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

Is Rick making a mistake by not complaining about the officiating?

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

  • Is Rick making a mistake by not complaining about the officiating?

    I know we all laud and praise Rick for taking the high road. And by the way, I'm not exactly sure how I feel on my own question. On one hand, I wish everybody would leave the officiating for the fans to bicker about (esp on message boards )

    However, there is something to be said for getting a reaction. Doc Rivers complained about screens... we saw an increase in calls for illegal screens on the Pacers the next game. I distinctly remember the way the entire Bulls/Pacers series shifted in officiating based on comments to the media.

    Phil complains about the officiating... more fouls were whistled on the Pacers. Larry complained about Pippen fouling Mark Jackson everytime he brought up the ball... Pippen starts getting whistled for it in MSA.

    If Larry is going to complain about the nickel and dime stuff he is getting, maybe it is appropriate for Rick to ask when and if there will ever be a foul called when Jackson drives it to the hoop.

    As a person who appreciates taking the high road, I am 100% for what Rick is doing. But, you also have to use every bit of influence as a coach to win a game. If the next game is called awfully and in favor of Detroit, we'd better see the fired up Rick again!
    “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
    motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
    Reggie Miller

  • #2
    Re: Is Rick making a mistake by not complaining about the officiating?

    Rick probably complains about bad officiating, but not at press conferences, or through the media. I heard one of the talking heads say that coaches and owners typically call into the league office to discuss controversial calls after games.
    You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Is Rick making a mistake by not complaining about the officiating?

      Originally posted by SoupIsGood
      Rick probably complains about bad officiating, but not at press conferences, or through the media. I heard one of the talking heads say that coaches and owners typically call into the league office to discuss controversial calls after games.
      I'm sure they all do that, but when you call the officials out in the media... calls certainly seem to change.
      “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
      motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
      Reggie Miller

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Is Rick making a mistake by not complaining about the officiating?

        Guess we'll find out tomorrow if it's a mistake or not. It's gonna be a foul fest, the only question is if it'll be one-sided or both ways.
        Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Is Rick making a mistake by not complaining about the officiating?

          Many of you will not like this, but if there were something to complain about in the first three games, then yes Rick should make his feelings known. If the Pistons were getting away with the same things every game play after play, then yes. If there just random bad calls here and there, then no.

          I enjoyed Chuck Dailey's comments during the game last night. Rick was an assistant under Chuck for a few season. he said that Rick is extremely smart, hardworking and has the perfect demeanor to be a great NBA coach.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Is Rick making a mistake by not complaining about the officiating?

            If it means anything, Coach Popovich doesn't play the blame the refs in the media game either. His opinion is that you can't change it, so don't worry about it.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Is Rick making a mistake by not complaining about the officiating?

              Originally posted by brichard
              I'm sure they all do that, but when you call the officials out in the media... calls certainly seem to change.

              Maybe I am naturally dopamine-deficient or something, but I have never noticed that pattern.

              To me, the refs are equally bad each game, but only the losing team/coach mentions it, because they need to let go of some pent-up frustration. I don't personally think it actually affects the result of the next game...
              You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Is Rick making a mistake by not complaining about the officiating?

                When you are a bruising physical team like the Pacers, Pistons, Spurs, etc. generally it isn't a good idea to complain to the officials

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Is Rick making a mistake by not complaining about the officiating?

                  I think it makes a difference. Human nature. But I also think the ranting and raving can backfire on you. I think that's been the case for JO.
                  "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Is Rick making a mistake by not complaining about the officiating?

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck
                    Many of you will not like this, but if there were something to complain about in the first three games, then yes Rick should make his feelings known. If the Pistons were getting away with the same things every game play after play, then yes. If there just random bad calls here and there, then no.

                    I enjoyed Chuck Dailey's comments during the game last night. Rick was an assistant under Chuck for a few season. he said that Rick is extremely smart, hardworking and has the perfect demeanor to be a great NBA coach.
                    Rick and Chuck are very good friends, in fact I remember that Rick had Chuck present his COY trophy to him when he won it in Detroit. Just curious as I missed the comments did he say anything else?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Is Rick making a mistake by not complaining about the officiating?

                      Originally posted by brichard
                      I'm sure they all do that, but when you call the officials out in the media... calls certainly seem to change.
                      I think the officials may be a bit more sensitive to this type of stuff right now after the whole thing with Van Gundy. After hearing both Larry and Rick last night I felt like if anything the officials must appreciate the way Rick handled it and hopefully despise Larry's whining as much as I do! Maybe it will at least off set any effect Larry's comments may have had if Rick hadn't countered so strongly. I guess we'll see.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Is Rick making a mistake by not complaining about the officiating?

                        Originally posted by SoupIsGood
                        Maybe I am naturally dopamine-deficient or something, but I have never noticed that pattern.

                        To me, the refs are equally bad each game, but only the losing team/coach mentions it, because they need to let go of some pent-up frustration. I don't personally think it actually affects the result of the next game...

                        Well, I've just given you some specific examples I remember. I mean, how often do you see offensive screens called in the NBA? You could whistle that each time down the court, but since Doc went to the officials, it certainly seemed like those foul calls increased.

                        The most obvious example was in the Bulls/Pacers series. When we were in Chicago it was called one way and totally different in MSA. And I'm telling you, it gave each team a major home court advantage based on what the officials were looking for.

