly."

    Comment


    • Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

      you guys think we really landed on the moon?

      Comment


      • Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

        Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
        Oh, it absolutely can.

        The media is reporting (yeah, damn unnamed sources) that the Colts were on the lookout for this. They expected there to be an issue.

        As such they would have made sure that their own balls were fully inflated to the very top of the allowed range, or better yet,

        They simply pumped up their footballs outside so that the big air temperature drop from indoors to outdoors did not even occur. That would explain it completely. All you would have to assume is that the Colts expected it and that they are smart
        This is a strrrrrrrrrrrrreeeeeetch if I've ever heard one.

        Comment


        • Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

          Sorry Bball

          Comment


          • Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

            Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
            They simply pumped up their footballs outside so that the big air temperature drop from indoors to outdoors did not even occur. That would explain it completely. All you would have to assume is that the Colts expected it and that they are smart
            The colts had nothing else on their mind but to catch the pats in this little fiasco. Obviously the colts are smarter than the pats who got caught. The pats won the game but the colts won the popularity war.
            I suggest that the only penalty the team should endure is that they have their team name changed to the NE Uninflaters. Brady, Belichick, and the ball boys will go unpunished, no draft choices will be taken away and all is forgiven. Perhaps there is a better team name than Uninflaters but it will do for the time being.

            Comment


            • Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

              Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
              Only the NFL can verify what the NFL has determined to be true.
              Right. If a NFL statement is needed to prove what is true, then a NFL statement is also needed to prove what is not true. You keep objecting about it being "true" but have no problem declaring something else, without a NFL statement, false.


              Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
              But why would the NFL have to verify that what D'Qwell Jackson is saying about himself is indeed true, according to what D'Qwell Jackson has told them? You can ASK HIM YOURSELF and IT HAS BEEN DONE!
              Because that's the standard you're applying to the rest of us. If that's YOUR standard, then go by it.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

                Where is Robert Kraft in all of this?

                Every network slobbers over images of him in his box as if he is the one of the most amazing human beings in history. Jim Nantz practically faints every time Kraft is shown in his suite. Everyone gushes about how he's always entertaining famous people.....whether it's Steven Tyler or our overly-botoxed Secretary of State. Kraft always acts like he doesn't know that the cameras are on him, but it's obviously orchestrated. No other owner outside of Jerry Jones needs their ego stroked with face time as much as Kraft.

                For someone who gets hyped up as being such a dignified businessman, it's just amazing how the organization he runs has once again found themselves in hot water for shady activities. The normally visible Kraft has disappeared like Houdini the last few days.

                Comment


                • Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

                  Originally posted by Speed View Post
                  Just for the record, I've played basketball all my life, but by no means a professional, like say a Tom Brady. However, I can tell if a basketball needs air in two dribbles and a squeeze. I'm pretty sure Brady can tell the same with a footbal with one throw....
                  Son of a gun, you beat me to it.

                  I don't care what kind of a ball sport you play. You know whether you are significantly under- or over- inflated.

                  Play ping-pong? I don't have to inspect a ball or roll it under a paddle on a table to know that it has even a small crack in it.

                  Basketball? Most can tell if there is an inflation problem just by catching the ball in two hands. Dribble it a couple of times and you know for sure.

                  Soccer? Same thing. You kick a ball "sweet" one time and that's all you need.

                  Football? I punted and kicked off. I can tell you with certainty that a punter knows the difference the moment he catches the ball. And a kicker also knows the moment he kicks the ball, unless he totally dubs the kick.

                  What the hell? Even a kickballer on a Catholic school playground knows whether their kickball is under- or over-inflated or whether the ball is too light or too heavy.

                  We can argue all we want about how meaningful the infraction is or what the penalty should be. But, even risking a real emotional backlash, let me go on record that it is absolute stupidity to state that any QB would not know just by handling the football one time whether it had a significant problem. And that includes the duration of time that he is supposedly focused on other matters. He just knows. Subconsciously or otherwise.

                  Crap. The next thing you know is that Brady says is that he can't really tell us whether it is pleasurable sleeping next to Gisele because he is sometimes focused on other things.
                  Last edited by beast23; 01-23-2015, 05:02 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

                    Ditto. I've played basketball since I was 9 and I can tell instantly if a ball is flat or not by gripping it.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

                      Originally posted by beast23 View Post
                      let me go on record that it is absolute stupidity to state that any QB would not know just by handling the football one time whether it had a significant problem. And that includes the duration of time that he is supposedly focused on other matters. He just knows. Subconsciously or otherwise.
                      Joe Theismann, Dan Marino, and Doug Williams may each quibble with your characterization of their opinions as "absolute stupidity". Maybe, though, they would defer to the more extensive knowledge about what it is like to be an NFL quarterback possessed by both you and shade.

