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

Transformers: Who is seeing it tonight?

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

  • #61
    Re: Transformers: Who is seeing it tonight?

    Originally posted by indy0731 View Post
    I'm surprised we haven't heard from Shade yet.
    he is still recovering?

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Transformers: Who is seeing it tonight?

      most likely there wouldn't be a sequel till summer of 2009/2010....

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Transformers: Who is seeing it tonight?

        imdb has it set for 2009.

        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Transformers: Who is seeing it tonight?

          http://www.flickr.com/photos/punkjr/698895174/


          _decorate(_ge('photo_notes'), _ge('photoImgDiv698895174'), 698895174, 'http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1412/698895174_7fa1584682_t.jpg', '3.1444');
          View PunkJr's map


          Taken in (See more photos here)



          It's official. My name has been changed from Jason Michael Burrows to Jason Megatron Burrows, effective today.

          Here's the story of my trip to the courthouse:

          The Judge came in about 15 minutes late & apologized, then said that she'd be hearing name changes first, The first lady got up & changed her last name to honor her birth family. Next, a family went up, and the mom & dad both said that their daughter would like her name changed to Jessica, so the judge signed that order.

          Then it was my turn... I walked to the front, where she had me raise my right hand to swear that I would tell the truth, whole truth & nothing but the truth. She asked if my name change was to defraud creditors, I said no. She asked if it would be detrimental to anyone else, I said no. She Then asked if I was indeed changing my middle name to that of my childhood hero, I smiled & said "Yes Ma'am." She said, "Then I do order & decree that your name be changed from Jason Michael Burrows to Jason Megatron Burrows" with a HUGE grin. There were quite a few chuckles from the courtroom... I was handed the paperwork & I split. =)

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Transformers: Who is seeing it tonight?

            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


            • #66
              Re: Transformers: Who is seeing it tonight?

              Alright, I finally saw it, and...

              ...it was pretty good.

              I still have gripes, though:

              The character designs still suck, even in the film's context. Frenzy doesn't look like he transforms into ANYTHING, let alone a boombox/cell phone.

              After being nearly traumatized as a child when several Autobots bit it in the 1986 film, you'd think Jazz's death would have affected me at least a little. But it didn't. At all. And it was kind of morbid having Prime hold his shattered body as he spoke of his sacrifice.

              I have no doubt in my mind that Frank Welker would have done a hell of a lot better job with Megatron than Hugo Weaving did. Not that Weaving was bad, he just didn't add anything to the character.

              It was too over-the-top. An hour into the movie I actually muttered "enough with the puns already." They're the kind of thing that will be funny the first time you watch the film, but progressively annoying with subsequent viewings.

              The CG, as I said before, is the best I have ever seen. I was even looking for problems and spotted nothing glaring or obvious. The animation crew did a good job as well, though it was weird seeing Bonecrusher rollerblade after Prime.

              So, in short, I think the film did a good job of catering to the non-Transformers fan at large, and the movie is a fun little romp ala other Bay films, like Independence Day. But the essence of the Transformers felt lost in the shuffle somewhat.

              Good first attempt, but I really hope they cut a lot of the cornball act for part two.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Transformers: Who is seeing it tonight?

                Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                LOVED it.

                Frenzy was.....odd. But funny

                It wasn't classic TF, but at the same time it was quality, funny, and the fight scenes were top-notch.

                I'm not sure how they'll make another Transformers without Megatron. I mean, who's left? Shockwave?
                Galvatron?

                Shockwave is a possibility, since the Dinobots are supposedly in #2. As are the Constructicons. Though I don't know what their gestault form will be called, since they changed Brawl to Devastator for the first movie.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Transformers: Who is seeing it tonight?

