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

Article on referee Dick Bavetta

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

  • Article on referee Dick Bavetta

    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/05/sp...gewanted=print



    Referee Takes Longest Whistle-Stop Tour
    By LIZ ROBBINS

    Armed with a whistle and a smile, Dick Bavetta has run with four generations of superstars. He has never been shy. Bavetta once rebuked the Lakers superfan Jack Nicholson for leaving the court with three minutes to go in a blowout.

    "I told Jack, 'Do I get up and leave early?' " Bavetta said, recalling the moment with his throaty laugh and Brooklyn accent. "He went back to his seat."

    At 66, Bavetta is not going anywhere besides back to the basketball court.

    He is the Cal Ripken Jr. of referees, never missing a day of work in his 31 years in the N.B.A. Bavetta will referee his 2,035th game Wednesday, surpassing the retired Jake O'Donnell for the most regular-season games in league history.

    "I guess if you stay around long enough and get old enough, you get to this point," Bavetta said. "I still feel like I'm celebrating my 16th birthday. I'm blessed with good health — why not keep doing it?"

    He spoke by phone before refereeing the Hornets-Spurs game Wednesday. Bavetta had already been dodging traffic in downtown Oklahoma City at 6:30 a.m., on his usual 8-mile, 80-minute run on a game day. "I feel it invigorates me," he said.

    Bavetta gave himself just one day off from exercise after last season's N.B.A. finals. "As this game has evolved and as I've gotten older," he said, "I've learned you really can't turn it on and turn it off."

    Ronnie Nunn, the N.B.A.'s director of officials, said no one had adapted better to the game's demands than Bavetta. "I tell these guys that if a man at 66 can cover the baseline like he can cover it, you really don't have any excuse," he said.

    Bavetta's physical regimen is spartan, but his personality is flamboyant. Witness his vaudevillian block calls when Bavetta throws his hands on his hips, arches his back and sways with a pelvic thrust.

    "Whenever I see the old training tapes, I think, 'I look like Joe Cocker or John Belushi,' " Bavetta said. "All the referees in the room laugh and say, 'There he goes again — he's going to throw his back out!' "

    Bavetta honed his style for nine years in the old Eastern League. During the week, he would referee games in the Catholic High School Athletic Association in New York, then he traveled around the region on weekends for the Eastern League games.

    It took him 11 years in the N.B.A. before he worked playoff games; he is now a postseason fixture.

    Bavetta recalled two regular-season games as personal highlights.

    The Celtics-Sixers rivalry had boiled over on Nov. 9, 1984, when the referee Jack Madden broke his leg in the third quarter, leaving Bavetta to work alone. As the benches cleared, Bavetta saw Larry Bird and Julius Erving exchanging punches, and he ejected them. "I guess the N.B.A. figured, 'If this guy could handle this, he could handle anything,' " Bavetta said.

    Bavetta was not expecting a punch from Jalen Rose, then with the Indiana Pacers in 2003. At Madison Square Garden, Rose was aiming for Patrick Ewing when Bavetta's nose got in the way. Bavetta was back refereeing a Nets game the next night.

    "I love Dick, we patched things up," Rose said Friday. "I'm proud to be one of his fans. He's a funny guy, and he's a great ref."

    Bavetta prides himself on defusing situations with humor and shrugging off criticism. Tim Hardaway of the Miami Heat once dubbed him Dick (Knick ) Bavetta for his calls in Heat-Knicks games.

    "By not taking myself too seriously, I really don't take the comments too seriously," Bavetta said. "There's nothing they can say I haven't heard before."

    Or seen.

    Trading Season Focuses on Future And Present Fixes

    By the time Indiana traded Ron Artest to Sacramento for Peja Stojakovic last month, the anticipated move had lost its punch.

    It did, however, signal the late start of the trading season, one that has ranged from head-scratching to shrug-worthy as teams balance the need to rebuild with the desire to win now.

    The Celtics and the Timberwolves swapped seven players the next day, with each franchise seeming to be running on a treadmill.

    In Boston, the newly acquired Wally Szczerbiak loves to shoot, and so does Paul Pierce. They take shots away from each other as the team seems bereft of defenders. At least Szczerbiak and Pierce can provide a veteran presence for Kendrick Perkins, Delonte West and Al Jefferson.

    The draft pick from Minnesota will arrive in 2008 or 2009, but it is hard to say whether Coach Doc Rivers or Danny Ainge, the executive director for basketball operations, will still be in Boston without a playoff run.

    In Minnesota, Kevin Garnett was not selected in the All-Star fan balloting for the first time in six years. The stat-happy Ricky Davis, whom the Timberwolves acquired in the Szczerbiak deal, is not a legitimate second star to complement Garnett's remarkable talents.

    The Knicks and the Raptors swapped aging veterans — Antonio Davis for Jalen Rose — with different views of rebuilding.

    The Raptors' interim general manager, Wayne Embry, was merely seeking to get rid of Rose's $16.9 million contract and acquire an expendable one so the team could be close to $10 million under the salary cap. That could enable the Raptors to re-sign point guard Mike James and acquire a free agent to support their cornerstone, Chris Bosh.

