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

What movie did you last watch?

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

  • Re: What movie did you last watch?

    Pirates 3: At World's End - The 3 hours were worth it. But please don't try to go see it without watching the first two...

    Evan Almighty - Funny. Short. But funny. I think Bruce Almighty was funnier, but thats because Jim Carey was in it. But it surprised me that there is actually a sequel that you don't have to see the first one to understand.

    Fantastic 4: Rise of the Silver Surfer - Too short. The movie itself, without previews and credits, was like less than an hour long. The ending sucked. But other than that, it was alright. FYI, I personally think if you didn't see the first one, you will be lost.
    Last edited by indyman37; 07-01-2007, 10:50 PM.
    I think KP is a Captain Planet fan. He believes that the collective will of five decent starters can outweigh the power of top-level talent. Too bad Herb won't cut the check for their Planeteer rings.

    Comment


    • Re: What movie did you last watch?

      Originally posted by Mal View Post
      Batman Begins wasn't a sequel; it was a reboot.
      Exactly.

      And the rule with sequels IMO is the same as the rule with all films - who produces, who directs, who writes, who acts. If those are good you're gonna be okay.

      No coincidence that Lucas brought in great writers for Empire, then dumped them for Jedi and onward. Coppola simply did the rest of the book for Godfather 2, thus being a "dead heat" which most agree with I think.

      Cameron in his prime did both Aliens and T2 and it shows.

      Now Dawn of the Dead better than Night of...no way and I still sorta like the original Dawn, but Night of was brilliant work by Romero. The remake of Dawn was fantastic IMO and better than the original.

      People get too hung up on remakes and sequels like they are inherently bad things. They aren't. The problem is that studios and exec producers (ie the money not the hands-on producers) USE and ABUSE the franchise name to make a quick buck most of the time. Put any hacks on the project and let the rep earn us some money, rather than paying to keep good talent involved in the process. Planet of the Apes is just one of many examples where it gets progressive worse this way.

      Oh, and it also helps if you don't have the writers still writing the script WHILE you are filming - ie, the 2 Pirates sequels.



      DHard 4 - solid action film despite some stretches on reality even by DH rules. Also DH is a great example of a sequel being terrible due to director. Hack Renny Harlin came on board for DH2 and it tanked, so they brought back McTieren for 3 and it showed (though its been rough for him since then).

      Ghost Rider - bland direction, uneven acting by Cage though he is cast well, spotty plot points that ruin an otherwise good story...most of that was saved by some great visual FX and art direction. Sad that they got the toughest part right (his look and behavior) and blew just about everything else. This is the same guy that did Daredevil and Electra and it shows.

      Black Snake Moan - if you liked Hustle and Flow you should love this. I was very happy with this modern southern folk tale and I love how he keeps sneaking this heartwarming relationships underneath a surface of depravity and apparent exploitation. The way this film was advertised plays on that exploitation without the slightest hint about it's heart.

      1408 - nice to see a rare good King story on film, in large part thanks to Cusak's effort. Still has touches of King-camp to the story, but at least it's not about alien ghosts who are creating monsters in a lab but lose control of them when gov't bio-weapons are used (maybe just 1 premise at a time there Steve, okay).

      Comment


      • Re: What movie did you last watch?

        I have a confession to make.

        I broke down and saw a sequel last night and it wasn't half bad. Really I had no choice, when you decide to go to a movie in the middle of this horrible summer movie season you have no real choice but to see a sequel especially when the person you go to the movie with says I've never heard of 1408 - it can't be any good.

        Saw "Die Hard 4" last night that is what I call it anyway. And really it wasn't bad. I'd say it wasn't as good as the first "Die Hard" (which is clearly wasn't) but it was better than the 2nd or 3rd "Die Hard" but I really don't know that since I didn't see those two movies.

        The action was way over-the-top, but I thought it had some funny lines and the correct tone as it didn't take itself too seriously.

        So that wasn't half bad.

        Second confession: I saw a Micheal Bay movie last night also. Of course I didn't know it was a Michael Bay movie until about half-way through and what can you do then, be a jerk and demand the movie be shut off, or leave in a tizzy saying I refuse to see Michael Bay movies.

        The movie was "the Island" from a couple of years ago, we started watching it and either I missed the opening credits or just spaced it. But the first 1/3 of the movie didn't seem like a Michael Bay movie, but all of a sudden when they escaped the underground what ever you call it and it started doing that Michael bay thing, I turned to my friend and said, "wait is this a Michael Bay movie, it has to be I'm getting whiplash and a headache" to which he said to me, "what is a Michael Bay movie" At that point I decided to say nevermind and make the best of the situation. So I sat through it and tried to enjopy it as best I could. A regretful decision on my part.

        Comment


        • Re: What movie did you last watch?

          Ghost Rider - It's unfortunate that this was a semi-enjoyable movie that could have been much more. The dialogue was bland and unimaginative and the actors were very stiff, other than the bad guys & Elliott. Cage was weak and Eva Mendez was horrible - could have taken an attractive cardboard cutout, hooked up a tape recorder and it would have offered as much to this movie as she did. Worth seeing? I guess - but I was left with a, "Is that it?" feeling.

          Black Snake Moan - Interesting movie and seeing Ricci in her underwear the entire show (except when she was out of it) was't bad. And I always like Samuel L. The only thing I thought it lacked was setting Samuel L up as more of a tortured soul than he was - one of the deleted scenes should have been included which would have added a lot - the one about his ex's pregnancy. Also, the Reverand's character could have been expanded - good flick though.
          The poster formerly known as Rimfire

          Comment


          • Re: What movie did you last watch?

            I finally watched the second Pirates of the Carribean this weekend. Pretty good, but damn it ****ed me off when it really didn't have an ending....I knew that was coming, but both my wife and I looked at each other sand said "that's it?". Much like she does when Btown comes around....

            Comment


            • Re: What movie did you last watch?

              Zing!
              Narf!

              Comment


              • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                Saw Miami Vice this weekend. I had heard a few bad things, but I thought it was really good actually. Seems like another of these 2:20 minute movies that could have been 2:00, but it was actually pretty dense considering the current state of over-long movies from self-important directors.

                Essentially, it was a "dark" version of the TV show, right down to the literal sense of charcoal and black suits instead of pink, white and blue. And I was particularly impressed by how strong and detailed the "drug bust" story was. Colin and Jamie Foxx made a good, although a lot different, Crockett and Tubbs.

                As far as Michael Mann movies go, it wasn't as good as Heat or Last of the Mohicans, but better than Collateral and Ali (which I liked a lot, though I hear most people didn't).
                Last edited by JayRedd; 07-02-2007, 12:09 PM.
                Read my Pacers blog:
                8points9seconds.com

                Follow my twitter:

                @8pts9secs

                Comment


                • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                  I watched Grease twice last night.

                  Comment


                  • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    Mourning: seems like we tend to like the same movies. "Zodiak" was a great movie - another movie to look for is "Lookout" those are the two best movies I've seen this year. i think you'd like "Lookout"

                    As far as sequels go, Empire strikes back is the best of the 6 movies, Godfather 2 - although I still like the original one better and same thing with T2 which was a good movie, but the original Terminator was better.

                    Speed2 might have been the worst movie I've ever seen, and I loved Speed.
                    I reallyliked Mission Impossible - the first one, the second and third one I did not like.

                    The only other sequal that I can think of that was better than the original was Aliens - but that movie came out about 7 or 8 years later.
                    Ok. Haven't heard about "Lookout" yet, but I think I will check on it tonight to see what sort of story it is. Further, I fully aggree about your sequals part. "Aliens" was a superb sci-fi thriller/horror/action movie. "MI-I" is by FAR the best of the 3 movies. Two was easily the worst, while the third was so-so, see it once and never again after that.

                    I liked "T1" better then "Judgment Day" aswell, but both were absolutely good.

                    Regards,

                    Mourning
                    2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                    2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                    2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                    Comment


                    • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                      Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                      Saw Miami Vice this weekend. I had heard a few bad things, but I thought it was really good actually. Seems like another of these 2:20 minute movies that could have been 2:00, but it was actually pretty dense considering the current state of over-long movies from self-important directors.

                      Essentially, it was a "dark" version of the TV show, right down to the literal sense of charcoal and black suits instead of pink, white and blue. And I was particularly impressed by how strong and detailed the "drug bust" story was. Colin and Jamie Foxx made a good, although a lot different, Crockett and Tubbs.

                      As far as Michael Mann movies go, it wasn't as good as Heat or Last of the Mohicans, but better than Collateral and Ali (which I liked a lot, though I hear most people didn't).
                      I liked "Collateral", but wasn't as enarmoured with "Heat" as some seem to be. It just doesn't really touch or grab me. "Last of the Mohicans" was good. "Miami Vice" ... I hated, really hated it. All style, no substance. Almost a non-existent story line. And a woman that was supposed to be "THE" babe of the movie I found to be extremely annoying.

                      Nah, sorry, not my movie .

                      Regards,

                      Mourning
                      Last edited by Mourning; 07-02-2007, 03:08 PM.
                      2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                      2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                      2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                      Comment


                      • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                        Originally posted by Gyron View Post
                        I finally watched the second Pirates of the Carribean this weekend. Pretty good, but damn it ****ed me off when it really didn't have an ending....I knew that was coming, but both my wife and I looked at each other sand said "that's it?". Much like she does when Btown comes around....
                        The way the leave you, you don't know whether they are going to make another one or just stop.
                        I think KP is a Captain Planet fan. He believes that the collective will of five decent starters can outweigh the power of top-level talent. Too bad Herb won't cut the check for their Planeteer rings.

                        Comment


                        • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                          Just saw Shooter, kick @ss movie!
                          "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

                          Comment


                          • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                            Originally posted by Mourning View Post
                            Ok. Haven't heard about "Lookout" yet, but I think I will check on it tonight to see what sort of story it is. Further, I fully aggree about your sequals part. "Aliens" was a superb sci-fi thriller/horror/action movie. "MI-I" is by FAR the best of the 3 movies. Two was easily the worst, while the third was so-so, see it once and never again after that.

                            I liked "T1" better then "Judgment Day" aswell, but both were absolutely good.

                            Regards,

                            Mourning
                            Here is some info on Lookout from Rotten tomatoes


                            And here is what I wrote about it back in March when I saw it in the theaters

                            saw "The Lookout" today. A really, really good movie. It just goes to show you that if you build the characters first and then add in the action, it is just much more suspenseful - because you really care about characters. Why don't more movie makers realize this.

                            I highly recommend this movie.

                            Here is a clip for Ebert and Roeper - you have to find the Lookout in the now playing section. Although you might not want to watch the clips because it gives parts of the movie away. Just a fantastic movie though




                            http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/lookout/
                            Last edited by Unclebuck; 07-02-2007, 04:18 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                              Music and Lyrics - just your average DVD flick that revolves around POP music...

                              Pan's Labyrinth - It wasn't boring...but I just didn't really care too much about the ending. Nevertheless it was an alright movie.

                              Comment


                              • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                                Originally posted by Hoop View Post
                                Just saw Shooter, kick @ss movie!
                                I just watched that as well. Mark is in beastmode.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X