                  Originally posted by indy0731 View Post
                  Maybe someone can clear this up for me, but what happened to Barricade? You see him chasing down the autobots on the highway and then right as Optimus transforms you don't see him the rest of the movie...Are we to assume he made it out and may still be on earth or do we assume that he was killed? We know the decepticons who definetely were "killed" and we know that Starscream survives and flies into space, but Barricade never really is shown getting beaten in a fight from what I can remember. I was thinking about that this morning and it was kind of bothering me because part of me thinks he will play a bigger role in the sequel if he survived, which I'm leaning towards that he did.
                  Also I hope that if the decepticons find a way to bring back Megatron that the autobots find a way to bring back Jazz. I really enjoyed him as a character and didn't think his death really had anything to do with the plot and was just kind of thrown in there to say "Hey look Megatron can tear autobots in half. Sweet!" I think that if they kill him off they are wasting someone who was a pretty cool and well done character. Plus they never really addressed what they did with his body. Optimus is holding it after the final battle, but was he sent to the bottom of the ocean or did the autobots hold onto his remains?
                  My friend read the book, and said that Bumblebee actually dropped a wrecking ball on Barricade and left him pinned there in the novel. That would have been cool to see in the film, too. Dunno why they changed it (maybe for time, since the film was already so long).

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Transformers: Who is seeing it tonight?

                    Originally posted by indy0731 View Post
                    No he was talking about Megatron.
                    Which is odd because I had just said they were talking during their fighting it was almost like two brothers that had been jealous of each other. Like one line when Megatron says "That was always your problem Optimus you always fought for the weak." That kind of sounded like something an old resentful brother would say.
                    For those discussing the Jazz death I was pretty ****ed about it. I thought Jazz was an awesome character and I was slightly upset they had him die. I am holding out hope that the allspark shard will be able to help Jazz if it is able to bring back Megatron. I think that the sequel and the way it is set up will be completely dependent on how many movies they wanna do. They could really focus on Starscream trying to find away to bring back Megatron or they could go another direction I.E. Starscream becomes the leader.
                    In the movie version of the Transformers, Prime and Megs were co-rulers of Cybertron, until Megs betrayed them in order to seek the power of the Allspark.

                    Megs is also responsible for the loss of Bumblebee's vocals. When Bee refused to disclose the location of the Allspark while they were on Cybertron, Megs crushed his throat.

                    When it comes to the Transformers, I know my ****.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Transformers: Who is seeing it tonight?

                      in other words, you read the movie comics...

                      It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                      Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                      Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                      NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Transformers: Who is seeing it tonight?

                        Originally posted by Sh4d3 View Post
                        In the movie version of the Transformers, Prime and Megs were co-rulers of Cybertron, until Megs betrayed them in order to seek the power of the Allspark.

                        Megs is also responsible for the loss of Bumblebee's vocals. When Bee refused to disclose the location of the Allspark while they were on Cybertron, Megs crushed his throat.

                        When it comes to the Transformers, I know my ****.
                        OK then here are some questions...
                        How does Bumblebee manage to speak at the end then? Secondly, when you say Barricade had a wrecking ball dropped on him in the book do you mean during their first battle when Frenzy turns into the cell phone or did this happen during the final battle? If it was supposed to happen during their first battle then what happened to Barricade during the final battle and if it happened during the final battle I'm ****ed they left it out.


                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Transformers: Who is seeing it tonight?

                          Originally posted by indy0731 View Post
                          OK then here are some questions...
                          How does Bumblebee manage to speak at the end then? Secondly, when you say Barricade had a wrecking ball dropped on him in the book do you mean during their first battle when Frenzy turns into the cell phone or did this happen during the final battle? If it was supposed to happen during their first battle then what happened to Barricade during the final battle and if it happened during the final battle I'm ****ed they left it out.
                          1. The allspark fixed him.

                          2. the final battle.

                          It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                          Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                          Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                          NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Transformers: Who is seeing it tonight?

                            Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                            1. The allspark fixed him.

                            2. the final battle.
                            1. Ahh I completely forogot that he probably got fixed during that moment.
                            2. Then boo for leaving it out.


                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Transformers: Who is seeing it tonight?

                              I thought it was very good. CGI was flawless. Optimus was badass. I thought Hugo did a good job with Megatron's voice. I liked all of the jokes and puns.

                              I highly recommend it.

                              On a side note, did anyone else see the trailer for JJ Abrams movie in January 2008? Some type of giant monster movie?

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Transformers: Who is seeing it tonight?

                                Originally posted by Stryder View Post
                                On a side note, did anyone else see the trailer for JJ Abrams movie in January 2008? Some type of giant monster movie?
                                Yeah.

                                http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1060277/

                                a giant monster movie (refferred internally as The Parasite) which is shot using home video cameras from the point of view of real people who are experiencing the attack on New York City
                                Also, there's a link to one of those "too cool" websites.

                                http://www.1-18-08.com/
                                Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X