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?

    Something tells me Gravity is going to take this one.

    Comment


    • Re: What movie did you last watch?

      Identity (2003)

      Not a bad film, but I was a little underwhelmed due to the high rating. All star cast including John Cusak, Rebecca DeMornay, Ray Liotta, and Amanda Peet among others. Worth a watch.

      Comment


      • Re: What movie did you last watch?

        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
        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.
        Have you watched Short Term 12? Brie Larson is fantastic in it, and I think the movie as a whole is great too. (Shoutout to Maui!) Cate Blanchett is also really good in Blue Jasmine. I also think Sandy Bulls was way better in Gravity than in Blindside. I haven't seen the Judi Dench or Meryl movies, but damn, there were no good roles for actresses in 2013, huh?


        The Oscar nominations continue to baffle/underwhelm. It makes the year in movies seem a bit crappy, when it was actually pretty good, considering some of the great stuff we got at the end. I'll just say that, despite how great Her, Gravity, Short Term 12 and The World's End are, The Act of Killing is still the best movie of last year.
        You Got The Tony!!!!!!

        Comment


        • Re: What movie did you last watch?

          Triangle (2009)

          What an amazing movie. Second time I've seen it. A real head trip of a movie that really makes you think. It's the kind of movie that may have you still trying to decipher it days later. Starring Mellisa George, who is a seriously under-rated actress at this point. I've seen a lot of strong movies from her in the last few years. I would say this flick falls in the drama, thriller, and horror categories. Here's the premise:

          When Jess sets sail on a yacht with a group of friends, she cannot shake the feeling that there is something wrong. Her suspicions are realized when the yacht hits a storm and the group is forced to board a passing ocean liner to get to safety, a ship Jess is convinced she's been on before. The ship appears deserted, the clock on board has stopped, but they are not alone... Someone is intent on hunting them down, one by one. And Jess unknowingly holds the key to end the terror.

          Comment


          • Re: What movie did you last watch?

            Little trivia in case you missed it. Abduwali Abdukhadir Muse the lone surviving pirate (Captain Phillips) is serving his sentence in the Terre Haute Federal Pen
            You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

            Comment


            • Re: What movie did you last watch?

              Lone Survivor

              Highly recommend this movie. Fantastic. And if you do see it, stay through the end credits.

              Comment


              • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                Originally posted by spreedom View Post
                I thought Lawrence was, at times, the highlight of the movie. Amy Adams' performance as a whole was better because she had a little more to work with, but I thought all of the performances were top-notch. My only gripe with it is that I feel like the ending was really rushed, but to me Hustle was the best movie of 2013. Nobody maximizes actors' ability to perform quite like David O. Russell.

                If anyone cares, my top 10 movies of 2013:
                1. American Hustle - One of the best movies I’ve ever seen, period.
                2. Prisoners - I liked it more than I expected. Thought it would be more of a paint-by-numbers revenge movie but it was just a great movie by any standards.
                3. The World’s End - Totally hilarious.
                4. The Wolverine - The best comic book movie of the year. Hugh Jackman is pitch-perfect. Embodies the character as well as anyone in a superhero movie.
                5. Anchorman 2 - Not quite as funny as the first one, but still very good. Big thumbs up for a movie that gets Liam Neeson to say the word “minotaur”.
                6. Out of the Furnace - Like Prisoners, it wasn’t as ordinary as the previews made it look… dragged a little at times but Christian Bale was fantastic in it.
                7. Man of Steel - Might not have made my list before the sequel announcement.
                8. Fast & Furious 6 - Needed more Rocky, but these movies never fail to entertain in the most ludicrous ways.
                9. The Wolf of Wall Street - I really liked the movie, but I don't think Leonardi Di Caprio is a very good actor. He's occasionally capable of good performances (such as in this movie, any time that he didn't have to deliver any expository dialogue or act like a normal adult) but in general I have trouble getting lost in his performances like I do with a lot of other actors. He just seems like a kid whose only acting style is "pretend I'm an adult." I thought Matthew McConaughey and Kyle Chandler both took him to school during their respective scenes with him, and Jonah Hill was more memorable as well. Though I will say that the scene where Leo is basically paralyzed and has to crawl to his car is one of the best movie scenes of this year.
                10. Olympus Has Fallen - The best Die Hard movie of 2013.


