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

how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

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

  • #46
    Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
    You jumped into the conversation by quoting me, those are my three posts after Sookie made hers. In each and everyone of them, I mention that it "should" be the rule.
    Yes, I quoted you. Then I quoted her in the next post. The time I quoted her involved the clarification of the rule. Then you respond telling me you 'knew that, but didn't agree with it', and that I was missing the point.

    Truth is, you're missing the point, the rule clarification wasn't directed at you to begin with. So it didn't require a response from you telling me I was missing what you were trying to say, because it wasn't meant for you to begin with. Sheesh.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

      The point of my response wasn't to tell you what I was saying, it was to ask a question that still hasn't been answered. (I really don't expect you to be able to answer it, because you aren't in control of the rule.)

      I'm merely voicing my opinion on what the rule is, and what it should be, no need to get ****ty.

      Like I said then, LeBron clearly passed the ball off the backboard, it wasn't a shot attempt. It's a grey area of the rule.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

        Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
        Maybe that's what you were arguing, but I believe I saw Sookie (who I quoted) twice saying she believes it IS a travel. Not SHOULD be a travel. She even said it was a play they were so in awe of making that they just never called it, but should have.

        You just jumped into debate a point I didn't even try to make. I replied to you in the post that I quoted you, and replied to Sookie in the post I quoted her in. You're taking unrelated posts and trying to make them all about you.
        Yea, I thought it was. Made sense that it would be because I see a shot off the backboard as an airball. (Because of the whole shot clock thing.)

        So I am in line with Since86 on what it should be and I still think it's a gray area because Lebron's wasn't a shot.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

          I think the reason that it counts as a shot attempt if it goes off the backboard, but doesn't count for a shot is just to keep the sport, well, sporting. If the ball going off the backboard reset the shot clock, guys could just throw it off the backboard with the clock winding down and have a much higher chance of getting it back than if they forced a shot to try to hit the rim, by nature letting defensive players who have boxed out have a better chance at the rebound. It's inconsistent, but necessary I believe.

          I tend to agree with UB on the officiating. It wasn't the best called game I've ever seen, but it was very even.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

            I can't believe people are complaining about that off the backboard pass. Thats a great play. The awareness and savvy of it is awesome. Kobe does is often. Vince Carter does too. It's completely within the rules and it should be. Its an exciting play. If PG did that everyone would have loved it.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

              Where were all the people complaining when Murphy tried the exact same thing last season and got away with it?

              Kobe's had that move in his arsenal for years now. It may be illegal, but i thought it was common knowledge that players could get away with it? If it becomes a problem, i'm sure the league will look into it- as of right now though, it's such a rarely attempted move that its isn't worth worrying over.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

                [QUOTE=Rogco;1168748][QUOTE=D0NT SH0OT ME;1168717]
                Originally posted by bhaas0532 View Post
                Lebron's pass to himself off the backboard should also have been travelling. You cant pass the ball to yourself.

                True. That was one of those Lebron plays that just made my mouth drop open. He really is that good.


                Off topic here but does Josh's salary even put him over the poverty level in Carmel?........................sorry.......it's a joke....but I can joke because I live in the same county

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

                  Originally posted by TinManJoshua View Post
                  Larry Johnson 4-point play. Other than that I agree.
                  Not really.

                  People often assume that shot was at the buzzer, it wasn't. We still had the ball back and time for a play.


                  Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

                    Originally posted by Peck View Post
                    Not really.

                    People often assume that shot was at the buzzer, it wasn't. We still had the ball back and time for a play.
                    Yeah, like I said to Unclebuck, the call was so horrendous I can't help myself but to blame it, though I know there was like 5 seconds or so left on the clock.

                    It was, however, incredibly demoralizing.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      Obviously it isn't considered a travel now, or it would have been called.
                      While you might be correct that it isn't a violation, to say that it must not be one because it wasn't called makes me laugh.



                      It isn't like refs haven't failed to make calls even on blatant violations in the past...
                      BillS

                      A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                      Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

                        Originally posted by BillS View Post
                        While you might be correct that it isn't a violation, to say that it must not be one because it wasn't called makes me laugh.



                        It isn't like refs haven't failed to make calls even on blatant violations in the past...
                        Negative. Blatant to you on 5 slow-mo instant replays and blatant to a guy trying to watch a dozen things going on a basketball floor at the same time are two entirely different things. Lets not pretend this event was similar to a guy taking 1 extra step with the ball, either. If throwing a ball off the backboard and catching it was a violation, it would have been called. It's that simple. That's as obvious as a guy on a coast to coast fast break for 85 feet never taking a dribble. Which has never happened and not been called. It's impossible to miss. Just like passing it off the backboard.

                        Unrelated to your post, I said it in a thread before just recently, some people here knew names and had issues with specific refs. It's a waste of time and energy. Refs are human beings and will make mistakes. Besides that, refs are just like everyone else and some people will be better at it than others. It's impossible to avoid. I'll boo at individual bad calls, but I think holding grudges against individual refs makes you more likely to complain about calls without it being necessary. Creates a bias.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

                          Originally posted by mboyle1313 View Post
                          I would be willing to wager that I've seen more NBA games than almost any of you, and of this I am certain: I have never...and I mean NEVER...seen a game decided by the officials.
                          I'm slightly amused that you would mention a wager. Years ago I was a professional wrestling referee. I've worked matches in the ring less fixed than the Kings-Lakers 2002.

                          I love the NBA, but that doesn't put it above suspicion or corruption.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

                            Originally posted by maragin View Post
                            I'm slightly amused that you would mention a wager. Years ago I was a professional wrestling referee. I've worked matches in the ring less fixed than the Kings-Lakers 2002.

                            I love the NBA, but that doesn't put it above suspicion or corruption.
                            That series was bad.... Was it game 6 when the lakers shot something like 30-40 freethrows in the 4th quarter?

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

                              Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                              I can't believe people are complaining about that off the backboard pass. Thats a great play. The awareness and savvy of it is awesome. Kobe does is often. Vince Carter does too. It's completely within the rules and it should be. Its an exciting play. If PG did that everyone would have loved it.
                              The And-1 tour is pretty entertaining as well, but it doesn't belong in the NBA.

                              Rules aren't made by evaluating their entertainment level, and they shouldn't be. I'm not blaming LeBron for doing it, I'm saying it's a dumb loophole of the rule. If it's legal, then by all means take advantage of it, but it still doesn't change my opinion of the actual rule. Who did it has nothing to do with the conversation.
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

                                I wish there were statistics on the amount of bad calls in a game to get a sense of how even they really are. I highly doubt it's literally 50/50, but I would be curious to see how close (or not) it is to 50/50.

                                Also, while admittedly I'm not up for a debate or an essay on the subject, let's not forget the issues of timing and psychology with regards to a bad call.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X