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

Purdue Athletics 2015-16

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

  • Re: Purdue Athletics 2015-16

    I was 101% on board with the hire. Thought it was gonna be great, thought he was a young dude with a great resume that would build a really good program. I obviously know dick all.

    Hazell hasn't done dick with the running game. He wasted Mostert, he wasted Hunt, he continues to waste Green.

    Look man, I'm all for rooting for what ya got and all, but this is a ****ing disaster. This is far, far worse than Danny Hope. The dude has 5 wins in 3 damn years and the only Power 5 win was ****ing Illinois. Minnesota was missing 8 starters, in West Lafayette, and just beat the **** out of us with some scrub RB that's never going to be heard of again. You paid any attention to what VaTech's done since they beat the **** out of us? They've ****ing sucked. We've gone from ****** so fire the coach to toxic under the new regime. There is absolutely zero reason to support Darrell Hazell going forward. Fire em all right now and give Marcus Freeman the job the rest of the way.

    Comment


    • Re: Purdue Athletics 2015-16

      Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
      I was 101% on board with the hire. Thought it was gonna be great, thought he was a young dude with a great resume that would build a really good program. I obviously know dick all.

      Hazell hasn't done dick with the running game. He wasted Mostert, he wasted Hunt, he continues to waste Green.

      Look man, I'm all for rooting for what ya got and all, but this is a ****ing disaster. This is far, far worse than Danny Hope. The dude has 5 wins in 3 damn years and the only Power 5 win was ****ing Illinois. Minnesota was missing 8 starters, in West Lafayette, and just beat the **** out of us with some scrub RB that's never going to be heard of again. You paid any attention to what VaTech's done since they beat the **** out of us? They've ****ing sucked. We've gone from ****** so fire the coach to toxic under the new regime. There is absolutely zero reason to support Darrell Hazell going forward. Fire em all right now and give Marcus Freeman the job the rest of the way.
      Yeah VT barely lost to Pitt and Barely lost to EC and beat a decent NC State team, should be noted with them their starting QB got hurt in their first game or there was a good chance they would have beat OSU.

      But back to Purdue, yeah I am ready for a change, as far as football and the running game, it takes time, it is not just the backs, but the line and the scheme... if you look at some of our games recently and see what we have done on the ground (by individual backs) there have been some pretty good moments.

      Coming in we knew that Hazell ran a run heavy offense and he liked to pound it, all my comment was saying is that he is still going that direction and it is improving, however that means nothing if you are not winning and other areas of your team are not developing.

      Anyways I would be fine if the went ahead and made a move to get rid of him now, he is gone at the end of the year so it really doesn't matter if we go ahead and cut ties now, could possibly be better... but we will see how things go in the next few weeks.

      By the way I don think Minnesota's RB is a scrub by any means, not sure where you get that from, have you watched the guy run or are you just saying that because he is a freshman, or that he has only played 3 games? That kid is pretty good, definitely someone to keep an eye out for in the future.
      Why so SERIOUS

      Comment


      • Re: Purdue Athletics 2015-16

        I don't see how you can possibly say they are improving. This team is a dumpster fire.
        "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

        -Lance Stephenson

        Comment


        • Re: Purdue Athletics 2015-16

          Originally posted by cdash View Post
          You guys know I'm not here to troll...but what is there to burn to the ground? Isn't that pretty much where you're currently at?
          Can we just release all the players from their scholarships, fire all the coaches, refund both of the tickets sold, and just have all new coaches and a massive recruiting class next year?

          Comment


          • Re: Purdue Athletics 2015-16

            Dump Hazell in the offseason, promote Marcus Freeman and let him fill out his staff with a bunch of nobody Ohio high school connections next year and play it blind. ****, fire em all but Freeman and give him a multi-year deal right now. That's where we are. I don't think Freeman's any sort of savior or anything but he's the only guy that's currently employed and whose unit has shown any signs of life at all, he's obviously the best coach on the staff. He's super young, he's a Midwest guy, he's got a pedigree, give him a shot the way OSU did Fickel after the tattoos, except we'd be hoping he might be a guy we could actually keep.

            Marcus Freeman, Purdue head football coach 2016.

            Comment


            • Re: Purdue Athletics 2015-16

              Bentley wants to try to hold off surgery on his ACL and play again this year. God bless him, but man that'd be stupid. You're a sophomore that probably has an NFL future, no need to Robert Marve this. Have the surgery and go get better.

              Comment


              • Re: Purdue Athletics 2015-16

                Smotherman a potential redshirt. Hopefully just a numbers game.

                Guess we're #24 in the ESPN/USA Today coaches poll.

                Comment


                • Re: Purdue Athletics 2015-16




                  I would say he has a decent shot to win.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Purdue Athletics 2015-16

                    Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                    Dump Hazell in the offseason, promote Marcus Freeman and let him fill out his staff with a bunch of nobody Ohio high school connections next year and play it blind. ****, fire em all but Freeman and give him a multi-year deal right now. That's where we are. I don't think Freeman's any sort of savior or anything but he's the only guy that's currently employed and whose unit has shown any signs of life at all, he's obviously the best coach on the staff. He's super young, he's a Midwest guy, he's got a pedigree, give him a shot the way OSU did Fickel after the tattoos, except we'd be hoping he might be a guy we could actually keep.

                    Marcus Freeman, Purdue head football coach 2016.
                    So what does Freeman coach on the team? I do not know who any of the coaches are other than Hazell. I think last weeks loss was the end of this regime. The players have given up. Get rid of the reefer head players. Get some kids who want to play and have some commitment. Something desparately needs to change. This program is not even MAC worthy. Really sad.
                    {o,o}
                    |)__)
                    -"-"-

                    Comment


                    • Re: Purdue Athletics 2015-16

                      patented Shoop run un the middle on 3rd and long. every day that goes by that that moron isn't relieve of playcalling the bigger moron Hazell is.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Purdue Athletics 2015-16

                        spread was 23. we're not gonna cover.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Purdue Athletics 2015-16

                          I'm gonna say it, we probably just should've kept Hope. Yeah we were still kinda high off the Tiller years, but not like we were **** for a long time before that. We're a budget limited program whose history is stuff recruits grandpas are like "oh, yeah, Purdue was pretty decent for awhile I guess." we've been to two Rose Bowls ever and the last one was 15 years ago, it's not like we have title history or anything. local recruiting is ****. one of, if not the most, storied programs is up the road. football facilities are subpar. the fanbase is as apathetic as it gets. we're a basketball school.

                          seriously, if you're some hotshot young coach why the **** would you come here? if you're ANY coach with a real future why would you come here?

                          Comment


                          • Re: Purdue Athletics 2015-16

                            I liked Hazell, and I still can't completely blame him, but yes these coaches are done. I'd definitely like to see Hazell get a competent OC, but if he won't or can't get one, he needs to go. It is painfully obvious whatever they are doing is not working.

                            Is there a way to lock this thread until November? Nothing to see here until then...

                            Comment


                            • Re: Purdue Athletics 2015-16

                              every day Shoop stays employed further illustrates how ****ing dumb Hazell is. a 12 year old that plays Madden can call plays as well. if it's about money or buyouts or whatever, hey OK, demote the dude, WHY THE **** IS HE CALLING PLAYS?

                              Comment


                              • Re: Purdue Athletics 2015-16

                                we're apparently spending $60 mil on football facility upgrades, football specifically from what I understand. so hey, that's a start.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X