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

2014 NFL offseason thread

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

  • Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

    Been checking out some of the thoughts on Colts picks here in the last week since I don't pay too much attention to college football.

    Here's hoping the Colts get some protection for Andrew Luck and the experts seem to be really high on Weston Richburg in the 2nd round. After seeing video he seems to have a really good motor so what the heck I wouldn't be disappointed if that's the way the Colts go.
    You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

    Comment


    • Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

      Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
      I've barely heard the NFL draft mentioned on any of the local sports shows. It seems that no one wants to talk about the draft in any way shape or form because doing so just ticks you off when you remember that the Colts don't have a first rounder.
      It is crazy how not having a first round pick has made Indianapolis not care about the draft. I have not really bothered with the draft this year and what little I do know is some of the stuff I have picked up from listening to the radio going to and from work.

      Then again I do think the NFL is going a bit to far with their coverage of the draft. They are up to three days now and I just cannot fathom being remotely interested after the first day. I love football, but I just cannot bring myself to sit in front of a TV for that long just watching a bunch of people talk. I could see having it as back ground noise when doing stuff around the house, but actually sitting down and watching it? That is just a bit to much.

      I probably would be more interested if we actually had a pick in the first round.

      From what little I do know I think the Browns could nail this year if they can land Sammy Watkins and Teddy Bridgewater. I just find it crazy how far Teddy has fallen because of a couple workouts. The tape shows this guy can get it done, but yet you would think he was some bum who struggled.

      Comment


      • Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

        You all make way too much of this late first rounder, it's hilarious. Only because of TRich. Any other year and everyone would be like whatever.

        Our history at that spot is remarkably unremarkable, but you'd think we were missing out on Marvin Harrison based off all the TRich hate.
        Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 05-08-2014, 04:33 PM.
        There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

        Comment


        • Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

          Any other year and people would at least be talking about it. It wouldn't get 2012 Luck hype, but the Indy sports radio scene always devoted a decent amount of time to Colts draft coverage even when the Pacers were at the beginning of their playoff run last year. I listen JMV for about 45 minutes every day and he's barely mentioned the Colts draft. He's even made note of the lack of coverage.

          And yeah it's "only because of T-Rich" considering that T-Rich was the player the pick was traded for. First round picks, even late ones, are extremely valuable in the NFL. I'm not going to beat a dead Colt and rehash all of the arguments we had last year, but there's no way that people weren't going to make a couple of comments about the trade given the draft is tonight.

          Comment


          • Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

            Like I said before, I watch the draft more for what the Jaguars, Texans, and Oilers do than what the Colts do regardless on where they are picking. This year with it starting later, it almost feels like the draft has already happened and now I am waiting for the season to start.
            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...

            Comment


            • Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

              Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
              You all make way too much of this late first rounder, it's hilarious. Only because of TRich. Any other year and everyone would be like whatever.

              Our history at that spot is remarkably unremarkable, but you'd think we were missing out on Marvin Harrison based off all the TRich hate.
              The value of #26, if you still had it, this year would most likely be that some QBs are going to slide into the 20s because some of the teams that need a QB but had picks in the top 10 decided to go for a stud non-QB. Then they see their favorite QB still there at 26, and trade their high 2nd rounder and a couple of other assets to move up 10 spots, or even less.

              At least the analysts seem to be saying that non-QB talent is pretty equal from about #20 or so to #40 or so.
              The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

              Comment


              • Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

                You don't gotta sell me on it, been following the draft for decades. That scenario is very unlikely, and you know it, because the Colts never capitalize on draft position and trades like that.

                I know the likelihood of what you get late in the 1st round and in the draft in general. Our best late first rounder in recent years is probably Donald Brown. That's not saying much. And 13 games behind a terrible o-line isn't enough for me to throw out the book on TRich either. Yet the way people talk around here, the trade has already been set in stone and TRich can never achieve anything of worth for something as high and mighty as a late first rounder... a position that in years past no one made any hay about and in that same vein the team has rarely realized any overwhelming talent from it. DBrown had a decent year last year (at best... it was honestly just a mediocre year in relative terms) *finally* after underwhelming for FOUR years here.

                It's just silliness is all. Everyone gave DBrown years to develop and acted like he was amazing last year, and yet people can't give TRich 13 games. The lack of perspective is just really, really high. I think TRich can and likely *will* turn out to be a better addition to this team than anyone would would've selected in the first this year. But you know what will happen; some stud that we probably wouldn't have drafted will go somewhere between where we would've drafted in the 1st and our 2nd round pick, and everyone will be like "Uhhh we coulda had (insert future stud) instead of TRich, uhhhhh". The reality is far from that.

                The reality is, whoever we would've drafted this year at that spot likely would've been a project and possibly only a fringe contributor for the next few years, sorta like Bjoern Werner.
                Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 05-08-2014, 10:00 PM.
                There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                Comment


                • Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

                  Josh Gordon could be facing suspension.

                  Excerpt from:
                  http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/...ong-suspension
                  Cleveland Browns wide receiver Josh Gordon could face a season-long suspension after a second failed drug test months ago, this time for marijuana, sources told "Outside the Lines" on Friday.

                  Reached by phone Friday afternoon, Gordon said: "That's something you're going to have to talk to [agent] Drew Rosenhaus about. I really don't know anything about it."

                  Josh Gordon could face a season-long suspension after a second failed drug test months ago, this time for marijuana, sources told "Outside the Lines."

