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 TV Show Did You Last Watch

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

  • Re: What TV Show Did You Last Watch

    Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
    Vinyl any good? It looks like HBO giving Scorsese a blank check and saying have fun. Which means it looks ****** to me.
    So far it's been good enough to keep me watching, but not good enough to get me excited about watching it.
    Did you know Antonio and Dale aren’t actually brothers?

    Comment


    • Re: What TV Show Did You Last Watch

      Originally posted by Shade View Post
      Spoiler Spoiler:
      Ahhh...yes...I forgot. Now I remember I was like ....I enjoyed the movie though: Fire walk with me, I believe it was called?

      Comment


      • Re: What TV Show Did You Last Watch

        Originally posted by pogi View Post
        Ahhh...yes...I forgot. Now I remember I was like ....I enjoyed the movie though: Fire walk with me, I believe it was called?
        Yep. FWWM was apparently much-maligned by critics, but I thought it was okay.

        Comment


        • Re: What TV Show Did You Last Watch

          Originally posted by Suaveness View Post
          Just finished Daredevil S2. Amazingly, it's even better than S1. They did Punisher beautifully and the action seasons were amazing as before. S3 can't get here fast enough. And looking forward to Luke Cage later this year.
          S2 was really good, but I still have to give the slight edge to S1. S2 was a bit predictable. I had four predictions going into S2 and they all came to pass. S2 probably has better replay value than S1, though.

          I did notice in one of the last episodes there was a fight scene where DD threw a kick while fighting an army of ninjas, but there was nobody there.

          Comment


          • Re: What TV Show Did You Last Watch

            Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
            Vinyl any good? It looks like HBO giving Scorsese a blank check and saying have fun. Which means it looks ****** to me.
            Not too bad of a show... Just not a great show in a sea of other options.

            I feel like the actors and premise are a good ball of clay to work with but I'm still waiting on the writers to make something out of it.

            Comment


            • Re: What TV Show Did You Last Watch

              Well, we're coming up on the season finale of TWD. It's been an interesting season. It's been entertaining to me but I can't say I don't have some nit-picking moments. I didn't like the Glenn fake out. That just seemed cheap. Almost late season "Dexter"ish. But then there are some excuses why they might've done it (which I'll have to spoiler tag). But even the excuses are a little thin because the show didn't exactly let fans off the hook with a quick resolution.

              Then this weekend we get the 'big bad' that everyone has been waiting on. Everyone knows, SOMEONE is going to die... well.... supposedly we all know it! Just a question of who. But then the spoilers came out and said....
              Spoiler Spoiler:
              Last edited by Bball; 03-29-2016, 07:47 PM.
              Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

              ------

              "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

              -John Wooden

              Comment


              • Re: What TV Show Did You Last Watch

                TWD:
                So the spoiler was 100% accurate...
                How cheap. Awful ending as compared to what could've been....
                Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                ------

                "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                -John Wooden

                Comment


                • Re: What TV Show Did You Last Watch

                  who died by getting smashed in the head with a bat?

                  the people who still give a **** about that dumb show.

                  Comment


                  • Re: What TV Show Did You Last Watch

                    Carl on Shameless has to watch a DePaul game with his old lady's hard *** cop dad. I can't think of a worse night for a teenager. you couldn't pay me to watch DePaul play basketball.

                    Comment


                    • Re: What TV Show Did You Last Watch

                      Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                      who died by getting smashed in the head with a bat?

                      the people who still give a **** about that dumb show.
                      Watched TWD finale yesterday night. Just like the other millions of viewers that watched that show knowing that a major character was going to be killed off.....but than we were all disappointed that the Writers decided to give every TWD view blue balls for 6 months waiting to find out who gets a date with Lucille.




                      The episode did a REALLY good job of building up the tension throughout the entire episode. I knew from the moment that Rick decided to go after Negan's group that it would blow up in their face because he got cocky and SEVERELY underestimated their #s. But the impending and building dread when Rick and Co starting to realize that they SEVERELY underestimated Negan's group and then seeing Rick as he kneeled down with the utter panic and lost look on his face when you can see that they were in deep s***, left a pit in my stomach as the moment approached. But than the Writers of the show killed the moment by not showing who gets killed and it ruined the whole climax of this 2nd part of the season.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • Re: What TV Show Did You Last Watch

                        Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                        Watched TWD finale yesterday night. Just like the other millions of viewers that watched that show knowing that a major character was going to be killed off.....but than we were all disappointed that the Writers decided to give every TWD view blue balls for 6 months waiting to find out who gets a date with Lucille.




