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

Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

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

  • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

    Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
    Yes because a woman that Irsay gave a house too dies of an overdose and it isn't suspicious lets say this didn't involve the Colts owner but someone else entirely nobody would think it raises red flags here a woman who isn't related to him receiving a house from someone who was also a drug addict and dies of an OD? I'm not blaming him for her demise but its rather naive to think its impossible that there's a connection.

    Unless its proven Irsay gave her the drugs and the feds get involved nothing is going to happen to him. Goodell at the end of the day is an empty suit who works for the owners he'll give him a hefty fine and a suspension that means nothing to go along with it and Irsay will say what the public wants to hear and it will be a distant memory. And the players will find it hypocritical even though it was Goodell who talks about how the NFL is a privilege and not a right unless you're an owner of course.

    And yes ESPN hires Ray Lewis who despite his past incident managed to be a "model citizen" since same for Michael Vick. Irsay had drug issues back in 2002 that were public and while he didn't get behind the wheel at one point there was a federal investigation with him.

    However this same network barely acknowledges this latest tidbit yet they can go into long discussions about Desean being possibly in a gang and living the thug life even though at worst he's proven to be a diva WR while an owner can get caught with 29K of cash on him, be arrested for a DWI, and have a woman die of an OD in a house that he bought for her and have it be no big deal.

    Yes that makes sense.
    Just 2 things...

    Get "caught" with $29K? It was his money. Last I checked it's perfectly legal to possess large amounts of money. No one got "caught".

    The house/OD thing isn't a big deal unless Irsay is tied to the overdose as a cause or contributor.

    Comment


    • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

      Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
      And yes ESPN hires Ray Lewis who despite his past incident managed to be a "model citizen" since same for Michael Vick. Irsay had drug issues back in 2002 that were public and while he didn't get behind the wheel at one point there was a federal investigation with him.
      I find it ironic that the defense of wanting to talk about Irsay and this woman OD'ing is that a connection isn't out of the realm of possiblity, but then declaring Ray Lewis and Mike Vick "model citizens" because they haven't been arrested again.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

        Originally posted by Stryder View Post
        Just 2 things...

        Get "caught" with $29K? It was his money. Last I checked it's perfectly legal to possess large amounts of money. No one got "caught".

        The house/OD thing isn't a big deal unless Irsay is tied to the overdose as a cause or contributor.
        I don't see how anyone can deny the coverage would be DRASTICALLY different if a player had all this happen.

        Comment


        • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

          Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
          I don't see how anyone can deny the coverage would be DRASTICALLY different if a player had all this happen.
          Aldon. Smith.

          Not only did the guy get bused for OWI, he's also been charged with felonies regarding illegal assualt weapons. That came to light after someone got stabbed at a party he was holding at his house.
          Last edited by Since86; 04-09-2014, 11:10 AM.
          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

          Comment


          • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
            I find it ironic that the defense of wanting to talk about Irsay and this woman OD'ing is that a connection isn't out of the realm of possiblity, but then declaring Ray Lewis and Mike Vick "model citizens" because they haven't been arrested again.

            It wasn't meant to be taken literally however we're talking about NFL players here there aren't high standards when it comes to being a model citizen hence why I put it in quotations as "model citizens" they weren't arrested again. Now had they had more brushes with the law then they would be perceived a lot differently right now.

            I don't get how its ironic but if Ray or Vick were arrested for a DWI, with 29K of cash on them and had a woman they were associating with die of an overdose in a house they bought them then yes the coverage would be different.

            Comment


            • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

              Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
              I don't get how its ironic but if Ray or Vick were arrested for a DWI, with 29K of cash on them and had a woman they were associating with die of an overdose in a house they bought them then yes the coverage would be different.
              And yet coverage isn't different with Aldon Smith.

              Which is worse, a woman OD'ing in a house by herself or a man getting stabbed in your home while you're throwing a party?
              Which is worse, getting busted with $29,000 in your own money, or finding illegal guns?
              Which is worse, and OWI with no accident or a OWI with an accident?
              Last edited by Since86; 04-10-2014, 10:23 AM.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                Colin Kaepernick and two other NFL players have been accused of sexual assualt and the police are investigating. Anyone wanna take a bet on how long it takes the NFL to hand down punishments? I'll take "after(if) they're convicted" for $2000 Alex.

                I'll also be waiting for all the "he's a thug" articles to come out within the next few days, since that's what the media does to non-white non-owner athletes.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                  Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                  And yet coverage isn't different with Aldon Smith.

                  Which is worse, a woman OD'ing in a house by herself or a man getting stabbed in your home while you're throwing a party?
                  Which is worse, getting busted with $29,000 in your own money, or finding illegal guns?
                  Which is worse, and OWI with no accident or a OWI with an accident?

                  And yet you ignore the fact that Aldon Smith's situation was actually covered by ESPN more than Jim Irsay's which was my point its not about who's actions were worse (or not) its about the media picking and choosing who they vilify versus who they don't.