                  Asked whether he planned an appeal of his suspension and test, Gordon said, "I'm going to have to find out about that later. You need to call Drew," before hanging up.

                  Rosenhaus declined to comment but said the information was "not true."

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

                    The U.S. Congress...where it's always the offseason. http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10...kins-team-name

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread


                      Comment


                      • Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

                        Originally posted by idioteque View Post
                        The U.S. Congress...where it's always the offseason. http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10...kins-team-name
                        As much as I agree that the Redskins name is really bad as is the Cleveland Indians logo it is not the place of congress to be dealing with that. We have a crumbling infrastructure, healthcare, and many other more important issues for them to deal with than this.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

                          Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                          You don't gotta sell me on it, been following the draft for decades. That scenario is very unlikely, and you know it, because the Colts never capitalize on draft position and trades like that.

                          I know the likelihood of what you get late in the 1st round and in the draft in general. Our best late first rounder in recent years is probably Donald Brown. That's not saying much. And 13 games behind a terrible o-line isn't enough for me to throw out the book on TRich either. Yet the way people talk around here, the trade has already been set in stone and TRich can never achieve anything of worth for something as high and mighty as a late first rounder... a position that in years past no one made any hay about and in that same vein the team has rarely realized any overwhelming talent from it. DBrown had a decent year last year (at best... it was honestly just a mediocre year in relative terms) *finally* after underwhelming for FOUR years here.

                          It's just silliness is all. Everyone gave DBrown years to develop and acted like he was amazing last year, and yet people can't give TRich 13 games. The lack of perspective is just really, really high. I think TRich can and likely *will* turn out to be a better addition to this team than anyone would would've selected in the first this year. But you know what will happen; some stud that we probably wouldn't have drafted will go somewhere between where we would've drafted in the 1st and our 2nd round pick, and everyone will be like "Uhhh we coulda had (insert future stud) instead of TRich, uhhhhh". The reality is far from that.

                          The reality is, whoever we would've drafted this year at that spot likely would've been a project and possibly only a fringe contributor for the next few years, sorta like Bjoern Werner.
                          We don't need to be drafting projects in the first round and that's why Brown was a mistake as is likely TRich and possibly Werner. We will always have projects either from late rounds or FA but you have got to be on target with your first and second round picks. That's why unless something really dramatic happens TRich is a colossal mistake because this is year 3 for him and the potential should start to be realized in year 2.

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

                            Originally posted by speakout4 View Post
                            We don't need to be drafting projects in the first round and that's why Brown was a mistake as is likely TRich and possibly Werner. We will always have projects either from late rounds or FA but you have got to be on target with your first and second round picks. That's why unless something really dramatic happens TRich is a colossal mistake because this is year 3 for him and the potential should start to be realized in year 2.
                            First, I don't necessarily agree they were drafted as projects. Second, if Brown and Werner are projects and "mistakes", why on earth do they receive a fraction of the grief that TRich does? All three of them are worth the same to this team in terms of where they were selected --- they were all late-round 1st round picks for us, TRich being acquired for a late-round 1st rounder this year, he was essentially our 1st round pick this year. Same thing. Third, those two were on the same team and system from Day 1, and Brown was given four years --- TRich had a really good rookie campaign in Cleveland, and then had a bad 13 games after being traded mid-season behind a terrible line. Why is everyone giving up so quickly? Brown didn't produce for four years, he's never received the amount of grief that TRich did in a much worse situation last year in 1/5 the amount of time. Brown was in year 4 of this team, and was given a lot of chances, TRich was thrown into the fire 3 days after being yanked from the system he had been learning, and behind a much worse offensive line --- wouldn't you agree that it was a pretty ****** situation for TRich? And wouldn't it make sense that DBrown would see more success since he had been here for years, and had an entire training camp to learn the system?

                            It's all extremely hypocritical and short-sighted. I believe TRich will come out much stronger this year, and making statements like "colossal mistake" is just that --- a colossal mistake.
                            Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 05-13-2014, 09:59 PM.
                            There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

                              Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                              First, I don't necessarily agree they were drafted as projects. Second, if Brown and Werner are projects and "mistakes", why on earth do they receive a fraction of the grief that TRich does? All three of them are worth the same to this team in terms of where they were selected --- they were all late-round 1st round picks for us, TRich being acquired for a late-round 1st rounder this year, he was essentially our 1st round pick this year. Same thing. Third, those two were on the same team and system from Day 1, and Brown was given four years --- TRich had a really good rookie campaign in Cleveland, and then had a bad 13 games after being traded mid-season behind a terrible line. Why is everyone giving up so quickly? Brown didn't produce for four years, he's never received the amount of grief that TRich did in a much worse situation last year in 1/5 the amount of time. Brown was in year 4 of this team, and was given a lot of chances, TRich was thrown into the fire 3 days after being yanked from the system he had been learning, and behind a much worse offensive line --- wouldn't you agree that it was a pretty ****** situation for TRich? And wouldn't it make sense that DBrown would see more success since he had been here for years, and had an entire training camp to learn the system?

                              It's all extremely hypocritical and short-sighted. I believe TRich will come out much stronger this year, and making statements like "colossal mistake" is just that --- a colossal mistake.
                              You have an ingratiating way of arguing your point-calling people's arguments hypocritical or colossal mistakes.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2014 NFL offseason thread

                                If it's not hypocrisy, overlooking other first round mistakes while focusing on TRich, then what is it?
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X