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

  • Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

    The problem with discussing officiating is that, too often, folks (such as Mark Boyle, this instance) confuse the idiot masses with the more thoughtful minority when it comes to NBA fans.

    Most people, most of the time, don't know what the hell they're talking about when it comes to officiating.

    But there are those of us who, while obviously still making mistakes ourselves, make a much more concerted effort to be educated, observant, and thoughtful on the matter, and even amongst those of us who fall into that category, we are still left less than satisfied with what we see out of the officials.

    We realize basketball is extremely hard to officiate.

    We realize that, in general, the officials are just good people doing the best that they can.

    We realize that there are many calls that we think they got wrong, only to see that, in fact, WE were wrong once we got to look at a good replay.

    We realize that many of the plays that the officials DO get wrong are simply honest mistakes.

    And, of course, we realize that we have our own personal bias and emotional attachments to a particular team or players.

    We get it.

    But we still see things that raise our eyebrows, and we still believe that there's something not quite right going on here.

    It may be small, but it is noticeable.

    Oh, and by the way, on one occasion (Donaghy), our general suspicions of something being off were confirmed, and that's ignoring all of his claims and focusing only on the man himself.

    With all of the above said, is it really that absurd, emotional, and/or illogical to assume that perhaps something else is possibly going on here? Really?

    And, by the way, when I say "something" I don't mean that to translate as "David Stern is an evil overlord who fixes games left and right". "Something" is more likely that certain teams and players, in certain situations, get a few calls that they don't deserve, and that they didn't get them by happenstance.

    Comment


    • Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

      Originally posted by mattie View Post
      Sure, for the most part we all respond with emotion when discussing officiating but there is a reason for a seemingly common acceptance of the belief that NBA officials are flawed don't you think?

      Every game every where ever from every given sport fans complain about officiating but it is normally a minority and it is generally a quite subdued debate.

      I find it odd that you'd argue officiating isn't a problem when in almost every big NBA game in the last 20 years where the officiating was discussed on a national level, David Stern shot down any and all accusations indicating the officiating was flawed.

      This in complete contrast if we were to compare his response to the NFL's response in like situations. If we look at the NFL we can all remember in the 2004 playoffs when Marvin Harrison was grossly molested on seemingly every play. While the bias' of those of us from Indiana was plainly obvious, and we were still the only ones that cared, the NFL took another look and noted officials needed to ensure passing interference rules were enforced! Since then I think some of us now cringe when officials overcompensate in the Colts favor as I can readily admit, but that doesn't change the fact that we all saw a clear problem with the officiating, and the NFL rectified the problem.

      If we look back at the now famous Lakers-Kings series which was, unlike the Colts-Pats playoff game, a national story, David Stern shot down any accusations contending there was a problem with officiating. You don't see this as a problem?

      I certainly would agree fans need to cool it when complaining about officiating. At the end of the day, the best team almost always wins. But in the NBA, different from every other pro sport, certain players definitely get help. If we ignore this and assume the inherent innocence of the NBA's leadership wouldn't we be a foolish group of customers? I expect a competitive balance and equality within the sport that you would think depends upon true healthy competition.

      I know a lot of people are disagreeing with you. But that doesn't necessarily mean they have lost all ability to reason or think coherently. At least think about that even if you don't feel the need to respond.
      Well spoken Mattie! Spot On!
      Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

      Comment


      • Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

        [QUOTE=vapacersfan;1197772]I had erased that whole series from my memory, damn you, damn you all!!!!!![/QUOTE

        Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

        Comment


        • Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

          Originally posted by Pacer Fan View Post
          I could be wrong here, cause my memory isn't serving me well at the moment on this. But didn't he actually travel before he had threw it to the backboard. That's what I remember seeing and I think the commentators mentioned that too?

          Besides that, I thought it was awsome!
          I didn't see the play, but the officials missing a traveling call, especially against a superstar, now that's something I've never seen before. (I'm to lazy to color this green.)

          My biggest complait with the officials, and I've seen it on the FoxSports comments from othe teams' fans, is them not holding LBJ and Wade to the same "cry you geet a tech" standard they have others. Those two do get to complain alot.

          Comment


          • Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

            the pacers lost to the Bulls today primarily because of poor officiating. I'm sorry, but no player should ever get to shoot 20 free throws in a single game. that was a joke that every time rose took the ball to the basket, he got a whistle. sure, some of them were fouls on the pacers, but there were a few charging fouls on rose that were missed. I remember one in the first half where Rose was completely out of control, and he jumped in to McRoberts while josh was just standing there. Foul on Josh was called. also, Josh was absolutely mugged on a dunk attempt in the second quarter, and no whistle was blown. yet if a finger nail touches Rose than a foul is called. the Pacers have no chance to win this series unless the officials call a more balanced game. I know that Rose is getting his MVP push from the media, but it isn't right that he is getting these favorable calls. and why wasn't kurt thomas given a flagrant foul for elbowing tyler in the head? everybody knows that Thomas is a dirty player, yet the officials seemed reluctant to even call a foul. if that was rose elbowed in the head, our player would have been ejected for sure.
            Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

            Comment


            • Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

              Considering the usual superstar bias, I actually thought the refs called a decent game.