                The only movie that came out this year that I really wanted to see, and missed, was Dallas Buyer's Club.
                Really?? He is by far my favorite. He and Tom Hanks would be my two favorite actors. Catch Me If You Can has to be one of the best acting jobs by Leo I have seen. Plus Amy Adams was amazing in that movie. I don't get why anyone would say he can't act he is very good IMO. It seems like all his movies turn out to be very good. Inception...Departed.....Blood Diamond (one of my favorites)....The Aviator(very good acting job.... The Beach.....Django I love almost every movie he has been in. I guess I don't get it. Why don't you think he is a good actor?


                And yes the Wolf of Wall Street was great. I laughed so many times, and the story was very well done.

                Comment


                • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                  I would put Leo in my second tier of imaginary movie actor rankings; he's had a great career with many good movies but he isn't an all-time talent with numerous super-memorable performances. For me, it just seems like he tries so ****ing hard to win an acting award every time he chooses a movie. For a guy who's really rich and just bangs a bunch of supermodels, he isn't very chill on screen, and he can come off as a one-note (an albeit high quality note) performer. (Seems like he never fully recovered from choosing Titanic over Boogie Nights.) I like his choices in Django and WoWS as semi-comedies, but if Cruise can do something like Tropic Thunder (and he's ****ing insane), why can't Leo show some range? Also, he's just simply not at the talent level of an RDJ or a Denzel or a Streep.

                  Also, I saw the Jack Ryan movie that's out right now. It doesn't deserve a review. I don't think I would give Kenneth Branaugh a high five if I saw him walking down the street at the moment.
                  You Got The Tony!!!!!!

                  Comment


                  • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                    Originally posted by AesopRockOn View Post
                    I would put Leo in my second tier of imaginary movie actor rankings; he's had a great career with many good movies but he isn't an all-time talent with numerous super-memorable performances. For me, it just seems like he tries so ****ing hard to win an acting award every time he chooses a movie. For a guy who's really rich and just bangs a bunch of supermodels, he isn't very chill on screen, and he can come off as a one-note (an albeit high quality note) performer. (Seems like he never fully recovered from choosing Titanic over Boogie Nights.) I like his choices in Django and WoWS as semi-comedies, but if Cruise can do something like Tropic Thunder (and he's ****ing insane), why can't Leo show some range? Also, he's just simply not at the talent level of an RDJ or a Denzel or a Streep.

                    Also, I saw the Jack Ryan movie that's out right now. It doesn't deserve a review. I don't think I would give Kenneth Branaugh a high five if I saw him walking down the street at the moment.
                    Tell us more of these imaginary rankings.


                    Comment


                    • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                      I'm only an hour or so into Wolf of Wall Street but I don't know if I'm going to be able to finish this. Not because it's long, it's just really shallow and masturbatory to this point.

                      Comment


                      • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                        Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                        I'm only an hour or so into Wolf of Wall Street but I don't know if I'm going to be able to finish this. Not because it's long, it's just really shallow and masturbatory to this point.

                        Glad I'm not the only one that thought this.

                        Comment


                        • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                          Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                          I'm only an hour or so into Wolf of Wall Street but I don't know if I'm going to be able to finish this. Not because it's long, it's just really shallow and masturbatory to this point.
                          Don't keep us in suspense. Did you finish it, or find something else to do?

                          Comment


                          • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                            Solomon Kane

                            Highly recommend.
                            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?

                              Captain Phillips
                              I thought Hanks' acting in that final scene was some of his best acting of the movie. I was just now reading about it and found out that wasn't the actual scripted ending at all but something that just happened to fall into place as they were getting some background on the incident from the real Navy personnel on the navy ship. After hearing about the real Capt Phillips state at that point they decided to craft and shoot that scene for the ending (instead of what was planned) right then and there.. And that included using real naval people and not actors. Wow...
                              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

                              Comment


                              • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                                AMC had a giant Godfather marathon this weekend. Enjoyed that.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X