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 Pre-Season - 2019

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

  • #31
    Could it be... Or maybe not it... But it's the Colts and a star player. So who knows...

    https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/art...LJbsQzndSxPSQZ cnoZ2ymDO5xiDIc_bfSLO1Ahbo5RI
    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


    • #32
      Originally posted by habart30 View Post
      According to multiple reports and confirmed by several Colt beat writers, Luck is dealing with a “bone issue” per Jim Irsay on a Radio Interview. Although Irsay wouldn’t mention what type of “bone issue” he’s dealing with, he did state Ryan Diem amd Raheem Brock dealt with the same injury. Anyone have any insight as to what this “bone injury” is he’s referring to?
      FWIW, I found an answer to my own question, so for anyone interested...
      https://amp.indystar.com/amp/1996326...mpression=true

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post

        Oh, here we go again.

        He'll get out there when he gets out there. I wouldn't worry about him. He's got most of his guys back, and he's not a rookie.

        About the only question I have is what on earth did he do to his leg, lol. Mid-April, so like no football activities, how do you injure your leg that badly that 4 months later it's still a problem? But anyway, they'll get him fixed up, no doubt.

        Well people wouldn't find the Colts shady about this sort of thing if they weren't shady about this sort of thing to begin with.... I wouldn't be surprised if he's not starting a regular season game but I don't think the sky is falling either because its not as if Luck hasn't missed games or gotten injured before. Most other Colts fans wouldn't either.

        I just don't believe anything the Colts are saying publically until I see Luck out there Week 1.

        Comment


        • #34

          Comment


          • #35
            Just more questions but at least it sounds like Irsay has forced their hand into being a little more truthful. Thanks for the link talking about Diem's injury.

            So, rest was a possible best first course action. Plenty of time to try it. Was there a misdiagnosis in there as well?

            Then he's still dealing with the problem and valuable time that could've been put towards surgery and recovery before the games count has been wasted it sounds like.

            So, soon the discussion will morph into "Play thru pain, or get it fixed to minimize lost season games?"

            And then there will be the question... "Or did he already have the surgery and it's still not better?"

            And lastly... Are we even getting the true story now.

            As someone above said (Basketball Fan I think it was), if the Colts would quit being so dodgy with this stuff fans would be a little less skeptical and more understanding.
            It's pretty clear at some point they knew it wasn't a 'mild calf sprain' but they continued to sell that story.

            I think fans would be more understanding of the truth, not necessarily needing every last medical detail per se' (just in general as to what is going on), and just roll with it. Then fans could hope Luck is back but be much more prepared to see Jacoby under center for game 1 and start focusing on how Reich and him are clicking as compared to how his game went under the Pagano regime.
            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


            • #36
              Originally posted by Bball View Post
              Just more questions but at least it sounds like Irsay has forced their hand into being a little more truthful. Thanks for the link talking about Diem's injury.

              So, rest was a possible best first course action. Plenty of time to try it. Was there a misdiagnosis in there as well?

              Then he's still dealing with the problem and valuable time that could've been put towards surgery and recovery before the games count has been wasted it sounds like.

              So, soon the discussion will morph into "Play thru pain, or get it fixed to minimize lost season games?"

              And then there will be the question... "Or did he already have the surgery and it's still not better?"

              And lastly... Are we even getting the true story now.

              As someone above said (Basketball Fan I think it was), if the Colts would quit being so dodgy with this stuff fans would be a little less skeptical and more understanding.
              It's pretty clear at some point they knew it wasn't a 'mild calf sprain' but they continued to sell that story.

              I think fans would be more understanding of the truth, not necessarily needing every last medical detail per se' (just in general as to what is going on), and just roll with it. Then fans could hope Luck is back but be much more prepared to see Jacoby under center for game 1 and start focusing on how Reich and him are clicking as compared to how his game went under the Pagano regime
              .
              Exactly! There was no need to make this more complicated than it had to be. I mean really its not as if Colts fans haven't dealt with this before with Luck. If anything I feel a lot better about this with Reich in charge than Pagano because Reich has dealt with this before. He was a backup QB himself.

              Comment


              • #37
                Just an utter clownshow. It looks like Luck’s body has just broken down after years of getting pummeled behind a crappy offensive line. I will never forgive Irsay, Grigson, and Pagano for doing that. Cokehead Jim needs to let his kids take over.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Oh brother, here comes the falling sky crew again. Dude has a high ankle sprain, they take awhile.

