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

Refs for Today's Game - The Pits

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

  • #76
    Re: Refs for Today's Game - The Pits

    Am I still the only one to have picked up that UB just likes to play devils advocate on every subject? Is it really only me?

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Refs for Today's Game - The Pits

      Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
      Am I still the only one to have picked up that UB just likes to play devils advocate on every subject? Is it really only me?
      To a point.

      But sometimes UB isn't going against the grain. Like for instance, throughout O'brien's entire tenure UB was completely on O'brien's side. And was decently critical of Vogel (as much as you could be) But after the Bulls game, gave Vogel a lot of credit.

      But he does seem to like to be the minority opinion..

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Refs for Today's Game - The Pits

        Originally posted by IndyHoya View Post
        For example, Jack Nies was born November 11, 1937 (making him 74 and the oldest NBA ref). He is in his 29th season and has officiated over 1,800+ regular season games, 150+ play-off games, and 10 NBA Finals games. He was a teacher for the trainable mentally challenged for 7 years. He also instructed several current referees on how to be an effective official. It remains unclear at this time if these two avocations are interrelated.

        Not sure what your point is but he retired two years ago

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Refs for Today's Game - The Pits

          Originally posted by beast23 View Post
          But to be perfectly fair, Buck, how many times did our players stand or jump perfectly verticle, where Rose jumped into them... and the foul WAS called?

          At some point in time, I'd say that refs will get altered instructions on how to make these calls. They will probably then be forced to make judgement calls on the "intent" of the offensive player. If the player attacks the rim and is relying more on creating contact and getting the foul by putting up a "wing and a prayer" shot, then no foul?

          IMO, there is a huge difference in drawing contact and creating contact. But no matter what the rules or the instructions to the officials, it all comes down to judgement calls made in fractions of a second.

          I always thought if the defender jumps into the air whether the ofensive player jumps into him or not it is a defensive foul. At least that is the way it is called 98% of the time in the NBA. Unless the offensive player used his off arm to clear out or does something else unusual, the defensive player is going to get the call. is that fair, I don't know, but that is the way it is

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Refs for Today's Game - The Pits

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            Not sure what your point is but he retired two years ago
            Whoops! Editing as we speak.

            My point is that NBA referees can get pretty old and still keep their jobs.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Refs for Today's Game - The Pits

              Originally posted by IndyHoya View Post
              What a triumvirate: Violet Palmer, Joey Crawford, and Bennett Salvatore.

              Could it ever be worse than that?

              Crawford is actually the exact ref you want as a playoff road team. My guess is once the Pacers coaches found out it was Crawford, they were giddy

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Refs for Today's Game - The Pits

                Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                Am I still the only one to have picked up that UB just likes to play devils advocate on every subject? Is it really only me?
                I actually agree with him on this one, I think is a waste of time complaining about the referees, if the Pacers instead of playing like crap in the last 3 minutes had adjusted, had make the free trows and made a few jumpers, I think we could have won the game.
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Refs for Today's Game - The Pits

                  Originally posted by Peck View Post
                  You really do not like Pacer fans very much do you?

                  How so? What do you mean.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Refs for Today's Game - The Pits

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    I always thought if the defender jumps into the air whether the ofensive player jumps into him or not it is a defensive foul. At least that is the way it is called 98% of the time in the NBA. Unless the offensive player used his off arm to clear out or does something else unusual, the defensive player is going to get the call. is that fair, I don't know, but that is the way it is
                    Interesting you bring that up. When I was looking at the NBA Rules earlier this morning, I was trying to find the "Principle of Verticality" defined somewhere and I couldn't. At least not in the NBA Rules.

                    All I could find was stuff about the "legal guarding position". And that seemed to say that you had to have both feet on the ground to avoid being called for a block.

                    I found non-NBA Rules discussing the "Principle of Verticality" that seemed to say that a player has an absolute right to the territory immediately above him. Talk seemed a little ambivalent about whether that meant you could leave your feet and if contacted by an incoming player still not be called for blocking provided you jumped straight up.

                    Roy's apparently been told to jump straight up and hasn't been called for the incidental contact as in former years. I'd be interested in clarification on this too.
                    Last edited by IndyHoya; 04-17-2011, 07:52 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Refs for Today's Game - The Pits

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      Crawford is actually the exact ref you want as a playoff road team. My guess is once the Pacers coaches found out it was Crawford, they were giddy
                      Well, I have to admit, looking at B-Pump's stats, that Joey Crawford has been good to us. We were 5-0 this year in games he refereed.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Refs for Today's Game - The Pits

                        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                        I actually agree with him on this one, I think is a waste of time complaining about the referees, if the Pacers instead of playing like crap in the last 3 minutes had adjusted, had make the free trows and made a few jumpers, I think we could have won the game.
                        I'm pretty sure we only shot 2 free throws in the last 3 minutes - Roy hit one and missed one. They shot 4. Noah missed one and Rose hit all 3 of his. Noah's and one of Rose's were "and ones".
                        Last edited by IndyHoya; 04-17-2011, 08:38 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Refs for Today's Game - The Pits

                          Originally posted by IndyHoya View Post
                          Interesting you bring that up. When I was looking at the NBA Rules earlier this morning, I was trying to find the "Principle of Verticality" defined somewhere and I couldn't. At least not in the NBA Rules.

