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

2014 NFL offseason thread

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 2014 NFL offseason thread

    Where to talk Free Agency, Trades, and draft picks for this offseason
    Smothered Chicken!

  • #2
    Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread
    Offseason needs for Denver

    A sensational season ended just shy of the ultimate goal for the Denver Broncos. But with Peyton Manning under center, there's every reason to believe the Broncos can be back in the Super Bowl in 2014. But first they have a little work to do in the offseason.

    There's not a singular way to build a Super Bowl contender, but every championship team has had its share of shrewd free-agent signings, impressive draft picks and development of in-house talent.

    In the case of the Broncos, the foundation was laid through each of those avenues prior to the 2012 offseason, when the most critical transaction came to fruition.

    It was at that point the Broncos landed arguably the most sought-after free agent in NFL history by inking Manning to a five-year deal that immediately catapulted the team from a .500 club (albeit one that still won its division) to a Super Bowl contender.

    But to examine the Broncos' success and suppose it was the byproduct solely of Manning is shortsighted, of course. The roster around him is perhaps as strong as any he has played on during his majestic NFL career, and the Broncos' ability to ensure that roster stays largely intact will be paramount to how the rest of Manning's career plays out.

    With a young nucleus of talent -- something the Broncos have -- comes a list of ascending players looking for pay raises. It also leads to difficult decisions on players either entering contract years or playing under lucrative deals.

    As the 2014 offseason begins (yes, it already has), here's a snapshot of three positional needs for the Broncos.
    [+] EnlargeChris Harris
    Kirby Lee/USA TODAY SportsIs cornerback Chris Harris in the Broncos' long-term plans?

    Cornerback: Top performer Chris Harris tore his ACL in a divisional-round playoff win, meaning his status for the start of the 2014 season remains unknown at this time. The Broncos are unlikely to lose Harris, a restricted free agent, but this remains a position the team must address. Champ Bailey has slowed as age has caught up to him and veteran Quentin Jammer simply didn't perform at a high enough level as his role increased down the stretch last season. Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie, who is also a free agent, made headlines last week in suggesting that he may retire if the team won the Super Bowl, though he later backpedaled on those remarks. Nonetheless, he's an unrestricted free agent who played well at a premium position. He's due for a payday, be it in Denver or elsewhere, after betting on himself with a one-year deal last offseason. He's likely to seek long-term security this offseason.

    Wide receiver: It sounds a little crazy to suggest that the greatest offense (at least in terms of points scored) in NFL history would need to consider adding a wide receiver, but consider this: Eric Decker is a free agent, while both Wes Welker and Demaryius Thomas have contracts that run only through next season. Finding the cap space to accommodate extensions for some of Denver's core will be a chore for football operations czar John Elway, but Thomas figures to be near the top of the list. That being said, the team will need to make sure it has the depth behind Thomas to continue to play at its high-octane level. Manning has made a career of catapulting the careers of lesser-known wide receivers, but just as Denver made the right choice in investing in pivotal wideouts to build this offense through it's current group, it needs to continue to do so going forward.

    Inside linebacker: While it may have seemed unlikely before the season, Danny Trevathan evolved into a rock-solid performer, leading the team during the regular season with 128 tackles and snagging a notable interception to turn the tide of a regular-season contest against the Cowboys. He played alongside fellow Kentucky alum Wesley Woodyard, who is now a free agent. Beyond Woodyard, next on the Broncos' depth chart was veteran Paris Lenon, who is similarly a free agent. Re-signing Woodyard would largely alleviate the need to shore up this position, though the team could also address the spot through the draft. Elway landed Trevathan in the sixth round in 2012; he'd be wise to add dept
    Smothered Chicken!


    • #3
      Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

      The draft isn't until May which sucks especially since its safe to say the Pacers will be in their championship run.