                  As for CK7 yes we will wait and see but I bet you ESPN will talk way more about his situation than Irsay's.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                    http://www.indystar.com/story/news/2...rdose/7547915/

                    Death of Irsay's former friend ruled accidental overdose

                    A woman found dead in a townhome given to her last August by Colts owner Jim Irsay died of an accidental drug overdose, according to the coroner's report released Thursday.

                    Kimberly Wundrum, 42, was found dead March 2 — two weeks before Irsay was arrested on preliminary counts of impaired driving and possession of a controlled substance.

                    The police report lists evidence gathered at the scene of Wundrum's death as an "orange plate w/white power, straw, razor." The coroner would not release the specific drugs found, but said there was "no suspicion of foul play."

                    The coroner said an investigation showed Wundrum had an "extensive history of illicit drug abuse." The Indianapolis Star reported that an entity called the "Blue Trust," administered by Colts executives, owned three homes since 2007 that Wundrum listed in public records as her address.

                    Wundrum's sister, Rhonda Wundrum, who has worked as Irsay's personal masseuse, said in an email that her sister and Irsay were "former friends."

                    The Colts didn't immediately respond to a question about whether Irsay remains in rehab.

                    No charges have been filed in Irsay's impaired driving and drug case. Experts said the prosecutor is likely waiting for results from blood drawn from Irsay after his March 16 arrest.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                      Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
                      And yet you ignore the fact that Aldon Smith's situation was actually covered by ESPN more than Jim Irsay's which was my point its not about who's actions were worse (or not) its about the media picking and choosing who they vilify versus who they don't.

                      As for CK7 yes we will wait and see but I bet you ESPN will talk way more about his situation than Irsay's.
                      Disagree. Irsay has had attention for this... AND his situation isn't as severe as Smith's.

                      Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
                      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: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                        To the extent of Aldon Smith? No

                        But he's fortunate ESPN was more fixated on Desean Jackson(who unlike Smith and Irsay was never arrested) and now CK7's situation(who wasn't arrested either). Irsay's situation will be pushed aside media wise.

                        If people took off their Colts homer glasses they would see that.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                          That's why. The situation isn't as severe as Smith's. I also think you're having some amnesia regarding it. The coverage for both isn't drastically different. Smith's should be more --- it was a more serious situation.

                          Either way, who cares. You are really making more of this than anyone else.

                          Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
                          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: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                            Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
                            To the extent of Aldon Smith? No

                            But he's fortunate ESPN was more fixated on Desean Jackson(who unlike Smith and Irsay was never arrested) and now CK7's situation(who wasn't arrested either). Irsay's situation will be pushed aside media wise.

                            If people took off their Colts homer glasses they would see that.

                            Fans are generally going to care infinitely more about a player than an owner. Players are the guys who actually play the sport and generate excitement. Owners are generally just some rich stuffy guys behind a box. The public generally wants to hear more about the guys playing the game than the guys signing the check. DeSean Jackson was a huge story because a premier receiver in the prime of his career was RELEASED and then signed with a division rival of all teams. How often does that happen? There was naturally going to be some curiousness as to why that happened.

                            Irsay thankfully didn't hurt anyone, nor did he even crash his car. It was the first topic on Sports Center, PTI, etc for a couple of days. What is there to talk about now? They aren't going to give day to day upgrades about his rehab progress. This isn't the missing jet that we're talking about here.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                              Really? ESPN has been rather silent about Irsay's dead friend here one who died days before he got arrested for a DWI. If it was a player I think it would pan out differently

                              But you are right about one thing fans do care about players more than owners which also factors into coverage even if the owner does something we normally see a player get caught up in.

                              Which goes to show the media shouldn't be taken seriously about anything its about ratings. I mean ratings are driving the missing plane even though there was a mudslide here which caused a lot of damage and deaths in the States that barely got any coverage.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Irsay in jail for suspected drunken driving

                                Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post
                                And yet you ignore the fact that Aldon Smith's situation was actually covered by ESPN more than Jim Irsay's which was my point its not about who's actions were worse (or not) its about the media picking and choosing who they vilify versus who they don't.

                                Show me some examples. Pretty easy to do, instead of just making the assertion.


                                People who want to look for biasness, will see it everywhere. When you're not actively out there reading every article, listening to every talking head, it's pretty easy to get one picture, and stick with it. Do I listen to them? No, but when I don't see any coverage about Aldon Smith, hardly any negative coverage while he played just days after his DWI, zip coverage about his illegal gun court proceedings, and even less about the stabbing at his house, it's pretty hard to believe about how the racist media is ignoring Jim Irsay.

                                The fact you're missing with Irsay is quite simple.......OWI's aren't a big story. There's very limited coverage you can actually give over it. What are they supposed to do now, talk about how he's doing in his private rehab center? Break in and report about what he had for breakfast?

                                The lack of coverage is because there isn't anything new, which is the exact same reason there's a lack of coverage with Aldon Smith.
                                Last edited by Since86; 04-11-2014, 09:16 AM.
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X