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

Jared Lorenzen Should be Our Starter

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

  • #31
    Re: Jared Lorenzen Should be Our Starter

    well, this kind of seems like the old catch-22 as to whether to hope peyton gets back or waits until he's really healthy.
    i for one am not comfortable with the idea of throwing our franchise player out there when he really has no business out there because now he could get REALLY hurt and definately miss the rest of the year. i think we can still remember how playing our highest paid guy when he wasn't ready or fit to play worked for the pacers. do we really want that?
    i don't.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Jared Lorenzen Should be Our Starter

      I am done worrying about Colts Football in Sept. We have went two Sept w/o a loss. Keep in mind the Chargers went 0-4 and beat us in the playoffs last year. I am more worried about our lack of a Run Stopper on the D Line. I like Johnson & Dawson but our D cannot win in the playoffs giving up 4 yards every first down due to the ball being ran down our throats. Do you think that Johnson/Dawson can develop into run stoppers or should we check the wavier wire and look elsewhere? Remember how great of an addition Booger was.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Jared Lorenzen Should be Our Starter


        That's right -- except, according to WebMD.com, the knee needs this sac to keep the areas around the bones lubricated. Not that the removal of the sac injures the knee per se, but it takes away part of the liquid that keeps the knee lubricated. Removal of the sac exposes the knee to more bone-on-bone friction than if the bursa sac had not been removed.
        That may be the worst news in Colts football history.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Jared Lorenzen Should be Our Starter

          Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
          I am done worrying about Colts Football in Sept. We have went two Sept w/o a loss. Keep in mind the Chargers went 0-4 and beat us in the playoffs last year. I am more worried about our lack of a Run Stopper on the D Line. I like Johnson & Dawson but our D cannot win in the playoffs giving up 4 yards every first down due to the ball being ran down our throats. Do you think that Johnson/Dawson can develop into run stoppers or should we check the wavier wire and look elsewhere? Remember how great of an addition Booger was.
          We have to have a great September if we want to sniff a 6th straight AFC south title.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Jared Lorenzen Should be Our Starter

            It's gonna look really bad if we don't win the division this year of all years. Peyton must play.


            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Jared Lorenzen Should be Our Starter

              Hmmm - Lorenzen our QB with Booger MacFarland and Warren Sapp in the backfield. I like that.
              The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Jared Lorenzen Should be Our Starter

                not sold on the guy yet really. I'd still take Sorgi over him to be honest just cause of Sorgi's familiarity with the team. i just keep getting these visions that if Lorenzen starts for us, he'd throw 2 INTs cause of the pressure and unfamiliarity right away then get pulled out. I'd rather Sorgi do that then we can replace him with Lorenzen. But Peyton will play so it shouldn't even matter.
                http://Twitter.com/dRealSource

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Jared Lorenzen Should be Our Starter

                  Originally posted by Rotoworld
                  The Colts are reportedly unable to control the swelling in Peyton Manning's surgically repaired knee, and whenever Manning goes through extensive movement more swelling results.
                  The National Football Post's Mike Lombardi, who also writes for SI.com, calls this a "HUGE concern long-term and short-term" and that when Manning is hit, more swelling is inevitable. Lombardi says he was initially convinced Manning would be back for Week 1, but now has doubts. Practicing next week would be encouraging, assuming Manning can keep going.
                  http://www.rotoworld.com/content/pla...rt=NFL&id=1493

                  I'd take that with a grain of salt as he is the only one who is reporting that thus far, but I agree that in the event that Peyton can't go in week 1 that Lorenzen should definitely be your starter. Sorgi is to the Colts as Cassel is to the Pats..both are terrible backups for great QBs.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Jared Lorenzen Should be Our Starter

                    We should trade for someone. We should have signed Pennington.


                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Jared Lorenzen Should be Our Starter

                      Originally posted by Indy View Post
                      We should trade for someone. We should have signed Pennington.
                      But why would Pennington come here? Why go to a place where it's inevitable that you will be heading to the bench sooner than later? At best (for him), he would be starting just a couple games here. That's not the ideal scenario if you are a skilled quarterback that can start the whole season somewhere else. And that's exactly what he's doing in Miami-he's going to be their starter. There is absolutely no way that Pennington would want to come here to ride the pine.

                      Besides, there is no way the Colts would have paid him 11.5 mil over 2 years (which is what the fins are playing him). They pay Sorgi like 850,000 a year.

