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

Has everyone given up hope on Plumlee?

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

  • #31
    Re: Has everyone given up hope on Plumlee?

    He's been a monster on the boards and has been blocking shots left and right. The team drafted him to be like Jeff Foster. Check out these twitter feeds:

    http://alwaysmillertime.com/2013/07/...e-stepping-up/

    From the looks of my twitter feed, Mile Plumlee has been a bright spot through two games of summer league action.



    Two good games from a guy that I’ve been very vocal about on here. I really do want to see him do something for the Indiana Pacers, hence the harsh criticism. It’s harsh because there’s not been much to see of Plumlee, so there’s not much to take on him. Now this season with the loss of Tyler Hansbrough and Jeff Pendergraph, who’s heading to San Antonio, Plumlee bumps up a roster spot, and could get extra time when Chris Copeland and David West need that breather.
    That’s the perfect time for Plumlee to show that he’s worth the time and effort of his draft status. He was a late draft pick, but still a first round. Those are guys that should come in and be productive for the team. Even in limited action. I feel like Orlando Johnson, who was the second rounder, showed that he has something about him. Now it’s time for Plumlee to step into his role as well.
    The Pacers have been good about draft picks recently, so I want them to be right about Plumlee. He’ll need to continue to refine his game in this summer league, and see what translates to the regular season action. There could be that role he needs to fill, and we’ll see if he can step into it.
    Can't get enough Pacers Content? Be sure to sign up for daily updates:

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Has everyone given up hope on Plumlee?

      Lost hope on Plumlee? No. Lost hope on Gerald Green? Yes.
      Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Has everyone given up hope on Plumlee?

        Originally posted by BornReady View Post
        Lost hope on Plumlee? No. Lost hope on Gerald Green? Yes.
        Lost hope on Plumlee? No. Lost hope on Gerald Green? No.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Has everyone given up hope on Plumlee?

          Originally posted by QuickRelease View Post
          Who, taken after him, would you have taken instead that would be considered a no-brainer 1st round pick? People act like Miles was a lottery pick and we passed on a franchise level player. It was the latter end of the draft, and we went with a developmental big. I don't see what's so stupid about that.

          I've always felt posters didn't believe Plumelee was the BPA when Bird picked, even the best big man available. I happen to be one of those that feels that way. No need to re-hash who others felt were better players that were available as it's been done numerous times b4.

          I've heard all the excuses as to why Plumlee didn't play last year, and it really boils down to the fact that Plumlee didn't show enough to make Vogel comfortable playing him. You can slice it, dice it, and cut it anyway you want, but that's the bottom line. It's great Plumlee played well in SL, but those players aren't the quality of the majority of those playing in the NBA. Miles needs to be able to "produce" against NBA teams with NBA players. No one hopes he does more than I do. I'd love this coming season to be one where he can be a valuable rotational player. I won't hold my breath he will, but I will cross my fingers in hope that he can. Plumlee can't disappoint me like Green has, b/c I never had any high hopes for him to start with like I did Green. Miles can't go down as he can only go up, and that's upon him to do so.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Has everyone given up hope on Plumlee?

            Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
            I've heard all the excuses as to why Plumlee didn't play last year, and it really boils down to the fact that Plumlee didn't show enough to make Vogel comfortable playing him. You can slice it, dice it, and cut it anyway you want, but that's the bottom line.
            To me, the bottom line is we had Roy, Ian, David, Tyler, and even Jeff already on the roster, and no one was going to play over any of them.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Has everyone given up hope on Plumlee?

              Originally posted by SIR-LANCE-ALOT View Post
              why would we give up on a player picked that late in the draft and hasnt had to opportunity in a nba game to play, theres alot of successfull big men that took years to get to where they are, shaq even d-coward, hakeem, rick smits etc etc all took years to be the all star they are and were, i say hire rick smits and let him teach him a few things, doesnt smits still live in Indy? let the big man develop, he showed that he can at least be a shot blocker and a rebounder, theres alot of big men still in the league who cant really score but earn their money by rebounding and shot blocking, the guy has one year on the bench, and being on a veteran team last year, most knew he wouldnt get playing time,

              i have faith that he will be a servicable big man, like dale davis type

              Please don't insult Dale Davis by using his name in the same sentence with Plumlee.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Has everyone given up hope on Plumlee?

                Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                There's just not much to talk about I think. He has the physical tools to be a quality player, but we have yet to see his skills and drive against NBA quality players.

                Then you of course have the people that will hate him until he's either gone or been here 10 years.

                Better yet, produces. Only his producing will bring silence.

                The Pacers gave David Harrison 4 LONG years only to be a late 1st round bust. Maybe it's that memory that makes posters have little confidence in Plumlee.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Has everyone given up hope on Plumlee?

                  I never had any faith in him. I spoke down on him all year. This year, it's quite the opposite of being down on him. I know it's summer league, but he really looked like Fort Wayne helped him and that he might be ready for a shot. I am more high on him now than I ever have been.
                  Senior at the University of Louisville.
                  Greenfield ---> The Ville

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Has everyone given up hope on Plumlee?

                    Originally posted by ECKrueger View Post
                    To me, the bottom line is we had Roy, Ian, David, Tyler, and even Jeff already on the roster, and no one was going to play over any of them.
                    If anyone were better or had the potential to be better, they would have played over at least Tyler and Pendy. It's not like their production was so strong that it couldn't have been duplicated or replaced (and this is from a Tyler fan-boy)

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Has everyone given up hope on Plumlee?

                      If Plumlee can be a more athletic Samuel Dalembert and just come in and grab boards and block shots, I'm good with it. I don't expect him to be dominant offensively and we don't really need that.
                      Dear P_George,
                      You have received an infraction at Pacers Digest.

                      Reason: Unacceptable Comment and/or Content

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Has everyone given up hope on Plumlee?

                        Not hope, no. I have hope that the staff can develop him.

                        He may develop. He may not. He is worth taking a chance on and he's cheap. He may or may not amount to much.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Has everyone given up hope on Plumlee?

                          He was an end of the 1st round big man rookie. Expecting anyone drafted there to get significant minutes as a rookie is not realistic. At that point in the draft we are talking about players who are more likely to be busts than starters, and we are talking about teams with a lot of talent already. So a combination of not really be ready to play, and having enough talent on the team Vogel wasn't forced to play him is the reason he didn't play. Now, that has no bearing on him being ready to play this next season.

                          I do remember hearing about Harrison in summer league, and how he would dominate centers drafted at higher positions. Summer league is a tricky horse. He probably did so well in SL because he was a skilled center, he just didn't have the work ethic to make it translate against better competition. Likewise Plumlee has the physical gifts to be in the NBA, the question is does he have the work ethic to make those gifts translate into real NBA games. In my opinion, if a player can be one of the better players in SL they are capable of being at worst a rotational player in the NBA. If they don't become that then there is most likely a desire/work ethic problem instead of a skill/physical gift problem.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Has everyone given up hope on Plumlee?

                            Too early to tell IMO

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Has everyone given up hope on Plumlee?

                              Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                              He was an end of the 1st round big man rookie. Expecting anyone drafted there to get significant minutes as a rookie is not realistic. At that point in the draft we are talking about players who are more likely to be busts than starters, and we are talking about teams with a lot of talent already. So a combination of not really be ready to play, and having enough talent on the team Vogel wasn't forced to play him is the reason he didn't play. Now, that has no bearing on him being ready to play this next season.

                              I do remember hearing about Harrison in summer league, and how he would dominate centers drafted at higher positions. Summer league is a tricky horse. He probably did so well in SL because he was a skilled center, he just didn't have the work ethic to make it translate against better competition. Likewise Plumlee has the physical gifts to be in the NBA, the question is does he have the work ethic to make those gifts translate into real NBA games. In my opinion, if a player can be one of the better players in SL they are capable of being at worst a rotational player in the NBA. If they don't become that then there is most likely a desire/work ethic problem instead of a skill/physical gift problem.
                              I got the impression that Harrison did not care about playing but wanted the contract. Lot's of ticky tack injuries and illnesses (ala Tinsley). When he wanted to produce, he did. It wasn't a matter of talent. His telling moment for me was his "comeback" with MIN. He impressed them enough to give him a contract during training camp and make a spot for him. As soon as pre season started, he told them he had some minor injury. He got released right after and that ended his career, even though he made overtures for yet another comeback. He was just a head case and all Gm's knew it.

                              Plumlee at least doesn't have that problem.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Has everyone given up hope on Plumlee?

                                Harrison was also an unapologetic pothead

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X