                          All I could find was stuff about the "legal guarding position". And that seemed to say that you had to have both feet on the ground to avoid being called for a block.

                          I found non-NBA Rules discussing the "Principle of Verticality" that seemed to say that a player has an absolute right to the territory immediately above him. Talk seemed a little ambivalent about whether that meant you could leave your feet and if contacted by an incoming player still not be called for blocking provided you jumped straight up.

                          Roy's apparently been told to jump straight up and hasn't been called for the incidental contact as in former years. I'd be interested in clarification on this too.

                          In the NBA if the defender jumps into the air he will get called for a foul if there is contact unless the ofensive player does soemthing unusual.

                          Principle of verticality is not an NBA term, it is a college term. In the NBA if you want an offensive foul you cannot jump. Actually back in the late 70's and 80's there were so few offensive fouls calld players never ttried to get them, they either tried to block the shot, got out of the way or took the foul. A big guy holding his ground and taking a charge is somewhat new in the NBA - probably started in the 90's
                          Last edited by Unclebuck; 04-17-2011, 08:04 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Refs for Today's Game - The Pits

                            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                            I always thought if the defender jumps into the air whether the ofensive player jumps into him or not it is a defensive foul. At least that is the way it is called 98% of the time in the NBA. Unless the offensive player used his off arm to clear out or does something else unusual, the defensive player is going to get the call. is that fair, I don't know, but that is the way it is
                            I found this. But as mentioned, nowhere in the NBA Rules:

                            VERTICALITY-Verticality applies to a legal position. The basic components of the principle of verticality are:

                            Legal guarding position must be established and attained initially, and movement thereafter must be legal;

                            From this position, the defender may rise or jump vertically and occupy the space within his or her vertical plane;

                            The hands and arms of the defender may be raised within his or her vertical plane while the defender is on the floor or in the air;

                            The defender should not be penalized for leaving the floor vertically or having his or her hands and arms extended within the vertical plane;

                            The offensive player whether on the floor or airborne may not clear out or cause contact that is a foul;

                            The defender may not "belly up" or use the lower part of the body or arms to cause contact that is a foul outside his or her vertical plane;

                            The player with the ball is to be given no more protection or consideration than the defender in the judging of which player has violated the rules.

                            All I found in the NBA Rules was this:

                            Contact Situations:

                            3. Guarding an opponent:

                            ...A player is entitled to a vertical position even to the extent of holding his arms above his shoulders, as in post play or when double-teaming in pressing tactics.

                            I'm wondering if the NBA Rules incorporate other general rules of basketball.
                            Last edited by IndyHoya; 04-17-2011, 08:14 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Refs for Today's Game - The Pits

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                              In the NBA if the defender jumps into the air he will get called for a foul if there is contact unless the ofensive player does soemthing unusual.

                              Principle of verticality is not an NBA term, it is a college term. In the NBA if you want an offensive foul you cannot jump. Actually back in the late 70's and 80's there were so few offensive fouls calld players never ttried to get them, they either tried to block the shot, got out of the way or took the foul. A big guy holding his ground and taking a charge is somewhat new in the NBA - probably started in the 90's
                              What you are saying certainly seems to be true. I've been all through the NBA Rules about it and only found what I posted previously -- which seems to imply that both of a defender's feet have to be planted (a prerequisite for the NBA's "legal guarding position") before the defender can take a charge. The defender can put his arms straight up and is apparently entitled to the space above him, but he has to have his feet planted. If they aren't, he's not in the "legal guarding position" and he's called for the block.

                              You can't jump straight up in the NBA and take a charge. People saying otherwise appear to be wrong -- at least insofar as NBA Rules are concerned.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Refs for Today's Game - The Pits

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                                Crawford is actually the exact ref you want as a playoff road team. My guess is once the Pacers coaches found out it was Crawford, they were giddy
                                I'm curious. Why do you think Joey Crawford is the exact ref you want. After the technical he called on Tim Duncan for "laughing" at him from the bench, he seems kind of demented. In the ensuing encounter, he challenged Duncan to fight him. Afterwards, Crawford was removed from refereeing by Stu Jackson and David Stern for a while.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X