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

2019 Indianapolis Colts Regular Season Thread

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • PocketwatchFox
    Originally posted by Suaveness View Post
    I suppose it's possible that the ones they brought in aren't good enough or better. It's a frustrating scenario for all parties
    I suspect this is the case. There has been a fair amount of placekicker churn in the league this year and the replacements have often done as poorly or worse than the guys they replaced (and those that haven't mean there's one fewer decent kicker available for the Colts to choose from). I'm sure they KNOW his kicking rates this year are unacceptable, but they're probably thinking along the lines of: would we rather have a kicker who makes only 70% of his extra points and 73% of his field goals but provides a solid locker room presence or a guy that may kick marginally better but has no locker room presence?

    Not saying I necessarily agree with this thought process, but I kinda understand it.

    Leave a comment:

  • Basketball Fan
    If there was a surefire prospect at QB I would think the Colts are keeping Adam so they could lose enough games to get one...

    Leave a comment:

  • Suaveness
    I suppose it's possible that the ones they brought in aren't good enough or better. It's a frustrating scenario for all parties

    Leave a comment:

  • Sollozzo
    My guess is that the Colts were hoping he’d retire and spare them the awkwardness of having to yank the cord. But since he’s kept on trying.....and since he’s kept on costing the Colts games....the Colts are now pretty much in the position where they are committing football malpractice if they don’t make a change. They know something has to be done.

    Leave a comment:

  • D-BONE
    It is tough to pull the plug on the career of a first-ballot HOF-er and a guy who'll be in your ROH I assume. But can you afford to have your kicking game cost you multiple games? I know you can't lay some of the losses 100% at his feet (no pun intended), but bottom line is an XP or FG in several of the games would have meant a win regardless of crappy overall play.

    Leave a comment:

  • imawhat
    I think the best option may already be on the roster. They should look at Sanchez to handle all duties (of course he'd need a holder).

    Leave a comment:

  • PacerDude
    ^^ Yeah - I don't disagree.

    Though it IS difficult to cut a legend. If there's an Option B out there - it has to be done.

    Leave a comment:

  • Bball
    Someone who can consistently hit PATs would be an improvement.
    IMO The decision to move on should've already been made. This problem isn't fixing itself. The only thing left is simply finding the best option out there and going with him.

    Leave a comment:

  • PacerDude
    Can't say I blame them . . . .

    For the second time in less than three months, the Indianapolis Colts are giving serious consideration to moving on from Adam Vinatieri.

    According to a source with knowledge the situation, no decision has been made in that regard as of Tuesday morning. However, the team is expected to work out several kickers to determine if one would be a better option than its decorated placekicker who now has missed an NFL-high 11 kicks in eight games.

    Leave a comment:

  • Suaveness
    Sounds like Brissett was close to going this week (80%), so hopefully he plays. I still think with TY, Funchess, Campbell all back this is a team that can do some damage, but that o line has to fix themselves too. These last 2 weeks really hurt their playoff chances. Colts have to win this week against a Jags team that's given us problems recently, and then we have a short week game at Houston who I assume will beat us. We had a super easy stretch that we've thrown away

    Leave a comment:

  • Sollozzo
    There’s a reason Hoyer was the third QB. He’s terrible. Still, his decision making was atrocious for someone at the NFL level. Not checking the flat and instead throwing terrible picks or bombing it down the middle as if he was Favre was terrible to watch. We should throw Kelly out there to see what he can do. I think Reich thought he could coach out a victory against a terrible opponent.

    To go from Luck to Brissett (who exceeded expectations) to now’s a pretty shocking turn of events given where we thought this team would be after last year. Add in the injuries to Hilton/others and it’s not a very good team.

    Like I’ve been saying all week - you can’t consistently win games as an NFL team if your kicker is THAT bad. Those missed PAT’s and FG’s are just killer week in and week out. Yesterday showed how a missed PAT just totally changes the game situation.

    The Colts might as well be a PGA tour player who is trying to win golf tournaments without a putter in the bag. You can’t do it.

    I’ve gone from being sad watching Vinny at the beginning of this year to angry that we still keep throwing him out there. At worst, there has to be some guy out there who can at least make PAT’s and short FG’s. There had to be someone out there who tried out for XFL teams or something. If the Colts put feelers out there, they could surely get some capable people to try out.
    Last edited by Sollozzo; 11-11-2019, 10:28 AM.

    Leave a comment:

  • Kid Minneapolis
    What looked like a promising season is starting to make a thud sound. Just too many injuries and/or healthy people willingly walking away.

    Leave a comment:

  • Sollozzo
    I read on The Star that Michael Jordan and Ahmad Rashad were on hand for Freeney’s ROH ceremony. That’s pretty cool.

    The Colts always do a really good job with those ceremonies . Obviously that was the highlight of yesterday.

    Leave a comment:

  • Bball
    Vinatieri just needs to man up and retire. It's clearly either done thru age or has an undisclosed injury he's playing thru and it's hurting the team and not improving. Even if there's no injury, say there is and go on IR. Let the team or force the team to do the right thing and start trying out kickers. Just having a kicker that can make PATs consistently would be an improvement.
    The team can't continue to leave the door open by not getting 7 point trips from the red zone.

    Yesterday was the perfect example of how that bites you. It left the door open for a FG to beat us (or at least take the lead) rather than just tie us... and it then allowed a second FG to force us into needing a TD at the end rather than having the option of a FG to tie and send it to OT.

    Although, I would've had zero faith in AV hitting that FG to tie. But I had zero faith in Hoyer getting us a TD in that scenario once it was 4th down. So I would've rather tried for what SHOULD'VE been a chip shot FG to tie. If AV missed it, there'd be no surprise though.

    It's not like he's missed one PAT and finally missed a second one at a crucial time yesterday. He's the worst PAT kicker in the league now. It's not like he's simply lost his distance and you can't count on him beyond 45 yards. You can't count on him anywhere on the field, and he might actually be worse close in than he is at distance. How can you coach around that inconsistency?

    I know the story... "But who is out there to kick that is better than Adam?"
    As bad as he's kicking, who is out there that is worse? It's worth the gamble.

    Leave a comment:

  • Suaveness
    Worst sporting event I've ever been to. Crowd was great, halftime was great. Otherwise, a ****ing ******** game.

    Hoyer, Ebron, Vinatieri get the blame from me in this game

    Hoyer - consistently had wide open receivers running slant routes or short wide passes that he refused to throw. Instead, he spent all evening throwing to receivers who weren't open when that wasn't needed. That last set of plays was the epitome of that - lots of open receivers that he refused to throw to. Even Reich seemed to indicate this.

    Ebron - talked a big talk about wanting the ball and then once again played like a clown.

    Vinatieri - I've defended him as much as I could. Guy needs to retire and not make the club do this to him. He's singlehandedly cost this team 2 games - and you can make the argument we could have gone to OT (assuming he made a kick) had he not missed an XP. He's hurting this team, as is the FO for not talking to him about it.

    Offensive line - what has happened? At least they woke up the 2nd half.

    Unacceptable loss. I don't care if you want to blame our lack of Brissett, Hilton, Funchess on offense, this is not a loss that should have ever happened. And now we've got Jaguars, Texans, and Titans all in a row. Better ****ing hope they wake up, or else they'll be sitting at home in January. This team should be 8-1, not 5-4, and they have only themselves to blame.

    Leave a comment: