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

Official "I Am Legend" discussion thread (SPOILERS GALORE, YOU'VE BEEN WARNED!)

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

  • #31
    Re: Official "I Am Legend" discussion thread (SPOILERS GALORE, YOU'VE BEEN WARNED!)

    Originally posted by newman8r View Post
    Another question I had is how did Anna drive into Manhattan when the bridges were blown up? I dont know the geography of that area at all but wasnt the bridge blowing up supposed to keep people in manhattan and people out of it? Just wondering how she drove there?

    I want to watch it again and again. I just keep wanting to watch it. I downloaded I Am Legend audiobook and I am done parts 1 & 2 of 8. So far it is pretty cool. As I am listening to it I am imaging a whole different movie.

    I thought she said that she had come from a Red Cross evac. boat out of Sao Paulo, Brazil and that they started making port stops for supplies and then someone picked up KV on shore and brought it back on the boat and that is when they got out. I assumed that she had somehow made it to America from Brazil, and that means she had a boat. If she had a boat, she could sail right to Manhattan and then take her pick of vehicles.

    Of course, that still begs the question of how did she get off the island and have a vehicle? Again, not too hard to find a vehicle and I'm sure by that point she was used to taking whatever she found as the world was deserted. The logistics of all of these questions are taken with a grain of salt, I guess.

    I took a screencap of the map he was holding and I've tried to relate that to a real world map of NYC just to get a feel for the location of most of the movie, but I'm having a hard time matching it up. Here is the map:





    I've looked for the 'X' intersection of Avenue of the Americas and Broadway, and when I find that, I cannot relate any of the other street names, Hudson Square, or Independence Plaza and figure out where this location is at. Bear in mind that mapping is what I do for a living, so either I'm having a big brain fart, or the map is hypothetical. I will continue to investigate this, but for now, the Pacers are on and my son wants me to help him put decals on his new motorcycle stunt toy he got!



    RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Official "I Am Legend" discussion thread (SPOILERS GALORE, YOU'VE BEEN WARNED!)

      Welp, I was brain farting it...kinda....

      I found the real world location of the area on the map from the movie. Here it is:




      Also, with the wonders of privacy-invading mapping, here is a streetview shot of the area that is shown across the street to the south from the southeast corner of Hudson Square on his map in the movie. He has it kinda circled with hashes indicating a clockwise motion from the northwest of that area around to the southwest. I thought it interesting that the building he has that circle around (the circle doesn't look like the other circles that are just solid black lines with X's through them as he has searched/cleared them) is a police station....





      Also, the screencap below is of his house, with his door being just to the right of the Washington Square Arch....






      ...and then here is the streetview shot of the real world site.....




      Looks like in the real world view, all those townhouses are on the NYU campus. Do you think that since he was a Army virologist with a full lab in his basement, that maybe he was living in NYU housing and doing research for the Army in conjunction with NYU? I found this to be most interesting......

      Man, I either have too much time on my hands, or I'm a HUUUGE dork.....or both......

      At least I didn't start a thread about counting......



      RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Official "I Am Legend" discussion thread (SPOILERS GALORE, YOU'VE BEEN WARNED!)

        its just a movie

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Official "I Am Legend" discussion thread (SPOILERS GALORE, YOU'VE BEEN WARNED!)

          Originally posted by LouisvilleLip View Post
          its just a movie

          Just go away...



          RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Official "I Am Legend" discussion thread (SPOILERS GALORE, YOU'VE BEEN WARNED!)

            See I thought the boat had landed someone else and she said she came from vermont or somewhere and she heard him on the radio. But I just assumed there is someway she got across and I stopped asking questions. Nice mapping by the way cool to see the buildings and I like the privacy invasion too.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Official "I Am Legend" discussion thread (SPOILERS GALORE, YOU'VE BEEN WARNED!)

              Originally posted by newman8r View Post
              See I thought the boat had landed someone else and she said she came from vermont or somewhere and she heard him on the radio. But I just assumed there is someway she got across and I stopped asking questions. Nice mapping by the way cool to see the buildings and I like the privacy invasion too.
              I thought she was from like Baltimore, and she was traveling to colony and she heard him on the radio....
              Edit Signature

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Official "I Am Legend" discussion thread (SPOILERS GALORE, YOU'VE BEEN WARNED!)

                Originally posted by naturallystoned View Post
                I thought she was from like Baltimore, and she was traveling to colony and she heard him on the radio....
                Now that I watched that part again, she said she was from San Pablo (or maybe still Sao Paulo, I can't make it out 100% with her accent)...San Pablo is just outside San Francisco, so she would've had to cross the entire continental US with all the darkseekers and she didn't look like she had been through that kind of an odyssey...

                She did say that they had come from Maryland after hearing him on the radio, and that they were going to Vermont to the survivors colony.

                When she said she was on a Red Cross boat (out of either San Pablo or Sao Paulo) she was talking about "...after the Navy fell apart, we started docking to take on supplies....", so that makes me think that it was still somewhere in the US since she mentions the Navy even though she doesn't say specifically the US Navy....I would guess that either she started in San Pablo, CA and escaped and came across the country to Maryland and then to NYC or she came across the Atlantic on a ship from Sao Paulo, Brazil and then landed in Maryland and then came to NYC. Either way, she had been through plenty before she got to Neville. I don't think it would've been too hard for her to acquire the things she needed to move forward with her plan whether it was a boat to get across the river(s) to Manhattan, or multiple vehicles to keep moving from Maryland to NYC to Vermont....



                RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Official "I Am Legend" discussion thread (SPOILERS GALORE, YOU'VE BEEN WARNED!)

                  Incidentally, I found a REPACK of the dvd screener of this movie, supposed to have the slight audio sync problem fixed and be slightly better quality video. Getting it now....



                  RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Official "I Am Legend" discussion thread (SPOILERS GALORE, YOU'VE BEEN WARNED!)

                    The copy I have is perfect no worries on sound or picture. Just a little watermark here and there

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Official "I Am Legend" discussion thread (SPOILERS GALORE, YOU'VE BEEN WARNED!)

                      I watched up until Neville caught the female infected and than I jumped to the part when Fred is used as the bait for the trap set because one of my friends who had only seen the movie once wanted to see that part again because when we saw it in theatres it looked like Fred was moving and a real person at first and to me it almost still does when you get the first glimpse at him, but of course it is just a mannequin.

                      We noticed some butterflies in different places like there is one in the God Still Loves Us poster on the tank when he is driving at the start of the movie and there is one when he and Sam are in the corn fields. We were trying to figure out what the one in the corn fields could have meant. The only thing we decided on was that maybe it was to signify their food source and how they are staying alive, because I felt the butterfly in the poster meant that there is still a God and everything would be okay.

                      I am going to watch it again right now.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Official "I Am Legend" discussion thread (SPOILERS GALORE, YOU'VE BEEN WARNED!)

                        Originally posted by newman8r View Post
                        I watched up until Neville caught the female infected and than I jumped to the part when Fred is used as the bait for the trap set because one of my friends who had only seen the movie once wanted to see that part again because when we saw it in theatres it looked like Fred was moving and a real person at first and to me it almost still does when you get the first glimpse at him, but of course it is just a mannequin.

                        We noticed some butterflies in different places like there is one in the God Still Loves Us poster on the tank when he is driving at the start of the movie and there is one when he and Sam are in the corn fields. We were trying to figure out what the one in the corn fields could have meant. The only thing we decided on was that maybe it was to signify their food source and how they are staying alive, because I felt the butterfly in the poster meant that there is still a God and everything would be okay.

                        I am going to watch it again right now.
                        I noticed the butterfly on the 'God still loves us' poster on the tank as well. I remember thinking when I first saw the movie and saw the butterfly when they were picking corn that butterflies must be immune also and it got me thinking that birds must have been also. I know that in other movies with apocalyptic viruses, most of the time, when animals feed on the dead bodies of the infected, they become infected also, and I assumed that the dogs in this movie had been infected that way.

                        I'm not sure what the butterfly was meant to signify in the cornfield, but he and Sam were discussing what he would say to the girl mannequin at the video store...I can only assume that the butterfly was God trying to keep him vigilant and thinking about it when he saw the butterfly on Anna's neck.

                        Also, another thing that bothered me was that at the end, the survivor colony had a big wall, but it didn't look totally impregnable. I would think that the darkseekers would have been able to coordinate a ladder attack, meaning they would make a human (sort of) ladder....the only thing I can assume is that there were no darkseekers in Vermont because they all pretty much migrated into the cities because that is where the food was, plus there would have been much better places to hide during the day....



                        RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Official "I Am Legend" discussion thread (SPOILERS GALORE, YOU'VE BEEN WARNED!)

                          so this movie just came out in scotland on boxing day, so I've only seen it recently.

                          the thing that is bothering me is the death of Sam. I want to know what he injected her with, what your thoughts are on that.

                          here are mine:

                          I doubt very much he wanted to see her turn, so personally think he gave her something to kill her rather than the vaccine. I'm conflicted as to whether he then had to kill her himself because it didn't work fast enough and she turned anyway, or if he was just struggling to stop her from biting him until she passed.

                          I know of no one who would CHOOSE to put themselves in a position where they would have to kill/choke/strangle their best and only friend

                          He didn't think the vaccine worked at all, so why bother trying? Or if he did give her the vaccine why did he then not give her at least overnight to react, as he had given the rat at least one night to see. I realise he only gave the human moments to decide it didn't work, but still....Sam was not the same size as the human.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Official "I Am Legend" discussion thread (SPOILERS GALORE, YOU'VE BEEN WARNED!)

                            Originally posted by muppetgal View Post
                            so this movie just came out in scotland on boxing day, so I've only seen it recently.

                            the thing that is bothering me is the death of Sam. I want to know what he injected her with, what your thoughts are on that.

                            here are mine:

                            I doubt very much he wanted to see her turn, so personally think he gave her something to kill her rather than the vaccine. I'm conflicted as to whether he then had to kill her himself because it didn't work fast enough and she turned anyway, or if he was just struggling to stop her from biting him until she passed.
                            I know of no one who would CHOOSE to put themselves in a position where they would have to kill/choke/strangle their best and only friend

                            He didn't think the vaccine worked at all, so why bother trying? Or if he did give her the vaccine why did he then not give her at least overnight to react, as he had given the rat at least one night to see. I realise he only gave the human moments to decide it didn't work, but still....Sam was not the same size as the human.
                            It's probably that simple, a very sad scene but one that makes you appreciate what a great actor the fresh prince is.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Official "I Am Legend" discussion thread (SPOILERS GALORE, YOU'VE BEEN WARNED!)

                              if anyone is too lazy to read or just doesn't like reading, and they would like to know what happens in the book, go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Am_Legend and read the plot section.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Official "I Am Legend" discussion thread (SPOILERS GALORE, YOU'VE BEEN WARNED!)

                                Originally posted by newman8r View Post
                                I watched up until Neville caught the female infected and than I jumped to the part when Fred is used as the bait for the trap set because one of my friends who had only seen the movie once wanted to see that part again because when we saw it in theatres it looked like Fred was moving and a real person at first and to me it almost still does when you get the first glimpse at him, but of course it is just a mannequin.

                                We noticed some butterflies in different places like there is one in the God Still Loves Us poster on the tank when he is driving at the start of the movie and there is one when he and Sam are in the corn fields. We were trying to figure out what the one in the corn fields could have meant. The only thing we decided on was that maybe it was to signify their food source and how they are staying alive, because I felt the butterfly in the poster meant that there is still a God and everything would be okay.

                                I am going to watch it again right now.
                                The mannequin does actually move it's head. Of course it's not REALLY moving it's head, you're just seeing it from Neville's perspective as he's obviously going a bit loony.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X