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

Harrison NOT playing!

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

  • #31
    Re: Harrison NOT playing!

    I don't think the Colts are intentionally lying to us. But I think they recklessly said that he would play in the playoffs a while back and are now having to backpeddle on that. It's easy to say a guy could be ready for the playoffs when the playoffs are months away, but January sneaks up on you a little quicker than you think and he's not as ready as you thought.

    And I do think the Colts really wanted him to play this past week. But obviously something happened in between the practices and the game where he couldn't play. I just wish people wouldn't put some BS spin on it that it was a "meaningless game", because it didn't seem to be "meaningless" to everyone when they thought Marvin was playing, it only became meaningless afterword.

    Look at this thread from the Star about the Polian show.

    http://www2.indystar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=218570

    According to that thread, Polian admitted last night that on his show that he asked Harrison on TWO occasions about retirement down the road. Seems a little odd that Polian has asked him about it more than once. Why would Polian be asking Marvin about retirement RIGHT NOW, right in the middle of this important season, if there wasn't something serious about this injury? Seems to be a lot more than "conditioning" to me.

    That comment says a lot about the seriousness of the injury, whatever it was.

    I don't think we'll see Marvin Harrison again this year or ever.
    Last edited by Sollozzo; 01-03-2008, 01:01 PM.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Harrison NOT playing!

      If you read farther on that thread, someone corrected that.

      "The question was whether there had been any thought of retirement. Polian's answer was, "no,none at all". He did say he had asked Marvin about future thoughts of retirement but he went on to say that he did not foresee that at all and was not something Marvin was thinking about."
      Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Harrison NOT playing!

        I can't believe Marvin missing significant time for the first time in his career has people thinking he's going to retire, regardless of his age.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Harrison NOT playing!

          Originally posted by Suaveness View Post
          If you read farther on that thread, someone corrected that.

          "The question was whether there had been any thought of retirement. Polian's answer was, "no,none at all". He did say he had asked Marvin about future thoughts of retirement but he went on to say that he did not foresee that at all and was not something Marvin was thinking about."
          Poster DaveINMIami says that he interpreted it as saying he talked to Marvin about it more than once over the last few weeks.

          Still seems a bit odd to me

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Harrison NOT playing!

            Polian also went on to say that Marvin's response was that he had no intention of retiring and that they both came away believing that Marvin would continue to be productive both next year and beyond.
            From the Colt's perspective, don't you think that if they thought Marvin wasn't going to play again or had a very low percentage, that they would prefer to stop having to answer questions about it and reduce the distraction for the team by just stating that and moving on, rather than be barraged by questions at every press conference and have valuable practice time used up by a player who won't play?
            Of course there is a chance with any injury that it won't progress like you hope it to. Marvin's game is predicated on quickness on his breaks and to a somewhat lesser degree, pure downfield speed. If he is not going to come back better than what the Colt's already have on the roster and is reducing the chance that it will heal completely than that is probably still in consideration. That doesn't mean his recovery is not on an upward path or that the Colt's, despite Dungy's sterling reputation, are completely bluffing to the ultimate disapointment of primarily their own fans.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Harrison NOT playing!

              Originally posted by Adam1987 View Post
              I don't put as much stock into the injury report as I do what Dungy says. Isn't Tom Brady on the injury list half of the season? It sure seems like he is. I care a lot more about what the coaches have to say. And Dungy said that he would play.
              So the injury report is given without the consent of the headcoach? You don't think he has anything to do with what it says? Okay.


              Originally posted by Adam1987 View Post
              It's funny now that everyone says that it's just a "meaningless week 17 game." But 3 days ago no one seemed to be saying that when it was thought that Marvin was starting. Everyone was really happy about it. Then they pull him an hour or so before the game and it's all of the sudden just a "meaningless game" and fans say that it would have been "stupid" to play him.

              It's not like the Colts all the sudden figured out that it was a meaningless game an hour before game time. They knew it was meaningless all week and were planning on starting him. Fans were happy. Then they pull him and it all the sudden would have been stupid to play him.
              What's so meaningful about him playing, honestly? So you can get the pleasure of watching him play? That's about it.

              Oh yes, timing between him and Peyton is going to be off now and it will take them awhile during the game, a playoff game, to get back into. Well guess what, you don't think he's actually going to be at full speed with a swollen knee, even if it's slightly swollen do you?

              No matter what timing was going to be off, whether it was from not playing for however many weeks or from recovering from an injury or even from not being 100% fully recovered.

              Timing isn't going to be a sticking point because it was going to be messed up no matter what. Would it have helped? Yes, but let's not pretend like he was gonna come in, play a full half, and him and Peyton were gonna be back on the same page. They would make adjustments for the next two weeks, and even during the game even if he played.

              Calm down.

              Originally posted by Adam1987 View Post
              If the Colts would just flat out state that he will be back for the playoffs and leave it at that then it would be a lot easier to take. But the Colts and Dungy have only themselves to fault when people are bugging them about it every week. I know Dungy seems annoyed when asked about it. They tell us this week that he'll play, then pull the plug at the last minute. Of course people are going to wonder what was going on.
              So basically you're upset because you got your feelings hurt? You want them to stick by 100% of everything they say? You want a professional team to be completely honest with you, at all times. Well I hate to say it, but you're going to be very disappointed week in and week out.

