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?

    Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter (it was the only thing in the free preview of HBO last weekend that enticed me)

    Book was better, but movie was better than the critics gave it credit for.
    "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

    "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

    Comment


    • Re: What movie did you last watch?

      I'll be damned if I know.

      Comment


      • Re: What movie did you last watch?

        Originally posted by Peck View Post
        Also any updates on if the Justice League movie is still in the works or has that been scrapped?
        Oh, there's money to be made with the Justice League--probably big money. It's still in the works, and it's likely going to suck. I think they are aiming for a 2015 release there.

        Comment


        • Re: What movie did you last watch?

          They are still trying to do it, but the MoS2 movie is probably going to come out first
          Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

          Comment


          • Re: What movie did you last watch?

            I saw Whedon's Much Ado About Nothing tonight. I really enjoyed it, and there are some really fun and inspired interpretations to the play. It's a delight.

            The only place it's playing in all the state right now is at the Keystone Arts Cinema. I'd go sooner than later if you want to see it in the theater, just in case.
            Take me out to the black, tell 'em I ain't coming back. Burn the land and boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me.

            Comment


            • Re: What movie did you last watch?

              Man of Steel - I should probably start by saying I'm a Zach Snyder apologist/defender, so seeing the reviews didn't surprise me. He is the most sincere geek in any part of entertainment. Most other storytellers would make the Christ references in this movie a meta-joke, but Snyder is completely genuine in that he absolutely loves Jesus and Superman, so why can't he compare them?

              The sci-fi/action genre (with outliers like Looper and District 9) has become all these hyper-structured $250 million colossi trying to please everyone in the world to a billion dollars, three sequels, and two tie-ins. With this one, Star Trek, and Iron Man, there just isn't much room for anything remotely interesting either thematically or story-wise.

              They really are all the same, so all Snyder and Goyer, or Shane Black, or JJ Abrams and Lindeloff can do is inject small bits of their own personality. Snyder goes passionately sincere, Goyer exposits everything, Black goes for the post-modern sarcasm, JJ throws out lens flares like Ginobili throws errant passes, and Lindeloff shames beloved franchises. But that's like five percent of each movie. The rest is the lead up to a big, stupid, predictable mess of a $100 million action set piece before the heroes walk away fine having caused trillions of dollars of untold, consequence-less damage and dead people. I know the Internet is set up so that we can all have false arguments about what we love and what we hate, how wrong you are and how right I am.

              But what's really happening is companies investing hundreds of millions to make billions on pretty ****** movies.
              You Got The Tony!!!!!!

              Comment


              • I liked Man of Steel. Not my favorite superhero movie ever, but it's definitely my favorite superman movie. He seemed much more relatable in this film than any of the others. I liked that he didn't have the power to dues ex machina every single problem and never have to get his hands dirty.

                I hated that about the original films, save for II. All destruction gets fixed, superman never, ever causes any collateral damage, bad guy goes to jail safely, and if anybody by some miracle dies, just change the rotation of the earth and re-do it. Wash, rinse, repeat.

                Yes, there was a lot of mindless violence. But you know what? I LIKED that. Finally, after decades, we get more than just a token scene or two with superman really taking the gloves off against an enemy. His biggest draw is his insane repertoire of powers, and yet he holds back in every film. I don't want every superman film to be like that, but dammit I wanted to see a legitimate no holds barred superman death match on the big screen at least once, and it was awesome.

                Also, thrilled that we can have a movie where his biggest threat isn't a stupid inanimate green rock.
                Last edited by Kstat; 06-22-2013, 03:17 AM.

                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


                • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                  I saw Man of Steel tonight. I saw in in IMAX 3D and to say the visuals for this movie were out of this world.

                  Look I've never lied to a single person, I'm a Marvel man through and through but as any respectable comic book person would do you have to recognize Superman for what he is. The first and arguably the greatest "superhero" comic person ever created.

                  That being said I can not tell you how thrilled I was to not be bored to death again with another rehashing of the coming of Superman to earth. They kind of did a back story about Krypton and his family but other than that everything else was in flash back scene's which I deeply appreciated.