      • #4
        Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

        Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
        The draft isn't until May which sucks especially since its safe to say the Pacers will be in their championship run.
        I never pay too much attention to the draft in most years (aside from 2012 for obvious reasons), but I will have even less interest this year than I normally do. It will be irritating watching Cleveland use our draft pick. Plus the Pacers will be smack dab in the middle of a playoff run, as you mention.


        • #5
          Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

          Yeah this year might be a good one to skip the draft but it just reminds me football season is around the corner. Fortunately the Pacers are around till then.


          • #6
            Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

            Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
            Yeah this year might be a good one to skip the draft but it just reminds me football season is around the corner. Fortunately the Pacers are around till then.

            At least free agency is always kind of interesting.


            • #7
              Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

              FA is rather overrated I just hope the Colts don't go too crazy here.


              • #8
                Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

                Andquan Boldin anyone?


                • #9
                  Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

                  Absolutely yes for me. He's what you need in the playoffs...a reliable receiver who has big game experience. A Wayne, Bolden, Hilton, Allen, Fleener receiving corp would strike fear into any defense.
                  Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.


                  • #10
                    Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

                    Originally posted by khaos01207 View Post
                    Andquan Boldin anyone?
                    Aqib Talib maybe?
                    Smothered Chicken!


                    • #11
                      Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

                      I would love to have Boldin here as a reliable target and insurance on Reggie. The guy is reliable and always steps it up come playoff time. If Rogers could learn from Wayne and Boldin that would be amazing, but I do not know if Boldin would want to come here with the less targets. You would have Wayne, Hilton, Fleener, and Allen.

                      I think the primary focus for free agency is offensive line. I would love LOVE Alex Mack to be here for years to come and grow with Luck. Mack is only 28 years old and is already one of the top centers in the league. He would automatically improve our OL over that turn style we have now.

                      This line would make me feel much better going into the 2014 season.

                      RT: Cherilus
                      RG: Thomas
                      C: Mack
                      LG: Thornton
                      LT: Castonzo

                      The draft will be boring leading up to us since we do not have a first round pick and I sure as hell do not want to see Cleveland picking in that spot. We have to focus on defense and defense and more defense in this draft.

                      We need help at ILB, CB, Safety, and maybe OLB.


                      • #12
                        Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread


                        The Indianapolis Colts have signed veteran free agent safety David Sims.

                        The 5-foot-10, 210-pounder played in 15 games with one start with the Philadelphia Eagles in 2012 and had eight tackles, one for a loss and one pass deflection.

                        He was waived by the Eagles last year. Sims was originally signed by the New York Giants as an undrafted free agent in 2011. He then spent time with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and Cleveland Browns before joining the Eagles.

                        Sims was a two-year letterman at Iowa State and had 188 tackles and six interceptions.. As a junior in 2009, he was named Big 12 Defensive Newcomer of the Year.


                        • #13
                          Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

                          Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
                          Yeah this year might be a good one to skip the draft but it just reminds me football season is around the corner. Fortunately the Pacers are around till then.
                          I really just follow the draft to see what the other teams in the divison are doing, this year will be very interesting because they all have high picks and all might draft a QB.
                          Originally posted by Natston;n3510291
                          I want the people to know that they still have 2 out of the 3 T.J.s working for them, and that ain't bad...


                          • #14
                            Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

                            Originally posted by Natston View Post
                            I really just follow the draft to see what the other teams in the divison are doing, this year will be very interesting because they all have high picks and all might draft a QB.
                            Yeah, it's a pretty huge draft for Houston (1), Jax (3), and Tenn (11). Houston has to hit this pick out of the park. They don't want to whiff on someone and then be haunted when that player torments them with the Jags.


                            • #15
                              Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

                              Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                              Yeah, it's a pretty huge draft for Houston (1), Jax (3), and Tenn (11). Houston has to hit this pick out of the park. They don't want to whiff on someone and then be haunted when that player torments them with the Jags.
                              Imagine the story lines if David Carr's brother comes to the AFC South...
                              Originally posted by Natston;n3510291
                              I want the people to know that they still have 2 out of the 3 T.J.s working for them, and that ain't bad...