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:
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

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?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: What movie did you last watch?

    Captain Phillips(2013) Secret Life Of Walter Mitty(2013)

    I was a little disappointed by Captain Phillips. It's a good film, but I don't think it's a great film like it has been hyped up to be. I know it's based on a true story, but it almost feels like an American propaganda film to me. Considering the exciting storyline, I found the film to be slow and prodding at times. Don't get me wrong, I liked the film, but it is not up there among the best I've seen all year.

    The Secret Life Of Walter Mitty is in the same category for me. I thought I would like it a little better than I actually did. Considering all the places and things they could have done with this movie with Mitty's daydreaming, I found it a little slow and short of the mark. Like Captain Phillips, it's a movie I like but not love. I'll forgive Captain Phillips for it's shortcomings as it's based on a true story. Walter Mitty, not so much.


    • Re: What movie did you last watch?

      Going for the McConaughey double feature tonight: Mud, followed by Dallas Buyers Club.


      • Re: What movie did you last watch?

        Not sure if documentaries count, but I watched the 30 For 30 on Bo Jackson and that was beyond words amazing. I was a little kid when he was coming up and barely getting into baseball when he was in the majors. If they would have shown the Royals on TV when I was little he would have been the guy I would have modeled baseball after.

        On a different note, he was the living day Greek Mythology kind of person. He's the only person to play in a baseball All-Star game and to be voted into a Pro-Bowl. I just wish i could have appreciated him in his playing career...amazing athlete.


        • Re: What movie did you last watch?

          This is my review of the movie "Her"

          When I decided to go see the movie "Her", I went based on one reason,
          and one reason alone: Joaquin Phoenix, my favorite actor, was in it. Because I have seen all of his movies, I needed to see this one. I never thought I would like it, in fact I assumed it would be one of my least favorite of his movies.

          I read the reviews online, and it was very highly rated among critics and online reviewers alike, so that made me slightly more optimistic for a promising picture.

          Here is some background into the movie before I start the review itself.

          The movie is set in Los Angeles in a semi-futuristic society. I would guess it to be about 2018 or 2020. It's in the future, but not that far into the future. Theodore Twombly (Joaquin Phoenix) is a writer for an online service where one can hire someone to write loving letters to their life partner. Anyway, he has a best friend named Amy (Amy Adams) and they seem to have been friends for a long time. She's married to this other guy, and Theodore is going through a divorce. He has trouble letting go. About this time, he gets this new operating system. Samantha the OS (Scarlett Johansson's voice) quickly becomes his friend and convinces him to let go, and he does. Meanwhile, Amy goes through a split of her own, and befriends the unnamed OS left by her husband when he moved out.

          Now, on to the review.

          The first thing that I feel I should mention is that not once did it lose my attention. What Spike Jonze did with this picture as the writer and director was he made the picture completely immersive. You become keenly aware of the world of Theodore Twombly. Every time he feels an emotion, you feel the same emotion for him. That is not only a testament to the production of the movie, but to Joaquin Phoenix as an actor. The characters are very genuine and the way they are developed is phenomenal. I'll touch more on this later.

          The plot of the movie is absolutely genius. This is because it is not the plot you would expect walking into the theater. I expected, just as everyone on social media, that it would be about this weirdo guy falling in love with a computer. However, it was much more than that. The relationship between Theodore and Samantha was a bit of a sci-fi twist in a movie that to my surprise, was not hardly at all sci-fi. Is it weird? Yes. Just a bit. But because the plot is much more developed than the theme of the movie suggests, it works very well. What I like most about the plot is that it is not about Theodore loving his computer/phone OS. In fact, that is used almost solely as a way to develop the friendship of Theodore and Amy.

          This I think was what I loved most about the movie. The plot of the movie was in direct relation to the development of the relationship between the characters Theodore and Amy. Nothing progressed to slowly and nothing felt rushed, either. Even though the OS's played a vital role in the movie, it was still based around Amy and Theodore.

          As far as the actors go, Joaquin Phoenix was brilliant. This was another stellar performance for him. Amy Adams and Scarlett Johansson were both great as well, but they did not blow me away.

          All in all, I was very pleased with the movie "Her". It was a touching insight into the human emotion, and it was done with a little bit of sci-fi, a little bit of romantic comedy, and a little bit of drama all rolled into one package. I give this movie a 9/10 and would highly recommend it to those mature enough to handle the many adult themes and scenes that are portrayed in the picture. They say don't judge a book by it's cover, and definitely don't be quick to write this movie off. It is a fantastic production and I would highly recommend it.

          Sent from #PacerNation using Tapatalk
          Senior at the University of Louisville.
          Greenfield ---> The Ville


          • Re: What movie did you last watch?

            American Hustle

            Fantastic movie. Really enjoyed it.


            • Re: What movie did you last watch?

              American Hustle is really really good. Amy Adams IMO is the best female performance I have seen in a movie all year.

              All the acting was superb. Just an outstanding movie.
              Last edited by Unclebuck; 01-13-2014, 10:50 PM.


              • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                American a Hustle is really really good. Amy Adams IMO us the best female performance I gave seen in a movie all year.

