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

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

    Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
    usually it means marc davis, bennet salvatore or ken mauer are officiating.

    sorry, just couldn't pass a chance to throw my least favorite officials under the bus.

    in general, it is because the calls you refer to are not really bad calls. just different interpretations than your [or my] own.
    That is the problem though there is no different interpretation. These aren't just random guys that signed up to ref a few boys and girls club games. These are professional refs that go through training and know exactly how the NBA wants them to call things. There is no interpretation, the NBA does the interpretation for the refs. That is why leagues fine players and coaches who complain about the refs, because saying the refs are stupid is the same as saying the league is stupid.

    Comment


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

      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
      And the attitudes dominating this thread might be a reason why.

      If you aren't willing to actively look for the next Tim Donaghy, you will never find him.

      EDIT: Tim also told us that the league pushed for certain series etc. Can you cite any investigations into his claims? I can't.

      I'm not saying they weren't performed, I'm saying we don't know. And if we don't know, then we don't know.....

      It could be nothing, or it could be something. We don't know....

      He is a crazy bitter criminal fool, I don't put any stock into what he says. Plus everything he said was hearsay and third hand, rumors, nothing concrete.

      I forget all the changes they made after the Donaghy thing, but I figure they are investigating it a ton.

      Comment


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

        All,

        Before I get lumped in the pile of "bitter" loser Pacer fans I want to re-emphasize again that I in no way am claiming the NBA handed the game one win to the Bulls.

        Overall I think referee's do an excellent job, other than Benet Salvatore' but that is another matter.

        But unlike my good friend Uncle Buck I do think at times star players receive the overly generous benefit of the doubt from officials.

        I also strongly disagree with U.B. that no I do NOT want refs. calling the game based on their feel for a particular series. Rules are rules for a reason and there is nothing that should allow player A to have an advantage over player B because "it's his game style". Everybody should have the same equal playing field.


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

        Comment


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

          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
          He is a crazy bitter criminal fool, I don't put any stock into what he says. Plus everything he said was hearsay and third hand, rumors, nothing concrete.
          Well that's fine. But if you want to stop the drug trade, you're going to have to deal with drug dealers.

          You can't clean anything up, without expecting to get your hands a little dirty.

          We're talking about a guy that fooled the system for years. I don't think that's the definition of someone who's stupid crazy, but rather just crazy crazy.
          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

          Comment


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

            Originally posted by Peck View Post
            All,

            Before I get lumped in the pile of "bitter" loser Pacer fans I want to re-emphasize again that I in no way am claiming the NBA handed the game one win to the Bulls.

            Overall I think referee's do an excellent job, other than Benet Salvatore' but that is another matter.

            But unlike my good friend Uncle Buck I do think at times star players receive the overly generous benefit of the doubt from officials.

            I also strongly disagree with U.B. that no I do NOT want refs. calling the game based on their feel for a particular series. Rules are rules for a reason and there is nothing that should allow player A to have an advantage over player B because "it's his game style". Everybody should have the same equal playing field.
            Couple of points.

            No not now, the refs are capable nor have they been trained to call an NBA game like the late great earl strom. I realize those days are long gone and won't ever come back.

            On the star player thing some players are allowed to do twhat they do. Like Patrick Ewing travel almost every play, Reggie traveled a lot also. But I don't consider those star calls, just they were allowed to do what they did almost every play. I would have to go back and watch some old foilm, but probably a player like Shandon Anderosn was allowed to get away with his move. I mean are you going to call Ewing for traveling 10 times a game. No

            Although really the refs are going away from that type of thing, so while I don't think the games are officiated any better than they used to be the direction they are headed is probably more to most of your liking. You see more fouls called at the end of games. You see more traveling, you see a much more standardized system of officiating

            I would argue though you are taking away the refs ability to think reason and are training them to be robots.

            Comment


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

              Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
              are you saying that all the officials are doing what donaghy did?

              or are some of them?? half, 1/4, 5 or 6 guys.

              is it joey, bennett or violet?

              or is this just a 'is it possible' arguement.

              if it is the latter, yes, it is possible that another official is betting on games. anything is possible. other than that, it is a bogus arguement.
              I can only speak for myself, but I think what he is saying is it has happened before so it could happen again.

              This notion that no one should ever question refs because nothing could EVER be off is comical at best.

              Comment


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

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                My personal opinion is I would like them to call a game less on the rules. hback in the 80's the top refs were so good they had a feel for the game and were able to call the game differently depending on what was needed.

                I'm not sure what you want me to say, I don't think the stars get the calls. besdies which stars are we talking about. Ask the players, coaches and fans in Orlando if they think Dwight Howard gets the calls. They would say no. Certain players do really get fouled a lot, sure they are star players because in a lot of instances in order to be a star players you have to be able to draw a lot of fouls


                Howard does get fouled a lot, but from my limited time watching games in Florida he also got quite a reputation as a whiner which did not help him. Then again, big guys get fouled more IMO (see Shaq) and yes, I agree about the chicken or the egg theory. Does not change the fact a star is more likely to get a call then a 12th man on the same exact play, and for no other reason then the fact that player is a star player.

                Comment


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

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                  I just remember thread after thread and article after article about how he was just the tip of the iceberg, "you just wait, there will be dozens of refs involved" nope hasn't happened
                  100% serious question: How do you know?

                  I mean, I hoped the NBA would be perpectly transparent, and I have little doubt that they researched this issue to the best of their ability (it was embarraing, no matter how you spin it)

                  That said, how do we know the NBA did not sweep it under the rug, or just simply miss it.

                  I mean, they did a great job catching Tim and his cheating, didn't they?............

                  Comment


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

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    He is a crazy bitter criminal fool, I don't put any stock into what he says. Plus everything he said was hearsay and third hand, rumors, nothing concrete.

                    I forget all the changes they made after the Donaghy thing, but I figure they are investigating it a ton.
                    So you would rather just dismiss everything he says because he is a criminal.

                    Do I take everythign he says as gospel? NO

                    Does that mean that he is unable to tell the truth now? NO

                    There is enough smoke for me to think there might be a fire, and that is a problem.

                    Doesnt matter, though. Clearly you and David Stern have a bat phone and he has done a great job instructing you on how to have an answer for everything and not hold the NBA accountable at all

                    Comment


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

                      Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
                      100% serious question: How do you know?

                      I mean, I hoped the NBA would be perpectly transparent, and I have little doubt that they researched this issue to the best of their ability (it was embarraing, no matter how you spin it)

                      That said, how do we know the NBA did not sweep it under the rug, or just simply miss it.

                      I mean, they did a great job catching Tim and his cheating, didn't they?............

                      The media would be all over it. The sports media, the NBA media and the news media. We would know.

                      Comment


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

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        Couple of points.

                        No not now, the refs are capable nor have they been trained to call an NBA game like the late great earl strom. I realize those days are long gone and won't ever come back.

                        On the star player thing some players are allowed to do twhat they do. Like Patrick Ewing travel almost every play, Reggie traveled a lot also. But I don't consider those star calls, just they were allowed to do what they did almost every play. I would have to go back and watch some old foilm, but probably a player like Shandon Anderosn was allowed to get away with his move. I mean are you going to call Ewing for traveling 10 times a game. No

                        Although really the refs are going away from that type of thing, so while I don't think the games are officiated any better than they used to be the direction they are headed is probably more to most of your liking. You see more fouls called at the end of games. You see more traveling, you see a much more standardized system of officiating

                        I would argue though you are taking away the refs ability to think reason and are training them to be robots.
                        Why not? If it really is that bad lets just get rid of traveling from the rulebook, then everyone can do it......

                        As for the last point, I agree to a point. However, I DO NOT pin that on the refs. I put that in the NBA. Stop adding stupid rules (like hand checks) and let the players play.

                        I hate the refs for this stupid techincal foul enforcement rule, but I get they are just doing their job.

                        Comment


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

                          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                          Couple of points.

                          No not now, the refs are capable nor have they been trained to call an NBA game like the late great earl strom. I realize those days are long gone and won't ever come back.

                          On the star player thing some players are allowed to do twhat they do. Like Patrick Ewing travel almost every play, Reggie traveled a lot also. But I don't consider those star calls, just they were allowed to do what they did almost every play. I would have to go back and watch some old foilm, but probably a player like Shandon Anderosn was allowed to get away with his move. I mean are you going to call Ewing for traveling 10 times a game. No

                          Although really the refs are going away from that type of thing, so while I don't think the games are officiated any better than they used to be the direction they are headed is probably more to most of your liking. You see more fouls called at the end of games. You see more traveling, you see a much more standardized system of officiating

                          I would argue though you are taking away the refs ability to think reason and are training them to be robots.
                          If Patrick Ewing traveled 10 times a game yes I would call him for traveling 10 times a game.

                          Refs aren't out there to think, they are out there to enforce the rules of the game. If making them more robot like means that we get consistent reffing that is fair to everyone then good that is the way it should be. Just because a player has a reputation for being more physical does not mean refs should allow him to do something that would be a foul on someone else. Likewise just because someone has a reputation of "being too fast to draw a charge" does not mean if he runs into someone it is a blocking foul.

                          Like I have said before if these refs can't keep up with the pace of the game they need to bring in younger refs who have eyes fast enough for the game.

                          Comment


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

                            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                            The media would be all over it. The sports media, the NBA media and the news media. We would know.
                            Yeah, and if the CIA is kidnapping people and running mind control experiments on them we would know to. Oh snap.

                            Comment


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

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                              The media would be all over it. The sports media, the NBA media and the news media. We would know.
                              You really beleive that?

                              I have no doubt if it was fixed (Stern tells X person to tell Y person to tell Z person to have the refs fix the game) you would be correct.

                              However, I do not think it is a written rule. IMO if there is something going on (and I am still not sure there is) I think it would be a unwritten policy of NBA refs being encouraged by the vertran refs (or coaches or fans) to push certain players or teams.

                              Remember the finals game when during a time-out of a Lakers game the refs were miked up and you heard Kenny Mauer (I think)say - "Remember guys, Shaq has 5 fouls".

                              No you could easily argue (and I am sure you will) that they were saying do not give him a cheap foul, or you could argue (which I will) that they are saying watch out for him and lets not have him foul out because he is a "star player" and we want him to last as long as possible.

                              That is only one example, and I will not even touch game 6 of the Kings-Lakers game (and of course I do not need to be reminded that the Kings could have wo game 7).

                              Comment


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

                                I believe great players will still be great if you force them to play within the rules. Patrick Ewing is not going to spend 10 years traveling 10 times a game - if it gets called, he'll correct it or he won't be in the league, and he was too good to not be in the league.

                                I always say that the "good old days" were when rules were made to STOP players from dominating - the "current days" are when rules are "interpreted" because dominant players clearly are better than the refs can possibly be.
                                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

                                Working...
                                X