              Now I could write a thesis on how disguisting the whole "superstar player = superstar call" attitude is, and the fact the NBA continues to deny this exists is comical, but that is a story for another day.

              As for the OP, my initial reaction when I heard the refs announced was and along with :shakehead

              That said, Violet was not all that bad. I truly hate Joey, and that is sad because I think he is a decent ref when he is trying to be the center of attention.

              More to the point, I think the refs were far from perfect, but the Bulls won (and Pacers lost) this game more then the refs lost us this game. If I had to blame one thing alone I would say lack of playoff experience, and there is only one way to fix that.....

              Comment


              • Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

                Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                I just don't care for the insinuation here that anyone who questions the officiating is nothing but emotional and illogical. I don't think that's necessarily fair or accurate.
                OK, but it is a waste of time and often only what the losing team and fans resort too. So I decided years ago, that I wasn't going to waste my time.

                Comment


                • Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                  OK, but it is a waste of time and often only what the losing team and fans resort too. So I decided years ago, that I wasn't going to waste my time.
                  It may be a waste of time, but how is it illogical to think star players get star treatment? A lot of times the commentators even say as much...
                  "We've got to be very clear about this. We don't want our players hanging around with murderers," said Larry Bird, Pacers president.

                  Comment


                  • Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

                    Originally posted by rock747 View Post
                    It may be a waste of time, but how is it illogical to think star players get star treatment? A lot of times the commentators even say as much...
                    And thats why there is always questioning about NBA officiating. Everyone knows about star calls. ESPN talks about it all the time. It's like we are supposed to accept favorable treatment by the refs and to be that is a joke.

                    Comment


                    • Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

                      Feed Tyler more. Tell him to draw fouls.


                      Tell players like Granger and Collison to go inside more and seek contact when they do.


                      Tell Hibbert to seek contact more while in the paint.




                      Basically put the refs in a position where they call more fouls that benefit the Pacers. That should always start with Hansbrough if you have him on your team.
                      <---- Hansbrough smiling in the training room after Gerald Henderson's cheap shot. UNC won the game, Tyler was happy so he took this picture. Roy Williams keeps it on his desk.

                      Comment


                      • Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        OK, but it is a waste of time and often only what the losing team and fans resort too. So I decided years ago, that I wasn't going to waste my time.
                        I HATE this argument, and to be frank I find it a bit insulting.

                        I have heard plenty of fans and teams (though now a day Czar Stern has muted most teams with large fines) complain after a win. I can also think of many times when I have talked about a game (in any sport) where a conversation started with something along the lines of "A great win for the X team, but man the refs were terrible. Were these guys watching the same game we were"

                        I get that some people feel like the NBA is not rigged and all the extremists make the sport look bad, but it is tired, lame, and frankly a bit silly to try to say that the refs do not make mistakes or favor a certain team. Hell, look at Simmons twitter from last night commenting on FTA's for the two games (our game and the PHI/MIA). Or is he just a loser as well?!?!

                        Comment


                        • Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

                          Originally posted by Shabazz View Post
                          Feed Tyler more. Tell him to draw fouls.


                          Tell players like Granger and Collison to go inside more and seek contact when they do.


                          Tell Hibbert to seek contact more while in the paint.




                          Basically put the refs in a position where they call more fouls that benefit the Pacers. That should always start with Hansbrough if you have him on your team.
                          This is what Drose, Dwade, Lebron all do very well.

                          Comment


                          • Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

                            pacers need to finish when they go to the rim. quit worrying about the call and worry about the shot. in general, the game is called to reward guys who try to finish and not bail guys out who are trying to get a foul.

                            focusing on the official as the cause of pacer losses only gives you an excuse for your own poor play. play better, and you will get more calls. the pacers lost this game because they didn't play well the last 4 minutes either offensively or defensively. not because of the officiating.

                            whining about the officials only keeps a team from fixing the things that need to be fixed. pacers need to focus on better play, smarter play, and making shots down the stretch.

                            Comment


                            • Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

                              The NBA favors big market teams.

                              I think we as a fan base have to get on the officials. Start hard in Area 55. Area 55's should put up a symbol like the K in baseball for all fouls called against the Pacers. It is just an idea and wouldn't work but may be fun.

                              Comment


                              • Re: how do the Pacers overcome bad officiating?

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                                OK, but it is a waste of time and often only what the losing team and fans resort too. So I decided years ago, that I wasn't going to waste my time.
                                I understand what you're saying here. And ultimately it's a valid position to take...on the other hand if one really feels the games are rigged intentionally or even if the refs really are giving star treatment to some players, one could say that that the NBA is a waste of time, too.

                                Maybe that's also why so many fans prefer college ball?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X