                  But ya, everybody is lying and Luck is done forever and Irsay is a crack head and blah blah blah.
                  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


                  • #39
                    Well considering that the Colts said it was a calf strain to begin with and now its a high ankle sprain yeah they were lying and Colts fans are stating the obvious. Who knew that was such a terrible thing?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      No, they said they thought it was a calf strain and are learning that it's likely been misdiagnosed. But ya, they were lying. Because that's what it *always* comes down to for y'all. And then the next thing you reply with is, "Well, if you buy that story, then you're a sucker". We've read this script before. You've got like, some serious issues with people "lying" to you.
                      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


                      • #41
                        High ankle sprains suck, btw.... had one just a few years ago, bent my ankle in half shooting hoops alone in the backyard, came down on the edge of a concrete pad after a jump shot and my ankle snapped inwards... My old *** was on the ground and had to crawl into the house to get my wife, had the massive blue welt you get on bad ankle sprains and all that, man I wanted to cry, not the first time I've busted my ankle, so I knew what I was in for. Couldn't walk on it for a week, and limped for weeks.

                        Ended up with both a lower ankle sprain *and* a high ankle sprain, opposite side of my ankle from the lower sprain... lower sprain hurt like the dickens and looked way worse, but it recovered in a few months. However, the high ankle sprain lingered for probly a year. And it was exactly like they described Luck's scenario... he can throw fine, he can move forward and back fine, but lateral movements or twisting movements are very unstable movements, it feels like something could break. I could walk fine with no problem, but then I'd turn/twist or move in a more athletic manner and I'd feel it. It's the weirdest feeling ever, takes a loooooong time to get over. Had many lower sprains, but that was my first high sprain, and it was a totally different situation. That said, Luck is a refined, young athlete with a lot of resources at his disposal, and I'm an out-of-shape old man who healed the old fashioned way, so the recovery methods/periods are likely a lot different for us.

                        I know I saw footage of him a few weeks ago dropping back and throwing, and he was doing so with much more fluidity than I could when I had my sprain, there was no way I could move like that even 6 months after, so my gut tells me he's much further along in the recovery period, but still just having some discomfort and taking it easy. I don't expect he'll miss more than a few games, if any.
                        Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 08-14-2019, 10:36 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


                        • #42
                          The Colts open on the road against tough teams in their first two games. Can’t afford to start 0-2.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            There's a misstatement about Luck that seems to be becoming prevalent in various circles that I think needs to be corrected. I keep reading/hearing that Luck is injury-prone and/or fragile. There's a big difference between someone who's fragile, and someone who's tough as nails who was subjected to 5 years of brutal hits because of his O-line and finally missing some time due to a legitimate injury. I mean, the lacerated kidney injury was equated to "being in a car crash". The amount of hits/pain he was subjected to those years under Grigson I would not wish on my worst enemy. The dude played and *won* a game after he lacerated his kidney, and continued to play for months after his shoulder injury. Not the wisest decision, but fragile? He's not a fragile guy. I wouldn't even call him injury-prone, he was as reliable as they come prior to that stretch towards the end of Grigson's tenure, even Superman would start to show some wear and tear. He came back last year and didn't miss a beat whatsoever. One missed year doesn't necessarily qualify as "injury prone". With the way the O-line protected him last year and the changes to how he plays and is much less liable to get out and run and take big hits, I don't feel like he's injury prone. The way you hear people talk, you'd think the dude has missed like half his career, which is not even close to reality. He's played in 86 of a possible 112 regular season games, so he missed 26 games, but.... 16 of those came in one year because of the shoulder, and another 9 coming a few years earlier because of the "car crash" lacerated kidney. I tend to believe all of this missed time could've been avoided with a proper O-line in front of him and reducing his time out of the pocket, which occurred in repeated total-pocket collapses.

                            My only curiosity is *how* he got the high ankle sprain. That usually involves a bad fall/step, so he musta been doing something and it happened. Not a huge deal, but high ankle sprains don't just pop up out of nowhere or because you're fragile --- they happen as a result of one bad ankle turn. By no means a career-ender, just long to work through.
                            Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 08-15-2019, 12:39 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


                            • #44
                              I don’t think it’s officially a high ankle sprain. Word is they “think” they’ve discovered the issue at its location in the high ankle area and are now rehabbing it. Hope it works out!

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                I haven't seen it called a high ankle sprain. I keep seeing "high ankle issue". If it was a sprain, I think they would've called it that.

                                Of course who knows... they apparently can't be honest about an injury to a star player at all anyway.
                                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

                                Working...
                                X