                All the the acting was superb. Just an outstanding movie
                This must be the generation of the female actresses. Just so many really really actresses like Amy Adams (holy crap, she's not as young as I thought), Jennifer Lawrence, & ChloŽ Grace Moretz, Kristen Wiig, Emilia Clarke, etc.
                First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.


                • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                  Originally posted by presto123 View Post
                  That's why movies are subjective. I guess we'll agree to disagree on 12 Years A Slave. I know a lot of people agree with me as 12 Years is sitting at 8.6 on IMDB. Highest rating I've seen from this year's films.
                  12 Years A Slave wins Golden Globe for best picture.


                  • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                    Wolf Of Wall Street(2013)

                    Very much over-rated IMO and not near the best films I've seen this year. It is a very stylistic film with a certain flow and good performances, but the story is lacking and everything is too over the top which makes for an "attention whore" of a movie.

                    We get it. Hunger for big money can lead to bad morals and excess in everything. The characters are not likable and pretty pathetic actually. I think that Scorsese was going for that, but like the characters in his movie, the actual movie took everything too far as well as repeated the behaviors way too often to make up for lack of script. It has it's moments, but I was still a little let down.


                    • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                      I saw Gravity and I liked it. I think the 'birth' and 'rebirth' metaphors were a little overdone, or not really necessary at all for that matter.... Or maybe didn't achieve what was intended because they never really worked things up beforehand to setup that type of depth of thought to begin with. But overall I found the movie entertaining. They didn't distract from the movie either even if they didn't really IMO give it more gravitas. Hmmm pardon that pun!!

                      Spoiler Spoiler:
                      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, thatís teamwork."

                      -John Wooden


                      • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                        Originally posted by Bball View Post
                        I saw Gravity and I liked it. I think the 'birth' and 'rebirth' metaphors were a little overdone, or not really necessary at all for that matter.... Or maybe didn't achieve what was intended because they never really worked things up beforehand to setup that type of depth of thought to begin with. But overall I found the movie entertaining. They didn't distract from the movie either even if they didn't really IMO give it more gravitas. Hmmm pardon that pun!!

                        Spoiler Spoiler:
                        Wife loved the movie and I hated it. The birth and rebirth metaphore was just so *****ing dumb.
                        First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.


                        • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                          O Brother, Where Art Thou(2000)

                          Every time I watch this movie, I always forget just how good it is. I never thought George Clooney would work in a piece like this, but he is perfect. The storyline, the settings, the soundtrack, the subtle and many times not so subtle humor, just perfect. I cannot recommend this movie enough. It's a movie I can watch over and over and I can't say that about too many movies.


                          • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                            Originally posted by Steagles View Post
                            All in all, I was very pleased with the movie "Her". It was a touching insight into the human emotion, and it was done with a little bit of sci-fi, a little bit of romantic comedy, and a little bit of drama all rolled into one package. I give this movie a 9/10 and would highly recommend it to those mature enough to handle the many adult themes and scenes that are portrayed in the picture. They say don't judge a book by it's cover, and definitely don't be quick to write this movie off. It is a fantastic production and I would highly recommend it.
                            Good review, Steagles. I agree with pretty much all of it, though I would say that this is by far and away Scar-Jo's best role and performance. So refreshing after Don Jon. You're right on Joaquin; dude was basically going from set to set talking to no one for most of the movie. You feel a rush of relief when he gets yelled at by Rooney Mara. The sci-fi in this movie is such an interesting contrast to the sci-fi in Gravity. Her is so cerebral while Gravity is so viceral. Gravity is almost impossible to misinterpret, while Her is one of the more misinterpretted movies in recent memory. (Anyone who thinks this movie has a full-on message is a little too uncomfortable with the idea of a nuanced world without big, all-encompassing statements.)

                            The main thing that attracts me to a movie, book, album, etc is whether it seems like it's coming from a unique and interesting place. And you know that Jonze's mind is a unique place. He's done Jackass, a uniquely-envisoned children's story (WTWTA), and adapted two Charlie Kaufman scripts successfully (which IMO no one else has done for a whole movie). Like Steagles said, Her maintains elements of many different genres, but still feels like its own thing; the Alan Watts reference is so weird, but fits perfectly into this movie. With Her, Jonze joins Paul Thomas Anderson (and that's pretty much it) in the group of filmmakers who create movie universes that are timeless, genre-less, and ambiguously beautiful. Extremely highly recommended, although it may be inappropriate to show some parents because of the phone sex (meow).
                            You Got The Tony!!!!!!


                            • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                              Oscar nominations. Looking at the list of best picture noms and the best director. I think it is between 12 years a Slave and American Hustle. Although would not be completely shocked if Gravity won.

                              Surprised Tom Hanks was not nominated. Not because he is Tom Hanks, but because I thought he was fantastic in that movie and the scenes towards the very end was some of the best acting I have ever seen by him.

                              Last edited by Unclebuck; 01-16-2014, 11:18 AM.


                              • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                                Tom Hanks should have been nominated, though it's hard to not say the ones who did get nominated didn't deserve it. That said, I think Ejiofor or Leo are going to win anyway
                                Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.