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

GOOO DAWGS!!

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

  • Re: GOOO DAWGS!!

    Originally posted by Hicks View Post
    Someone on twitter told me that last shot at half court would not have counted because it was allegedly after the buzzer sounded. Anyone know if he's right or wrong?
    Wrong, there is a photo on SI.com that shows the ball out of his hands at 0.0 and before a the light comes on.
    You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

    Comment


    • Re: GOOO DAWGS!!

      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
      Someone on twitter told me that last shot at half court would not have counted because it was allegedly after the buzzer sounded. Anyone know if he's right or wrong?
      it is clearly out of his hands at the 0.3 second mark, if you watch frame-by-frame.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDmW988_5Jg

      the youtube link will probably be deleted at some point for copyright reasons
      Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 04-06-2010, 03:19 PM.
      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


      • Re: GOOO DAWGS!!

        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
        Someone on twitter told me that last shot at half court would not have counted because it was allegedly after the buzzer sounded. Anyone know if he's right or wrong?
        It's very close. It looks and sounds like he gets it off in time, but the replay I watched (several times) was on a computer without great resolution. It would have certainly been reviewed, but I haven't seen an angle where you can see the shot and the light on the backboard.

        Unless he's seen something different from what's being shown on the internet, it's inconclusive.

        Comment


        • Re: GOOO DAWGS!!

          Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
          it is clearly out of his hands at the 0.3 second mark, if you watch frame-by-frame.

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDmW988_5Jg

          the youtube link will probably be deleted at some point for copyright reasons
          I'm not sure how to watch it frame by frame. I think he got it off in time, but it didn't go in, so it's moot.

          Comment


          • Re: GOOO DAWGS!!

            this video is a little higher quality, but you have to watch a stupid commercial:

            http://ballhype.com/video/last-13-6-...utler-vs-duke/

            my analysis:
            0.4 seconds: the ball is still in his hand
            0.3 second: it is on his fingertips
            0.2 seconds: it is very clearly out of his hands, by several feet

            to see frame-by frame I just kept double-clicking and tried several times.

            Last night on TV they showed a replay where you could see the backboard light and it was clearly a shot that would have counted.
            Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 04-06-2010, 06:06 PM.
            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


            • Re: GOOO DAWGS!!

              If they were reviewing a made FG, they could superimpose the clock into the corner of the screen, I believe. (Just as they did to verify the game clock on Duke's last timeout.) They don't need to solely rely on the lights on the backboard, although they certainly can help.
              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


              • Re: GOOO DAWGS!!

                I didn't get Kennedy-obsessed with the film before moving on, but I think the Twitter guy may be onto something. I think it's still in his hand for about 0.1 of a second.

                Comment


                • Re: GOOO DAWGS!!

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                  That was a big mistake to miss the second free throw on purpose with a 2 point lead. Duke needed that point to at least force OT if Butler's halfcourt shot goes in. If Duke had a 1 point lead, then yes miss the second free throw to use up some time, but not with a two point lead. Huge mistake there

                  You are absolutely right. I couldn't believe the Duke player missed that shot on purpose. Terrible decision that could have cost Duke the championship.

                  I truly enjoyed watching Butler play in the tournament, and it reminded me why years ago I enjoyed college BB more than the NBA game. I watched every Butler game televised in the tournament, and congrats to them for the outstanding season they had!

                  Comment


                  • Re: GOOO DAWGS!!

                    Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                    I didn't get Kennedy-obsessed with the film before moving on, but I think the Twitter guy may be onto something. I think it's still in his hand for about 0.1 of a second.
                    When I stop at the exact frame where the clock says 0.2 seconds, at the 1:43 mark in the tape I linked, the ball is at least 4 feet out of his hand. The clock is in the bar at the bottom of the screen, and the ball is clearly visable (from that perspective) above the heads of two people in the stands sitting next to one another, both wearing orange, straight above the "LL" in "Butler Bulldogs".

                    Oddly enough in the same video, later they show a replay with the clock at the left-hand side of the screen. This is at the 2:44 mark. In this version, the ball is still on his fingertips at 0.1 seconds. The very next frame the clock hits 0.0 and the ball is 4 feet out of his hands- the ball is clearly visable (from that perspective) but it is not above the heads of two people in the stands sitting next to one another, both wearing orange- It is near the person two seats to their right (another orange-clad patron, with a guy in blue in-between), straight above the "ER" in "Butler bulldogs". .

                    There is clearly a difference in the clock in the two versions. Which is official? I don't know. The horn is official, but freeze-framing audio is a bit above my level of expertise. Still another replay at the 2:49 mark shows the light going off, and it looks like the ball is well out of his hand when the light goes off, but high res video is needed to know for sure.
                    Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 04-06-2010, 05:55 PM.
                    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


                    • Re: GOOO DAWGS!!

                      this picture shows the clock dilemma I cited. The two clocks have different readings!

                      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


                      • Re: GOOO DAWGS!!

                        Note also on the replay the bone-jarring and perfectly legal pick that Howard (#54) set to free Hayward to get an "open" look on the half-courter.
                        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


                        • Re: GOOO DAWGS!!

                          sorry, one more still photo- ball is out of his hands and the "fast clock" says 0.0 but clearly the backboard light is NOT LIT (a red light all the way around the backboard).



                          woulda counted...
                          Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 04-06-2010, 06:13 PM.
                          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


                          • Re: GOOO DAWGS!!

                            Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
                            Note also on the replay the bone-jarring and perfectly legal pick that Howard (#54) set to free Hayward to get an "open" look on the half-courter.
                            Oh, yeah. I noticed that last night immediately. Loved that bone-crusher by him.

                            Comment


                            • Re: GOOO DAWGS!!

                              Well, in light of the clock discrepancy I say they give Butler the ball out of bounds on the sideline with 3.6 secs left and let them have another shot. It's only fair...



                              Watching on TV I don't think there's any question that bucket would've counted and I think the refs look like they were ready to count it (none were waving their arms to wave it off as the would've been the moment he released it if they felt it was late).

                              My experience is that on a buzzer beater shot the ref(s) is already waving it off even before it goes in the basket (or not) if he thinks it left the player's hand late. They don't wait to see if it went in or not. If you think about it, that wouldn't be right (to wait and see if the shot goes in before deciding whether it was late or not). When it's a buzzer beater layup it's all fairly simultaneous... but on a half court heave there's more time for the ref to be seen waving it off even before the ball reaches the rim.
                              Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                              ------

                              "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                              -John Wooden

                              Comment


                              • Re: GOOO DAWGS!!

                                I think I am finally recovered now. When it comes to Indiana college basketball I bleed gold and black, so I didn't expect to feel as badly as I did when that shot didn't go in.

                                The Colts, Fever, and Butler all get to the title game and lose...and let's not even talk about the Pacers. It's been a rough year for Indy sports.
                                "Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better." - Albert Camus

                                "Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well." - Voltaire

                                "Everyone's values are defined by what they will tolerate when it is done to others." - William Greider

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X