              They thought he was going to play until pregame warmups, they didn't lie on purpose. They had every intention of him playing. He, or the medical staff and he agreed, didn't feel like the risks were worth him playing. You should be glad he didn't play. I have a feeling if he did play, sucked it up because of the injury or reinjured it, that you'd be the first person complaining about rushing him back too soon.

              Do I want him to play? Of course, they're a lot better with him in the game, but I don't want to see him set back the progress or reinjure it in a game that means nothing for Indy. Tennessee had EVERYTHING on the line. They weren't gonna take it easy on him, they were gonna hit as hard as possible for as long as they needed too because if they lost, they were done.



              Originally posted by Adam1987 View Post
              If the Colts would just have set the bar low then there wouldn't be posts like this. No one would have had any expectations on him being back in the regular season if the Colts would have just flat out stated that he were coming back in the playoffs, even if they were privately hoping he'd be back in the reg season. The worst case scenario with that is that they are right and he doesn't play in the reg season. But if he does end up playing in the reg season then everyone is surprised and happy. There certainly wouldn't be fans questioning them.
              So what would you think would be the reaction if they did come out and say he would play in the playoffs, and he didn't?

              I have a feeling it would be this and 10X worse. Maybe you meant to say they hoped he would make it back, I don't know, but you'd still be here complaining that they lied and raised the bar too high and got your expectations up for nothing.

              Obviously they thought he would be ready for the playoffs, or atleast at some point in them. What's the difference? The difference is that you got your feelings hurt because they raised your expectations.

              Originally posted by Adam1987 View Post
              Obviously Harrison wasn't quite as ready as they thought. And why should we believe that he will be ready for the playoffs? It's not as if his body will know it's the playoffs and magically heal. The playoffs are just 2 weeks away, and this is an injury that has hobbled him for like 12 weeks. It looks to be like he couldn't go through with playing in the game after just 2 practices. Why should we believe it will be any different in 2 weeks?
              If that's the case, then when do people heal? If you're out 12 wks with an injury, you should be out another how long? Obviously just not another 2 wks.

              Do you understand what a bursa sac is, and what it's function is in the body? Or even how the treatments go?
              http://www.arthritis-treatment-and-r...int-bursa.html

              Originally posted by Adam1987 View Post
              The big question still is: Why the hell did he play against Jacksonville week 7?
              The bigger question is why does it matter? Week 7 has nothing to do with week 17. He could have reinjured it through the force placed upon it by merely running, going down, whatever. Because he played doesn't mean he can play now, nor does it mean he should have played. This is the guy that played most of last year with a liagament in his wrist screwed up so lets not act like he's one to milk injuries. I'm sure if he felt like he the benefits of him playing cover the risks he would play, I'm also sure they're being honest when they say they expect him to play.

              We only get to see or hear what they want us to see or hear. We dont' know the conversations behind closed doors or how his knee felt nor looked after pregame warmups or after practice earlier in the week. It can vary day to day, and there's no way of telling how it's going to be two days in advance. Just relax.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Harrison NOT playing!

                Just remember what happened with Sanders last year. You don't think the Colt's learned the value of waiting on a guy until he's totally ready?

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Harrison NOT playing!

                  Originally posted by McClintic Sphere View Post
                  Just remember what happened with Sanders last year. You don't think the Colt's learned the value of waiting on a guy until he's totally ready?
                  Exactly. I'm still not going to delcare us doomed with the Harrison situation.

                  I'll still be pretty shocked if I don't see him playing in the playoffs.
                  Super Bowl XLI Champions
                  2000 Eastern Conference Champions




                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Harrison NOT playing!

                    I won't be shocked if he doesn't play in the playoffs. After him not playing all season, this is obviously a serious injury. But I would put the odds at about 80/20 that he is going to play.

                    Then again, perhaps they are saving him for just one game (hmmm, I wonder which one that would be?)

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Harrison NOT playing!

                      Originally posted by McClintic Sphere View Post
                      I won't be shocked if he doesn't play in the playoffs. After him not playing all season, this is obviously a serious injury. But I would put the odds at about 80/20 that he is going to play.

                      Then again, perhaps they are saving him for just one game (hmmm, I wonder which one that would be?)
                      Saving a player for a special game in the playoffs means you might not reach that special game because you were short a needed player....

                      Obviously, the Harrison injury is more severe (or has more to the situation) than has been released by the Colts. At this point, I'll be more surprised if he does play than if he doesn't at any point in the playoffs.

                      Polian's comments that it was healed and it was now just a matter of conditioning have proven to have been inaccurate. I'll let others debate whether he was lying to fans, misinformed, or trying to throw off another team's preparation.

                      I just hope that whatever the problem is, it isn't career ending. I'd rather see Harrison go out on his own terms rather than have an injury do it to him (whether that means the injury won't ever let him be himself, permanent pain, or he decides he doesn't want to deal with the injury risk and rehab any longer).

                      -Bball
                      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