                        The episode did a REALLY good job of building up the tension throughout the entire episode. I knew from the moment that Rick decided to go after Negan's group that it would blow up in their face because he got cocky and SEVERELY underestimated their #s. But the impending and building dread when Rick and Co starting to realize that they SEVERELY underestimated Negan's group and then seeing Rick as he kneeled down with the utter panic and lost look on his face when you can see that they were in deep s***, left a pit in my stomach as the moment approached. But than the Writers of the show killed the moment by not showing who gets killed and it ruined the whole climax of this 2nd part of the season.
                        This whole thing should really be exhibit #1 on how not to end on a cliffhanger.

                        Let's assume that for whatever reason that HAD to end on a cliffhanger. Whether creatively they wanted to carry over tension all summer until the new season started, felt they needed the hook (which looking at ratings, clearly they don't), or because AMC said "we want a cliffhanger!"

                        They let the entire scene play out... until they didn't.... So that is the first problem. The second problem is there are so many characters to choose from that you can literally assume anything including it was a big time shocker, to a minor character that will have no impact. And no matter who, it will have less impact by the time S7 rolls around. Not only that, but it almost certainly will leak way before then. Shooting starts in a couple of months and the locals will quickly pick up on who isn't there shooting scenes. Or who has a new roll in something else next season. So all suspense will be gone.

                        The ways a cliffhanger could've played out better....
                        For one thing, less of the cast captured and there. Keep it very tight with Rick, Carl, Glenn, and Daryl. Maybe Maggie and/or Carol. That way, there's no question it was a fan favorite and major character that just got taken out. Plus that means plausibility is increased because that leaves more people behind to guard Alexandria.

                        Another way would be to save more of the scene for later. So don't show the "Lucilleing" at all. Don't get that far. Fade to black after Negan has made his speech and talked about his hard decision. Let it be "I know how I'll have to choose.... eenie meenie....." fade to black....
                        This leaves all sorts of possibilities of not only who is going to get it, but a fight, distraction, escape, or rescue attempt. And if the rule of above is followed and less cast is there in the first place, then it really leaves open the possibility of changing the scene from the comics and instead it playing out with a rescue attempt... that may or may not succeed. At least something to think about for the cliffhanger going forward rather than just 'Who got it?'.

                        And lastly, while requiring a dialogue change and a bit different use of camera, they could've written it with someone from the cast not in the lineup... But then open the scene next season from a different perspective and see that who was chosen was someone brought out at the last second that was already hostage and the 'who to choose' thing was all an act with an already chosen victim hidden in the wings for even more shock value.
                        In that example, a Carol.... or even a Judith (Lord knows I'd be all for any scene getting rid of that baby! )
                        IOW, the victim actually be a surprise we didn't see coming.

                        That all said... I'm putting my money on the victim being
                        Spoiler Spoiler:
                        . This crappy ending and the way things have been going they don't have the balls to let it be ___________
                        Spoiler Spoiler:


                        So these are my thoughts....
                        Spoiler Spoiler:
                        Last edited by Bball; 04-04-2016, 03:10 PM.
                        Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                        ------

                        "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                        -John Wooden

                        Comment


                        • Re: What TV Show Did You Last Watch

                          And here is the ending viewers were cheated out of last night. A proper ending and impactful scene....


                          There's a recut TWD finale video inside the spoiler tags.
                          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                          ------

                          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment


                          • Re: What TV Show Did You Last Watch

                            Wonder how many at least decent pilots Showtime passed on to give a season order to freaking Andrew Dice Clay in 2016

                            Comment


                            • Re: What TV Show Did You Last Watch

                              Not sure if I've shouted out Carmichael Show in this thread before. It's pretty specific, and it sometimes doesn't really feel like it is even trying to take place in a fictional world. But I love its ability to relay different perspectives and humor. Reminds me a little of That's My Bush in that it is drawing lines between standard multi-cam sitcom plots and political issues. DAG and Devine are the black parents I always wanted.
                              You Got The Tony!!!!!!

                              Comment


                              • Re: What TV Show Did You Last Watch

                                Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                                Wonder how many at least decent pilots Showtime passed on to give a season order to freaking Andrew Dice Clay in 2016
                                A-freaking-men.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X