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

Kravitz: Pacers attendance woes not tied to racism

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

  • #46
    Re: Kravitz: Pacers attendance woes not tied to racism

    OK, this is starting to wobble over the line. Still letting it go because we HAVE to be able to have the conversation, but keeping a close eye on it.
    BillS

    A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
    Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Kravitz: Pacers attendance woes not tied to racism

      Like I said in the other thread where I was disagreed with, the Pacers are still indirectly paying for the brawl. Notice I said INDIRECTLY. The fact is that attendance dropped and we had to ship players to change the culture and attendance has never recovered to this day is evidence enough. No one can convince me that in some ways the Pacers are not still paying for the actions of the "thugs". A bigger market probably would have shaken it off but not in central Indiana. I believe the attendance will increase and this team deserves it but nobody could have foreseen the ramifications of what went down in Detroit that day.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Kravitz: Pacers attendance woes not tied to racism

        I've been harping on the media coverage of this team for about a month now. I can't believe the Pacers aren't demanding better coverage of this team. Maybe they need to renovate the media room and have several of the players do a 5 min session after each game.
        You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Kravitz: Pacers attendance woes not tied to racism

          I won't go to any games until they get rid of all those white guys. Hansbroughs, Plumless--they have to go. I'm not out here to support a bunch of honkeys.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Kravitz: Pacers attendance woes not tied to racism

            Originally posted by BillS View Post
            OK, this is starting to wobble over the line. Still letting it go because we HAVE to be able to have the conversation, but keeping a close eye on it.
            Maybe it is better suited in Market Square, but this is a major issue surrounding this franchise right now. Because of a few scattered racists on the internet we have the sports world saying we are having attendance issues because of white racism. And I'm not just calling out the white racists spouting criminal thug remarks, I'm talking about all the racists making this an issue. If anyone can seriously say that most all white people are racist and Indiana is mostly white and that is why the Pacers struggle, then they themselves must be racist. Indiana is no more racist than any other place in the world. The mostly white rural areas of any state are more racist than the diverse population centers. Ask people who live in areas right outside of Atlanta how they view the inner city, and you see this as an issue everywhere. The Pacers don't play in Indiana. They don't tour the state. They play in Indianapolis, the most diverse part of the state, where literally a half million non whites live. There are enough non whites to sell out every game for a decade if they just went to a few games a year.
            Last edited by Midcoasted; 02-21-2013, 06:01 PM.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Kravitz: Pacers attendance woes not tied to racism

              Did Cowherd mention that the ONLY sellouts the Pacers have is for games with Miami, LA, NY, Brkyn, SAS, Chicago. and Boston? These teams have all white players with no tattoos, right? Oh, wait a minute! What a silly topic in 2013! On the other hand, I have some friends who moved out of Indy and didn't see Pacer games for several years whose first questions for me was "Why are you still following those Thugs?" The public perception of a team is a delicate thing. Maybe TPTB does need a state wide 'get to know your Pacers' tour in the off season?

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Kravitz: Pacers attendance woes not tied to racism

                Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                Haven't you guys seen all the KKK members that stand outside the fieldhouse keeping all the law abiding folks from getting into the games? It's a real travesty I tell you. Amazingly enough though they let the players into the game. One of the 7 wonders of the world really.
                No. I only tend to notice them around Christmas time when they're in front of all the Walmarts ringing bells, just a few yards away from the Salvation Army who keeps looking at them nervously.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Kravitz: Pacers attendance woes not tied to racism

                  Golly... Colin Blowhard popping off at a market he is now "REENTERING" ..

                  ????

                  He got what he wanted... attention... simple play, with great execution.

                  Who cares about Colin Cowherd?

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Kravitz: Pacers attendance woes not tied to racism

                    Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                    Indiana is no more racist than any other place in the world.
                    I'm sorry but this is just not true. Ever spent time in Evansville? Martinsville?

                    I love Indiana. I spent 31 years of my life living there. Crown Point, Evansville, Louisville area, Greenwood, and Bloomington. Great people for the most part. But there definitely is more racism in certain areas of the state (maybe not Indy so much anymore) than in some other parts of the country.

