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:
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

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 2018-2019 Post Season Thread

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Next week will be much tougher. Weather may be at play at Arrowhead. Even without Hunt, they have more playmakers to defend. Their D is vulnerable, only if we can again keep the pass rush under control. Will be fun.
    I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

    -Emiliano Zapata


    • #62
      Just want to again say thanks to Josh McDaniels for being the classless scumbag that he is. Best break this franchise has ever had aside from the Manning/Luck #1 picks.

      Its funny because the Pats and their creepy legion of obsessive fans think all of Belichickís assistants are these super hot commodities, when in reality the Belichick NFL head coaching tree is just a miserable failure. They thought McDaniels was setting the Colts back for years when he spurned us, but in reality it was a massive favor.

      Reich coached a brilliant game. KC has to be a bit nervous.


      • #63
        You gotta love how TY just brazenly trolls the Texans with smack talk and clown costumes, but always backs it up on the field.


        • #64
          Last edited by Natston; 01-05-2019, 10:02 PM. Reason: Maybe Skip will change his mind some day?
          Edit Signature


          • #65
            To Skipís credit, he did eventually say that Luck in Houston is hotter than James Harden.

            He just has a super super creepy hatred for Luck since he was wrong about RG3.


            • #66
              Quick history recap of how the Colts have totally owned the Chiefs in the playoffs in recent history:

              95 - Colts win on the road in KC before and ultimately are a play away from the Super Bowl against Pitt

              03- Red hot Colts win on the road in KC after getting the first playoff win of the Manning era at home against Denver. Ultimately lose to NE in AFCCG.

              06 - Colts defense stuns the league and shuts down the Chiefs running attack after being a putrid run defense down the stretch of the regular season. Colts win Super Bowl.

              13 - epic 45-44 comeback win in Indy

              4-0 in the playoffs against KC since 95


              • #67
                Which is why it shouldn't be a surprise when the Colts beat them next weekend.

                Plus the Chiefs aren't built for the postseason. This is where they are going to miss having a running game.


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                  Quick history recap of how the Colts have totally owned the Chiefs in the playoffs in recent history:

                  95 - Colts win on the road in KC before and ultimately are a play away from the Super Bowl against Pitt

                  03- Red hot Colts win on the road in KC after getting the first playoff win of the Manning era at home against Denver. Ultimately lose to NE in AFCCG.

                  06 - Colts defense stuns the league and shuts down the Chiefs running attack after being a putrid run defense down the stretch of the regular season. Colts win Super Bowl.

                  13 - epic 45-44 comeback win in Indy

                  4-0 in the playoffs against KC since 95

                  That 95 playoff run was my Colts awakening. That game against KC followed by Pittsburgh was what got me invested in the Colts as a wee lad.

                  The 2006 win and run led to the best moments ever as a Colts fan as we moved on to beat the Pats and win the SB

                  The 2013 game I was at. Best Colts game I've ever been to, man it was amazing.

                  These playoff games against KC mean so much to me. I'd like to see it continue!
                  Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.


                  • #69
                    Did anyone know where Nyheim Hines was?
                    There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                      Did anyone know where Nyheim Hines was?
                      I wondered that too... Was he dressed... on the sidelines?

                      Perhaps Mack's day and Reich's desire to out-rush Houston just left him sidelined but in the 2nd half I was kind of expecting to see him catching a pass or two out of the backfield... on a screen... etc...
                      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, thatís teamwork."

                      -John Wooden


                      • #71
                        Next game up is the only one that matters. Like investing past results do no guarantee future performance. Better bring it or Colts will get run out of the stadium.


                        • #72
                          At this point, I can't place an endpoint on this team's timeline. You know how you get a general overall gut-feel for how your team really is when you go into the post-season? Sometimes it's a "they're good, but they're gonna struggle against soandso, or soandso" and it generally goes that way? I don't have that feeling for some reason this year. This weird, hodgepodge team that was supposed to be a year away somehow not only doesn't have any real weaknesses.... but they are that proverbial "team that hit their stride going into the playoffs". Seriously, think about it. In years past, every Colts team had *some* weakness that teams would exploit. Usually our defense, or our d-line, or our defensive backfield... or our o line.