    Isiah Thomas, the Knicks' president, has added to the team's bloated payroll while collecting draft picks. The plan had value this season, with the draft picks Channing Frye, Nate Robinson and David Lee, but the Knicks hold two first-round picks in the 2006 draft, which is considered weak.

    Pistons' Milicic Undergoing Long Process Of Maturing

    As the Detroit Pistons rush to dispense with the regular season and return to the finals for the third consecutive season, one of their players, Darko Milicic, has been virtually invisible.

    Milicic, the No. 2 pick in the 2003 draft, was chosen ahead of players like Carmelo Anthony, Chris Bosh and Dwyane Wade. He entered the weekend averaging 1.6 points and 1.2 rebounds in 5.8 minutes and has not been able to break into the Pistons' well-oiled rotation.

    Detroit holds the option for his fourth season, and Joe Dumars, the team president, has become more active in trade discussions.

    But it is hard to ascertain Milicic's value because he rarely plays. With the team 39-6 entering last night's game at Indiana, the Pistons are in no hurry to make a deal. They made their blockbuster deadline trade for Rasheed Wallace two years ago; other than gaining depth, they need little but salary relief or draft picks.

    Milicic, a 7-footer and only 20, is aware of a trade possibility, but Dumars has also turned down offers to develop his talent.

    Milicic's agent, Marc Cornstein, explained his client's approach.

    "On one hand, he has tremendous loyalty for Joe, for John Hammond, for the management of Detroit," Cornstein said Friday, referring to Hammond, the Pistons' vice president for basketball operations. "They've really been in his corner.

    "That being said, it's two and a half years, and like any player, he'd like to play. He's happy as long as it's a situation where he's given the opportunity to play, and I can't see why a team acquiring him would not want to give him that immediately."

  • #2
    Re: Article on referee Dick Bavetta

    :

    Good to know his legs still work...

    Now, about those eyes....
    Here, everyone have a : on me

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Article on referee Dick Bavetta

      Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Article on referee Dick Bavetta

        One eye. That's why we call him Cyclops.
        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
        And life itself, rushing over me
        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Article on referee Dick Bavetta

          more on Bavetta-- 31 years without missing a game


          http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baske...uestions_x.htm

          Whistle-blower Bavetta shows no signs of slowing

          By Roscoe Nance, USA TODAY

          Dick Bavetta on Wednesday night will call the 2,135th game of his 31-year career as an NBA referee, surpassing Jake O'Donnell. Bavetta, 66, has officiated 214 playoff games, including 23 NBA Finals games, and has never missed a contest. Bavetta, who has a degree in finance and was a broker on Wall Street before he became an NBA referee, talked with USA TODAY NBA reporter Roscoe Nance about his career.


          Q: To what do you owe your longevity?

          A: I would be remiss not to look up to heaven and say God has blessed me with unusually good health. You're talking about somebody who tried out for the NBA for nine years, and each of the years I tried, (I was told I) was too thin, had a balding appearance, had a boyish complexion. They were looking for guys who looked the part.

          Q: What is your proudest moment as a referee?

          A: Every time someone recognizes me as an NBA referee. I've always felt the responsibility I take on as an NBA referee is 365 days a year, 24/7. If someone never meets another NBA referee, they're going to judge all NBA referees by me.

          Q: What is your most memorable game?

          A: Years ago, the big game was Boston-Philly when (Larry) Bird and (Julius) Erving would go against each other. It was a national TV game, and at the start of the second half, Dennis Johnson stumbled into (referee) Jack Madden and broke Madden's leg. I had to do the second half by myself. As the game progresses, Erving and Bird decide to start choking each other, and I eject both of them. I remember the comments by both teams were, "Maybe a lesser-experienced official would have called a technical and kept both of them in the game. Whatever possessed Dick Bavetta to do it, it was the right thing to do." That was kind of a launching pad for my career, and the NBA started to look at me a little differently with certain leadership qualities.

          Q: What's the closest that you've come to missing a game?

          A: Last year I had a game in Milwaukee on a Tuesday night, and I was working Wednesday in Detroit. When we drove back to Chicago from Milwaukee, they said O'Hare Airport was going to be closed the following day. I was with Sean Corbin. ... We drove 6½ hours in a blizzard from Chicago to Detroit. If we hadn't driven, we wouldn't have made the game.

          Q: How much has officiating changed during your career?

          A: Where it has changed is in the accountability and the scrutiny that we're now under. We carry a BlackBerrry. We have a laptop. We do daily testing. We do daily meetings. We do tape sessions. After the game, we're required to go back to our hotel and watch the same game we just refereed and submit a game report, submit a game summary, which is inclusive of critical plays in the game, pertinent plays, plays that we were not satisfied with. Years ago, that never happened. Maybe when you got around to it you put a handwritten report in an envelope. That generally only took place if there was a problem in the game.
          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

          Working...
          X