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

2018-2019 Colts Regular Season Thread

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

  • Originally posted by Major Cold View Post

    Dude Brissett would have lost the game. I said that to clearly point out that you are wrong about Luck. You didnít watch the game. You donít know what you are talking about. You think every time he gets hit itís his fault. You didnít see the game. Haeg was responsible for many hits on Luck.

    Luck is great. Sure he may get hurt. But this loss is not on him at all.
    Just you arguing with him is giving him what he wants. He wants attentiont. He exactly what you're giving him. Just stop. Everyone needs to stop acknowledging him. I"m literally thinking about leaving this forum for good.. I know I dont bring the popular opinion but I'm a legit fan of several sports. This guy BluBoy is literally a troll and nothing has been done about it. It's pure toxicity at it's greatest form. And know mod does anything about it. I'm strongly considering leaving because of it. I think others here should think about another place to post and if you find a good place, please Message me and let me know.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Major Cold View Post

      If you donít see the difference in play calls and quick passes then you are right we have nothing to talk about.
      I see a difference. I dont think Luck threw a ball over 40 yards. That was a difference right? When the defense knows the QB wont toss a ball over 40 yards, it makes defense a lot easier for them. Am I not right about this?

      Comment


      • Blu has been banned.

        Comment


        • Thank you!

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Foul on Smits View Post

            I see a difference. I dont think Luck threw a ball over 40 yards. That was a difference right? When the defense knows the QB wont toss a ball over 40 yards, it makes defense a lot easier for them. Am I not right about this?
            I do think there was one about 40-50 yards, but I'd have to see the replay to be sure. It was a bomb down the middle of the field to Hilton that wasn't particularly close to being complete and I think there was a penalty on the play so it was mostly ignored.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post

              I do think there was one about 40-50 yards, but I'd have to see the replay to be sure. It was a bomb down the middle of the field to Hilton that wasn't particularly close to being complete and I think there was a penalty on the play so it was mostly ignored.
              I dont remember one that long. I dont remember a single pass that went past 40 yards, complete or incomplete.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Foul on Smits View Post

                I see a difference. I dont think Luck threw a ball over 40 yards. That was a difference right? When the defense knows the QB wont toss a ball over 40 yards, it makes defense a lot easier for them. Am I not right about this?
                Considering we havenít been able to do a five to seven drop pass because of our line it will make teams play the under. The Bengals did on that last drive and their front seven played the under extremely well. Without to dinks and dumps we would have been blown out. We attacked the middle of the field well but the only fade we tried to hit was dropped by TY. That drop (opposed to Green catching his bomb) and the PA on Quincy that led to their first score was the difference.

                Nixon got his. Our young LB did well, but their inexperience played out. They were late to the break.

                I apologize for calling you you an idiot. Maybe some statements were extreme, but it didnít mean I should call you names. Sorry.

                Comment


                • On to the next game. I see some different play calling with a lot of short passes. I wonder if we could maybe have seen more TE activity. I think they are a very good group
                  {o,o}
                  |)__)
                  -"-"-

                  Comment


                  • Just got back from the game.

                    First time I ever went to a Colts game. I had fun(well except for the Colts losing of course).

                    - I thought Luck looked better as the game went on. Considering he's been gone for such a long time he's really the least of my concerns with this team.

                    - The Colts defense... the run defense... yeah nothing new there.

                    - The Colts are still a first half team and blow it at the end its like they went "Full Purdue" here.

                    - The tide of this game turned when Adam missed an easy FG a feeling of dread set in..

                    - Jack Doyle SMH worse seeing it in person I had club seats at the 40 yard line behind the Bengals bench. There were Bengals fans sitting around me... yeah.

                    - The Bengals don't impress me they just are less bad than the Colts.

                    Overall I think the Colts are at least heading in the right direction I feel a lot better about this team now than I have the past few years. Of course I also expect them to be mediocre at best this season.
                    Last edited by Basketball Fan; 09-09-2018, 05:33 PM.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Shade View Post
                      Blu has been banned.
                      Nice, what a loathsome individual.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Foul on Smits View Post

                        Just you arguing with him is giving him what he wants. He wants attentiont. He exactly what you're giving him. Just stop. Everyone needs to stop acknowledging him. I"m literally thinking about leaving this forum for good.. I know I dont bring the popular opinion but I'm a legit fan of several sports. This guy BluBoy is literally a troll and nothing has been done about it. It's pure toxicity at it's greatest form. And know mod does anything about it. I'm strongly considering leaving because of it. I think others here should think about another place to post and if you find a good place, please Message me and let me know.
                        I'm number #1 on the Blu is a genuine troll train, been there for years, it's to the point where I just put him on ignore, even though I can tell he's still coming at me by other people quoting him, so I just have to ignore it all.