                          But this year, every unit is solid, if not an advantage. QB, check. RBs, check. WRs, check, somehow. O-line, check. TEs, check. D-line, check. LBs, check. Safeties, check. CBs, check. Special teams, check. There is no unit that I deem as a weakness. There might be a few units that are not as strong as others, but there is no "weak" unit.

                          You could argue that our WR group needs work, but when you have Mr. Luck and that O-line, you evidently can get by with guys off the street (literally, see Dontrelle Inman).

                          In years past, you could also argue that the Colts were fairly one-dimensional, on offense, defense, whatever. They were mostly a finesse passing team. Disrupt the receiver routes, bother the QB, and you mess us up. Or, our tampa-2 defense gave up a lot of yards and RBs went apeshit on us.

                          But this year, this team is very multi-dimensional. They can play any number of ways, can win any number of ways. Sometimes Luck airs it out deep. Sometimes he keeps it short. Sometimes they use their TEs heavily, sometimes they run it heavily, sometimes they use a lot of screens. Teams have a hard time scoring against this defense, running against this defense, no matter they they try.

                          Sometimes, they jump out to quick leads and the game is over quick. Sometimes they start out slow and have to (and do) mount a come-from-behind and win.

                          How do you gameplan for this team?

                          And now you have a team of misfits and comebacks and plan Bs, who've come together to be much more than everyone thought, and they've made not only an improbable run into the playoffs, but they've gone on the road and beat a pretty good team.

                          The talking heads have made numerous references in the past few weeks when discussing the Colts: "Who wants to face this team?"

                          I get it. This is a scary team for opponents. They have chemistry, confidence, momentum, faith, they gameplan well, they can beat you a number of ways, they aren't afraid to go on the road, they have no pressure, no expectations, and they have a bit of a chip on their shoulder. They have all the makings of a Super Bowl champion, to be honest. Somehow.

                          I have no expectations for this team, at all. That was the beauty of this season. It was supposed to be a throwaway, a get-back-on-our-feet season. I'm very proud of them for what they've done so far, and if they lost next weekend, I wouldn't be mad at all. But losing next weekend doesn't necessarily seem like an inevitability, either. The Chiefs know that. I mean, the Chiefs have been almost incredible at times this season --- and yet, I don't have any reservations about the Colts going in there this weekend and doing something amazing. That's crazy to think about.

                          Whatever the outcome this next weekend, I'm a proud Colt fan. What a crazy but awesome season this has been.
                          Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 01-06-2019, 01:03 AM.
                          There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.


                          • #73
                            The craziest thing about all of this is that itís just the beginning of something special. This is still a young team with a lot of flexibility to improve.

                            Thats why this loss has to be extra deflating for Houston. They likely arenít going to have that home playoff game next season......


                            • #74
                              Btw, the Chiefs... first, Mahomes has been spectacular, he won me a lot of fantasy football games this year.

                              They put up some Star Wars numbers this year, and they have a bad defense. I've sat in that seat before, during Manning's tenure. I know how it goes.

                              There are 3 reasons why I think KC could be in trouble this weekend:

                              1) First-time playoff QBs. I'm sorry, but I've just been around too long not to take that seriously. It's like the Jump program in the Matrix --- everybody falls the first time. Ask Deshaun Watson, and basically every QB ever, outside of Brady.
                              2) Their defense is terrible. Like, worst in the league.
                              3) They won a lot of games --- but generally lost to the better teams. Looking at their schedule, they generally feasted on lowly teams. The only good teams they faced were Seattle, NE, SD, and St. Louis, and lost them all. They did beat the Ravens a few weeks ago... which is a decent win (although I think the Ravens are a tad over-rated). They did have two nice wins against SD and Pitt to start off the season... but as the season went on, they did not beat the eventual playoff teams.
                              Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 01-06-2019, 01:48 AM.
                              There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post

                                1) First-time playoff QBs. I'm sorry, but I've just been around too long not to take that seriously. It's like the Jump program in the Matrix --- everybody falls the first time. Ask Deshaun Watson, and basically every QB ever, outside of Brady..
                                Ben Roethlisberger, Russell Wilson, Mark Sanchez, Tim Tebow say hello...and many others I haven't mentioned.

                                That being said I don't think KC will win either because well for the reasons you listed but it has nothing to do with Mahomes being a first time playoff QB.

                                KC also has historically sucked at home in the postseason they haven't won a home playoff game since Montana was QB. Granted there's a first time for everything but not this time.