                  I am a rare person apparently because I actually liked this movie. As I stated before Superman is just a ***** to do because if you don't give him some form of physical equal you end up with the boring *** movies that have come in the past where basically he ends up just doing physical challenges instead of actually battling someone. So I am more than content with the amount of action in this film. Was it over the top? Maybe but I didn't once feel like something was out of context of the moment. Also I don't get where everyone is complaining about the fights taking place in the city for, it's not like Superman chose those locations he was kind of deposited there and couldn't get away.

                  Also one of the things I am most thrilled about is the fact that they didn't do the entire stupid Lois can't figure out who superman is. They just introduce him to her as Superman and that works great for me.

                  As to the ending, first I wonder how many hours were spent at DC deciding whether or not they were going to let that happen. They have always been hesitant to allow either of the big two (Batman/Superman) to make that kind of a move.

                  I applaud them on this and think it was well within the context of the story, I could argue that maybe a little more/longer anguish over the action might have been in order but I'm okay with the way they did this.

                  I think I am going to move this into my top 5 of comic book movies, although I'll have to think about that for a min. but top 10 for sure and probably closer to 5.

                  I think this is the first time I've ever seen a normal movie in IMAX, needless to say I'm afraid it has ruined me for seeing movies in any other way.

                  Just read Kstat's review and his point was so spot on I want to repeat it. The fact that the villains in this movie were powerful enough to stand on their own was important and they did not over play the krypotnite, in fact it was never mentioned by name that I can recall. Made this movie so much more enjoyable.


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

                  Comment


                  • Yeah. Lois was the most well written character in the entire movie. They finally killed that plot hole.

                    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


                    • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                      World War Z was really good

                      I was afraid going into the movie that it was going to be some hokey Independence Day type movie. But it certainly is not like that at all. (I never read the book it is based upon, so I had no idea).

                      Overall I enjoyed the movie more than Iron Man 3 or Star Trek. Have not seen Man of Steel
                      Last edited by Unclebuck; 06-25-2013, 09:31 AM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                        Getting close to the release of The Conjuring that I talked about a few pages back. So far the critic reviews are excellent. There has been a buzz about this horror film since it received record breaking test scores and was moved to the summer for blockbuster season. More of a buzz now that it is actually qualified for a PG rating but received and R just because of the scare factor. Have my hopes up as this is my fav genre but there are few real quality films released lately.

                        Comment


                        • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                          Monsters University. I enjoyed it.

                          Comment


                          • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                            This is the End

                            Hella funny.
                            First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                            Comment


                            • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                              Scott Pilgrim vs the world....fun movie
                              Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                              Comment


                              • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                                Finally saw Iron Man 3 tonight. My wife and I enjoyed it. It was entertaining and moved the story line along until the next Avengers movie. Saw the preview for the new Thor movie and decided we need to get around to watching the first one.

                                I guess i have enjoyed the Iron Man/Avengers/Captain America movies more than the Batman ones (recent incarnation) because they are less serious and dramatic in the approach. I guess they call that escapism. The funny thing is, when it came to the comics, when i was growing up any way, the two companies seem to be viewed in just the opposite way, with Marvel having the more seriously driven story lines with DC being the less serious bunch. Batman has always been different in his make up and approach, but it always seemed because he was the only, besides Green Arrow, member of the Justice League without super powers. He left the JLA in one continuum because they refused to get dirty and involved in conflicts such as wars.

                                On the note of Marvel movies, The X-Men movies seem to be more seriously driven, at least the new Wolverine movie looks to be more in the Batman mode, but it was just previews. I vaguely remember the arc with him going to Japan, as the movie shows, but this may be nothing to do with what happened in the comics. That there are two sets of timelines in the movies for that group makes the whole thing a little confusing to say the least. Also, are they part of the Avengers movie universe or not? Obviously the failed Fantastic Four franchise was not considering who is now Captain America. But then again, things took place in the comics where it would make sense for other heroes to be involved but they never were around. Oh the beauty of the comic/movie world!

                                I guess the pros and cons of comic book based movies could be a different discussion all together.
                                Last edited by SycamoreKen; 06-23-2013, 01:22 AM. Reason: editing.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X