                        When Pippen was allowed to crowd Mark Jackson, we were worthless. When Larry Bird complained to the media about Pippen fouling him each and time down the court, things changed. Larry even said something like "lets see Jordan score with Scott draped all over him like the officials are allowing Pippen on Mark Jackson."

                        I could also be forgetting this piece, but on the very first offensive posession in MSA, I believe Pippen was called for a foul for crowding Mark Jackson. It was an example of a night and day difference with the media. I don't think Bird wanted to go to the media, but Phil kind of forced his hands a bit with his comments.

                        The biggest change I foresee in this next game is that Reggie will get fewer calls. I'm not sure he'll have any more called on himself, but he may not get away with the Reggie flops we have all grown to love.
                        “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
                        motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
                        Reggie Miller

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Is Rick making a mistake by not complaining about the officiating?

                          The pacers are the best story in the NBA. They will win this series if the "NBA" has anything to do with it. Anywhere besides Detroit probably wants to see Indy win, it's just such a cinderella story.

                          I don't see too many calls favoring detroit. They have been immature and whiny this whole series. The pacers organization has been what it is known for, a class act...despite the ron thing.

                          Pacers are taking this series, just sit back and enjoy the ride kids. Carlise is the SUPERIOR coach and AT THIS POINT we are the superior team. Game over.

                          We want it more, we're in better position to win....yeah...game over.
                          *removed* Just keep politics and religion completely out of it, please.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Is Rick making a mistake by not complaining about the officiating?

                            I have mixed feelings on this one. I've closely followed plenty of series where coaches griping about refs made a difference - particularly Bulls-Knicks. One time Phil would gripe about something and the games were called differently, the next Riley would gripe and the refs would follow up with another "adjustment."

                            More than anything else I think this points out the overall suckiness of NBA refs - half the guys (and all of Violet) seem not to have any friggin' philosophy - i.e., "THIS is a foul and THIS is not." or "I'll blow a whistle NOW, but not NOW." (shakes head in disbelief) The only rationale I can see for changing how you call a game is if the overall physicality is on a road to where it might erupt in on-court trouble - tempers get high enough to where you might have a fight or something.

                            That said, I'm certain that what Riley and Jackson say to their guys (Larry Brown too I'd say) is, "You guys don't worry about the refs - that's MY job. There's nothing you can do about them anyway. You just go out and play. I'll have your back on this."

                            If your team can do that - and the Knicks and Bulls in the 90's could - then go ahead and whi ... er, comment on officiating after games. In a tough series it might give you an edge.

                            The problem is, the Pacers have a history here. Isiah used to whine about the refs all the time - incessantly. I've never seen such a thing. Heck, he even used the officials as a reason why he started Sam Perkins and Derrick McKey. And the team picked up on it. We all remember Jalen. By the end of Zeke's first season JO and Al Harrington were doing the same thing - worrying more about the refs than their game. And JO and Jax still show that tendency.

                            So while there's a time-honored tradition of complaining about calls in the NBA, because, after all the refs suck so bad that they'll let coaches determine how they call games, I'm not sure it's the right thing for the Pacers. Reggie Miller gets a special dispensation BTW - he knows how to do it and he uses non-calls as fuel, the same as he does a hostile crowd.

                            Them's my thoughts anyway.
                            The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Is Rick making a mistake by not complaining about the officiating?

                              Originally posted by DisplacedKnick
                              I have mixed feelings on this one. I've closely followed plenty of series where coaches griping about refs made a difference - particularly Bulls-Knicks. One time Phil would gripe about something and the games were called differently, the next Riley would gripe and the refs would follow up with another "adjustment."

                              More than anything else I think this points out the overall suckiness of NBA refs - half the guys (and all of Violet) seem not to have any friggin' philosophy - i.e., "THIS is a foul and THIS is not." or "I'll blow a whistle NOW, but not NOW." (shakes head in disbelief) The only rationale I can see for changing how you call a game is if the overall physicality is on a road to where it might erupt in on-court trouble - tempers get high enough to where you might have a fight or something.

                              That said, I'm certain that what Riley and Jackson say to their guys (Larry Brown too I'd say) is, "You guys don't worry about the refs - that's MY job. There's nothing you can do about them anyway. You just go out and play. I'll have your back on this."

                              If your team can do that - and the Knicks and Bulls in the 90's could - then go ahead and whi ... er, comment on officiating after games. In a tough series it might give you an edge.

                              The problem is, the Pacers have a history here. Isiah used to whine about the refs all the time - incessantly. I've never seen such a thing. Heck, he even used the officials as a reason why he started Sam Perkins and Derrick McKey. And the team picked up on it. We all remember Jalen. By the end of Zeke's first season JO and Al Harrington were doing the same thing - worrying more about the refs than their game. And JO and Jax still show that tendency.

                              So while there's a time-honored tradition of complaining about calls in the NBA, because, after all the refs suck so bad that they'll let coaches determine how they call games, I'm not sure it's the right thing for the Pacers. Reggie Miller gets a special dispensation BTW - he knows how to do it and he uses non-calls as fuel, the same as he does a hostile crowd.

                              Them's my thoughts anyway.
                              Good points Rim.
                              “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
                              motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
                              Reggie Miller

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X