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?

    Originally posted by presto123 View Post
    Rewatched the first 3 Paranormal Activity films and really enjoyed them. Those that can just suspend disbelief and go with it really enjoy these films.....those who can't.....well....I thought the use of the modified fan sweeping back and forth in part 3 was brilliant. Your eyes just search the screen waiting for something to happen and boy does it. haha
    Those are movies I could watch with people, but I'd never care enough to watch or suggest it on my own.

    Comment


    • Re: What movie did you last watch?

      Jupiter Ascending is...a thing? I like it, I guess, it's the 3rd best Wachowski siblings movie after Matrix 1 and Speed Racer, but that's not really saying much. Maybe 4th best, cuz Bound but that's different parameters. I'd like it a lot more if the leads could act worth a ****, same kinda deal as John Carter.

      Comment


      • Re: What movie did you last watch?

        that Vince Vaughan movie where he's a sperm donor and has 500 kids or whatever is an abomination, who greenlit that?

        Comment


        • Re: What movie did you last watch?

          Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
          Thoroughly enjoyed Avengers 2. Can't wait for the next Captain A and Thor movies.

          Spoiler Spoiler:
          Quicksilver isn't ridiculously overpowered in this movie like he was in Days of Future past. They poked a little fun at it when
          Spoiler Spoiler:
          They made it pretty clear while he's fast, he isn't godlike.

          I want to point out that I thought James Spader was fantastic in this movie. The people that claim he was trying to imitate RDJ haven't watched The Blacklist or Boston Legal. He wasn't being RDJ, he was being James Spader. And Ultron was never supposed to be a calm, calculated evil robot. He was a menacingly batshit insane robot. That's what defines his character. There was no better actor on earth to play his role and Spader nailed it.

          Age of Ultron was a really fun movie. Still felt like it was mostly a set-up Civil War and Ragnarok movies, the latter of which will almost certainly be a lead-in to the inhumans movies. I am glad that there's enough personality and fun to these films that it doesn't feel like we're just wasting time until the grand finale.
          Last edited by Kstat; 05-06-2015, 12:33 PM.

          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?

            Age of Ultron

            I really enjoyed it for the most part, but after two movies of fighting large group of bad guys I think it is time for them to find another way to get the group fighting. First, they fight the Chitauri in NYC and then in the second they were fighting basically the Chitauri that have been re-skinned to be robots. It was cool to see in the first one and ok in the second, but if they do it again in the third it will be stale.

            I cannot wait till Captain America 3 and what they have planned for that.

            Comment


            • Re: What movie did you last watch?

              Originally posted by thewholefnshow31 View Post
              Age of Ultron

              I really enjoyed it for the most part, but after two movies of fighting large group of bad guys I think it is time for them to find another way to get the group fighting. First, they fight the Chitauri in NYC and then in the second they were fighting basically the Chitauri that have been re-skinned to be robots. It was cool to see in the first one and ok in the second, but if they do it again in the third it will be stale.

              I cannot wait till Captain America 3 and what they have planned for that.
              The 3rd avengers movie will be the exact opposite of that...if it's anything like the comic, it'll reach holy **** levels of every avenger in existence trying to take down just one guy.
              Last edited by Kstat; 05-07-2015, 10:35 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?

                Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                The 3rd avengers movie will be the exact opposite of that...if it's anything like the comic, it'll reach holy **** levels of every avenger in existence trying to take down just one guy.
                Im hoping in Part 1 we see a team of people fighting the avengers. Be great if the chick from Guardians, Loki, Red Skull and then a few other baddies all showed up to take on the avengers and then in Part 2 we see the team all in against Thanos.

                Comment


                • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                  Am I the only one who just doesn't like comic book movies? I could do the Batman trilogy, but that's it. I understand the appeal, but the formulaic nature of them just drives me insane.

                  Comment


                  • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                    Originally posted by Dr. Hibbert View Post
                    Am I the only one who just doesn't like comic book movies? I could do the Batman trilogy, but that's it. I understand the appeal, but the formulaic nature of them just drives me insane.
                    Formula? What formula? Oh, that's right: Some bad mother****er wants to **** some **** up, a bunch of heroes combine forces, make quips, bicker occasionally, and save the day by leveling a major metropolitan area.

                    Comment


                    • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                      Originally posted by Dr. Hibbert View Post
                      Am I the only one who just doesn't like comic book movies? I could do the Batman trilogy, but that's it. I understand the appeal, but the formulaic nature of them just drives me insane.
                      I dug GOTG a lot, and I don't dislike any of the other Marvel ones but I'm definitely burned out on them. I have zero interest in seeing any of them at the theater, I'll end up watching em at home and dicking around on my phone half the time. I've also never been a comics fan either so I get they aren't necessarily "for" me and that's fine.

                      Comment


                      • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                        Originally posted by Mad-Mad-Mario View Post
                        Im hoping in Part 1 we see a team of people fighting the avengers. Be great if the chick from Guardians, Loki, Red Skull and then a few other baddies all showed up to take on the avengers and then in Part 2 we see the team all in against Thanos.
                        Unlikely to happen. Part 1 is going to involve Thanos getting all the infinity stones and then beating up on the Avengers with Part 2 being the resurgence and the gathering of all the Avengers to take down the mighty Thanos with wictory with consequences and fatalities.

                        They will probably introduce the remaining stones with Thor: Ragnarok and either Dr. Strange or GotG2. And I heard GotG won't be in Infinity Wars.
                        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?

                          Originally posted by Kstat View Post

                          I want to point out that I thought James Spader was fantastic in this movie. The people that claim he was trying to imitate RDJ haven't watched The Blacklist or Boston Legal. He wasn't being RDJ, he was being James Spader. And Ultron was never supposed to be a calm, calculated evil robot. He was a menacingly batshit insane robot. That's what defines his character. There was no better actor on earth to play his role and Spader nailed it.
                          Ultron's first lines in the movie (well, when he was introduced in person) was him telling a bit of trivia about the location he was at. Exactly the way Red Reddington would do! It took me a minute to get past that, but then it was great once I did. I love James Spader. I'm an 80's kid so I've been a fan since Tuff Turf.

                          Comment


                          • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                            Predestination

                            Loved it.

                            Sarah Snook is amazing.

                            Just saw Ex Machina too.

                            I'm starting to get very selective about what I'm willing to see in a theater, Ex Machina was well worth it.

                            Comment


                            • Re: What movie did you last watch?

                              IGN gave Mad Max Fury Road a 9.2. It does look very good from the trailers.
                              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?

                                Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
                                IGN gave Mad Max Fury Road a 9.2. It does look very good from the trailers.
                                it looks awesome, funnest movie of the summer. if mid-May counts as summer anyway.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X