                        So no argument here. I got frustrated that he was allowed back on this forum after we had to endure his first reign of ignanimity here years ago, and within a few days he was right back to attacking me and responding to every post of mine with "rah rah rah, you're just a mindless cheerleader" (because I said Luck wasn't done back when a lot of people said he was, which, hello 300 yards and 2 TDs today), and other immature nonsense that was completely unnacceptable to have to endure... I would report it, and the mods didn't appear to care. I feel like I've been a fairly upstanding, fair poster for, what 15 years now? and they let him back on after having already been banned, and he proceeded to make mine and everyone else's forum experience worse. I was definitely starting to look elsewhere.

                        We'll see how long this latest ban lasts, and it is a welcome move, but why this guy continues to get chances on here is beyond me. How many times has he been banned? I mean, he was just put "in time-out" a few weeks ago, and was right back to his general "I'm not anti-Colts/Pacers or negative, I'm just realistic" nonsense within a few days of reinstatement.
                        Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 09-09-2018, 07:46 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


                        • Originally posted by Foul on Smits View Post

                          I dont remember one that long. I dont remember a single pass that went past 40 yards, complete or incomplete.
                          He did let it go on a few misses and plays called back. I don't get the impression that he wasn't going deep because he can't, just that they're going for more move-the-chains plays. This was all mentioned in the off-season, talking about getting the ball out of his hands quicker, keeping drives alive, and that the previous regime's tendency for long-developing plays was a factor in his injuries and what-not, which they're trying to reduce. So I'd say this is the gameplan, and we should look at it positively.
                          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


                          • Glad Blu got the boot. Hopefully it's permanent. I was pretty close to moving on myself. I never believed for a second that he was "invited" back as he claimed. He came back when Luck wasn't playing so he could brag about predicting an injury and kick him while he was down. This board is much better off without him.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Bluboy View Post

                              I wasn't going to say it by agree with you that Brissett would have won this game.
                              You're gone now, but Brissett choked and threw a pick six in the 4th quarter of last year's Bengal's game. He literally lost us the game, while Luck almost won this game by himself.

                              I like Leonard, but man does he get hung up easily when tangled with a blocker. Doyle has sort of struggled since '16. I know he had a ton of catches last year, but hopefully he gets back into gear. At 23-10, this game looked close to over, but a couple of boneheaded penalties gave the Bengals some life. We need to learn how to win again..

                              Comment


                              • Game review:

                                - I was 50/50 on whether we'd win. Couple of factors... Cincy can play when they have their guys, may not be world-beaters, but they aren't a *terrible* team. On our side, we have an entirely new team/staff/philosophy, and Luck's first game in a long time, so i expected there would be rust and bumps, and there was. So while I was hoping we'd win, I also thought there was a chance we wouldn't.
                                - Luck, minus that first throw, looked pretty damn good.
                                - Our line is still having issues, which was at the root of most of our problems. Luck still got hit too much, even staying in the pocket more. Our running game didn't exactly explode off the ground. We're missing some guys, but that has to shore up.
                                - The mysterious "beat teams through three quarters, and then forget how to play football in the 4th quarter" bug of last season is still evidently here, even though we have a completely different quarterback, coaching staff, offensive scheme, etc... I don't quite know what to make of that. New team? Let's just hope that gets fixed sooner than later. It felt like a replay of last year.
                                - I don't quite understand how we can come out and basically control the game for 3 quarters, and then just forget how to play. There was no real reason Cincy should've been in this game. They were down almost two touchdowns, hadn't really put anything together, and next thing you know our offense scores zero points the rest of the way, and they score 24 unanswered in just over a quarter. And it's not like Cincy played flawless football, they shot themselves in the foot on a number of occasions. I've never understood this phenomenon in the NFL.. I get that the game isn't over until the clock reads zeroes, but this happens all the time in the NFL. Comeback wins where one team gets dominated and then puts together 1 quarter of play and wins? Way too often. Don't understand it. That doesn't seem statistically.... realistic. This has always made me furl the brow a bit. I don't quite buy the "momentum" theory, either your team is better or it's not, it's not a quarter-by-quarter basis.
                                - I can't quite put my finger on how this game got turned. I can't exactly point to any number of mistakes or areas where we clearly blame the loss, we just stopped making plays period on offense, and we stopped playing defense period on defense. And it happened suddenly. Towards the end of hte 3rd quarter, everything just got flipped. So, was it vanilla playcalling? Did we stop being aggressive? Didn't we learn our lessons with past teams where Pagano would lay off the gas when we had a lead and we'd let teams hang around and then make a game of it or steal a win? This team has to learn to step on throats and assert dominance. You can't lose focus and let up.

                                Overall, I felt like we came out and proved that we can play football, which is important all things considered with as much transition as we experienced this off-season. It's something to build on. I have to temper my expectations because human tendency lends towards expecting perfection, and we have to realize that this is still being put together and figured out, and likely will "gel" as the season unfolds.
                                There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X