                      When you have a player as great as Manning you are kind of putting all of your eggs in one basket. Him going down is a risk that we unfortunately have to take. We don't have the money to pay someone like Pennington millions a year to just start a couple of games. Besides, any competitor that has a reasonable chance to start isn't going to come where their job is inevitably going to be holding Manning's clip board.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Jared Lorenzen Should be Our Starter

                        Originally posted by Adam1987 View Post
                        But why would Pennington come here? Why go to a place where it's inevitable that you will be heading to the bench sooner than later? At best (for him), he would be starting just a couple games here. That's not the ideal scenario if you are a skilled quarterback that can start the whole season somewhere else. And that's exactly what he's doing in Miami-he's going to be their starter. There is absolutely no way that Pennington would want to come here to ride the pine.

                        Besides, there is no way the Colts would have paid him 11.5 mil over 2 years (which is what the fins are playing him). They pay Sorgi like 850,000 a year.

                        When you have a player as great as Manning you are kind of putting all of your eggs in one basket. Him going down is a risk that we unfortunately have to take. We don't have the money to pay someone like Pennington millions a year to just start a couple of games. Besides, any competitor that has a reasonable chance to start isn't going to come where their job is inevitably going to be holding Manning's clip board.
                        Yeah, and you get what you pay for.

                        Isn't Daunte Culpepper available? I'm sure he'd be happy just having a job.


                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Jared Lorenzen Should be Our Starter

                          Originally posted by Indy View Post
                          Yeah, and you get what you pay for.

                          Isn't Daunte Culpepper available? I'm sure he'd be happy just having a job.
                          Yeah, and that's all they can afford. Why in the world pay someone millions of dollars a year to hold a clip board? Manning has played every game in his career up to this point, so that would be completely foolish. There are plenty of more important needs on this team than backup quarterback, so I don't think we could afford that. Manning playing every game is one of the risks we take, and for 10 years it's worked perfectly. We've been able to spend money in far more important places than backup QB. If you pay a backup QB a few mil a year, then that takes away from something far more important.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Jared Lorenzen Should be Our Starter

                            Originally posted by Indy View Post
                            Yeah, and you get what you pay for.

                            Isn't Daunte Culpepper available? I'm sure he'd be happy just having a job.
                            Don't think Fumblepepper will ever make a recovery in the NFL. It's become apparent that a combination of Randy Moss and his mobility are what made him a great QB. You take both of those away, and you have a guy who can't even start over Cleo Lemon.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Jared Lorenzen Should be Our Starter

                              After the game last night, what's everyone's thoughts on who our starter should be if Peyton can't go on the 7th?

                              Out of what we have I still think Lorenzen should get the nod. Not that I'm happy about it but it's too difficult to look for another replacement option this late in the preseason.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Jared Lorenzen Should be Our Starter

                                I'm still not worried about an AFC South Title. Why would I be? I don't want any more silly embarrassing divisional title banners for one thing! With the Colts all I really care about is having late season momentum and making the playoffs. There are plenty of years where we've won the AFC South Title by a lot of games but come into the playoffs flat and gotten beat in the divisional game. I am tired of that **** and don't want it to happen again. Of course there are lots of Colts fans with selective memories and think that September will make or break or season, forgetting that San Diego, the team that spanked us in the divisional game last year, started the season 0-4 last year. Of course I would welcome an AFC South title, but football is a here and now sport and as we've seen before not even winning your first 13 or even 17 games guarantees anything when the playoffs or the Super Bowl come around.

                                But if the Colts are 0-4 this year, watch for the fickle Indianapolis fans to run away fast. If the games weren't already sold out, I wouldn't be surprised to see a black out. I love the Colts but sometimes I have low opinions on a majority of their fans.

                                We just need to be patient this year and hope for enough wins to get in the playoffs and late season momentum to carry us to another Super Bowl. Really right now I am having a hard time even hoping for a Super Bowl birth with our **** poor offensive line play at the end of last season and the preseason. It's so frustrating to watch. We could have Peyton Manning, Jim Sorgi, or Joe Montana back there and they would struggle behind those paper tigers.

                                As for the schedule argument, the Colts can beat absolutely anybody in the league 9/10 times if we're playing our best, except for New England where I think at our best we would probably only beat them every other time. Really I'm not worried about the schedule at all. The NFL season is a distance race, not a sprint. By the time Week 16 is over you just need to be in that first group of runners, because the guy at the very front is most likely going to run out of gas before it's all over. Ya'll keep worrying about regular season achievements and I'll worry about the playoffs.
                                Last edited by idioteque; 08-25-2008, 12:18 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X