                      "I asked our equipment guy to pump one football up to 13 pounds per square inch and another to 11 psi," Theismann told USA TODAY Sports. "I wanted to physically handle the footballs and see if I could tell a difference in them. And I couldn't.

                      "If you just pick a football up that is 13 psi and another that's 11 psi, no one would know the difference. Because you don't grip a football tight anyway to throw it."


                      Theismann explained that a quarterback's throwing grip is akin to the light grip required for a touring pro's golf swing.

                      http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2015/01/21/joe-theismann-stee-young-nfl-deflategate-patriots/22130249/

                      Theismann went on to quote Dan Marino: "The last thing you're thinking about as a quarterback when you get to the line of scrimmage is, 'I wonder if this football is 2 PSI lighter?' "


                      They came out of the woodwork, these legendary quarterbacks, furrowing their brows and wondering what all the fuss was about after all the news media reports about the underflated footballs.


                      "I've never heard of this before," Super Bowl XXII MVP Doug Williams said in a phone conversation Wednesday, "but it could have happened to me, I don't know. When it's cold, the football is going to be harder to catch no matter what the pressure is. But I don't know that I ever would have noticed it, if it was one or two psi more or less

                      http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports...dell/22135147/


                      But what would they know about being a QB? Just 103,000 regular season passing yards and 11 pro bowl appearances between them.

                      Trust me, shade and beast23 know better!
                      Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 01-23-2015, 05:47 PM.
                      The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                      Comment


                      • Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

                        So let me make sure I'm up to speed here....

                        First, none of this ball stuff is in the rule book. Second, nobody should pay attention to the Pats cheating because other teams have cheated before. Third, it's actually the Colts who planned and masterminded this whole thing in an effort to embarrass the Pats.

                        Does that about cover the last 40 pages or so?
                        Last edited by travmil; 01-23-2015, 05:25 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

                          Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                          Where is Robert Kraft in all of this?
                          Originally posted by Robert Kraft
                          “On Monday, I received a letter from the league office informing me that they would be conducting an investigation into the air pressure of the game balls. Immediately after receiving the letter, I instructed our staff to be completely cooperative and transparent with the league’s investigators.

                          “During the three days they were here, we provided access to every full- and part-time employee the league’s representatives requested to speak with and produced every communication device that they requested to search. It is an ongoing process that the league and our team are taking very seriously. I very much support the league’s desire to conduct a complete investigation and welcome the appointment of Ted Wells to lead the process.


                          “Competitive balance and the integrity of the game are the foundation of what makes our league so special and I have the utmost respect for those principles. Our organization will continue to cooperate throughout the league’€™s investigation. Meanwhile, our players, coaches and staff will continue to focus on our preparations for Super Bowl XLIX and the many challenges we face as we prepare for the Seattle Seahawks.”
                          http://itiswhatitis.weei.com/sports/...ery-seriously/

                          Indianapolis Colts general manager Ryan Grigson declined to talk about “Deflate-gate” in his season-ending news conference
                          http://www.news-sentinel.com/apps/pb...ORTS/150129822

                          Colts coach Chuck Pagano said he did not notice issues with the football
                          http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/d...otballs-012115


                          Some teams are seemingly open, honest, and transparent about this. Others are quiet and and apparently deceptive
                          Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 01-23-2015, 05:33 PM.
                          The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                          Comment


                          • Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

                            still waiting for ANYONE to explain the video where the ball pressure dropped upon cooling the football
                            The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                            Comment


                            • Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game


                              Looks like I made my post right as he was releasing his incredibly bland and scripted PR statement five days into the controversy.

                              Certainly doesn't go out of his way to stick up for Brady and Belichick here, FWIW.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Colts vs Pats AFC Title Game

                                Originally posted by travmil View Post
                                So let me make sure I'm up to speed here....

                                First, none of this ball stuff is in the rule book. Second, nobody should pay attention to the Pats cheating because other teams have cheated before. Third, it's actually the Colts who planned and masterminded this whole thing in an effort to embarrass the Pats.

                                Does that about cover the last 40 pages or so?
                                Maybe you need to re-read the last 40 pages because IMO you are 0 for 3.

                                It is all written up in the field operations guide. That matters not as to whether a rule was broken. The only reason that distinction is at all significant is that someone claimed it was unbelievable that Brady would not know ball inflation procedures but would know player substitution rules, because you either know a rule book or you don't. Well, they are NOT in the same book. That is not opinion but rather is fact.

                                Other team's behavior has no relevance whatsoever on the facts of this case

                                Nobody is saying the Colts masterminded anything. It was postulated that it is physically impossible that the Colts balls would have stayed in specs. A possible (and improbable) scenario was presented.
                                Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 01-23-2015, 06:00 PM.
                                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

                                Working...
                                X