                    Doesn't make it Indiana's "fault" per se, there are complex forces at work, economically, culturally, historically... but all places are not the same, sorry.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Kravitz: Pacers attendance woes not tied to racism

                      I also hesitate to get involved in this thread. I will say that "racism" is a much, much more complicated and subtle issue than some of you are making it out to be. Kravitz is oversimplifying as well. The "hey, why weren't we selling out games when we had a bunch of white dudes a few years back" comments strike me as particularly ignorant... JMHO.

                      I think the true attendance issues are complex. However as I've said many many times in these attendance threads... the issues are local/regional ones. It's not ticket prices, or the bad economy, or parking, or the NBA as a sport, or the product on the floor, or the stadium... these are all things that are as good or better in Indy than in other similar-sized markets who have better attendance.

                      I pray/hope race is not a major factor, but who knows.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Kravitz: Pacers attendance woes not tied to racism

                        I honestly wasn't aware this was even being considered an issue.

                        I hate reading articles by people playing the race card. I hate reading articles by people protesting against others playing the race card. It's not qutie as simple as, "If you don't talk about it, it will go away," but I feel like there's no reason to give something so potentially divisive legs. Racism is out there, but it's not running rampant in dominant culture *quite* the way journalists hoping to score ratings by talking about contentious yet safe issues would have you believe.
                        Time for a new sig.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Kravitz: Pacers attendance woes not tied to racism

                          Originally posted by rabidpacersfan View Post
                          I'm sorry but this is just not true. Ever spent time in Evansville? Martinsville?

                          I love Indiana. I spent 31 years of my life living there. Crown Point, Evansville, Louisville area, Greenwood, and Bloomington. Great people for the most part. But there definitely is more racism in certain areas of the state (maybe not Indy so much anymore) than in some other parts of the country.

                          Doesn't make it Indiana's "fault" per se, there are complex forces at work, economically, culturally, historically... but all places are not the same, sorry.
                          I live in Evansville, and it is nothing like the fantasy world you are describing. The inner city is a very diverse place and you see just as many black racists as whites. Just check Topix if you don't believe me. The idiotic racism goes both ways. If you are white with a big family odds are you have at least one bi racial family member. I have several. How could we be so racist? I have had several black friends and acquaintances over the years. And trust me I have met black people who are racist against other black people. So your notion that Evansville is so full of white racism is false. Outside of the city of Evansville in the majority white parts you have more white racism than the inner city. In the inner city the blacks are more racist than the ones that live in the majority white areas. It's called human nature.

                          Again it's a two way street. I have been in the black areas and encountered racism for being white. I'm sure black people have been to the white areas and encountered it. But I've been the only white guy in the club and never truly had a problem. And I've seen one black guy in a club full of whites and never have a real problem. Almost no hate crimes occur here, even though the crime rate is pretty high within the city limits.

                          I have also lived on the Southside of Indianapolis for many years, which is a majority white as well. I encountered just as much racism in Indianapolis as Evansville, which was some words here and there, but no for real hate crimes. Ever head of Whiteland Indiana? It was called that for a reason at one point in time. You obviously have not lived here in Evansville the last 20 years. Maybe in 1992 you had a point, I have heard crazy stories from the riots in the 60s, but I never see extreme racial issues here today. We all seem to get along just fine, even if some dumbasses make stupid comments on the Internet.

                          Ok mods I won't make any more comments on this issue. I am done with this thread.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Kravitz: Pacers attendance woes not tied to racism

                            To me, the bottom line is that we had racism in Indiana in the 70s 80s 90s and 2000s, probably even more back then than in 2013, so it was always a variable in this equation since the creation of the franchise, which is why I see no reason why it would suddenly be a more significant factor today than it has ever been before. It's almost certainly other reasons IMO.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by MAStamper View Post
                              To me, the bottom line is that we had racism in Indiana in the 70s 80s 90s and 2000s, probably even more back then than in 2013, so it was always a variable in this equation since the creation of the franchise, which is why I see no reason why it would suddenly be a more significant factor today than it has ever been before. It's almost certainly other reasons IMO.
                              This is the harsh truth (as I see it):

                              The nba has and will always be about the stars. When the pacers get a crowd pleasing star that shines on a national level, local attendance will go up.

                              Given Paul George's rise, he could be there someday, but he doesn't do a lot of his work in the highlight reels. Reggie did almost all of his work there. George is probably a better player right now than Reggie ever was, but he may never be as big a local draw.

                              (Cue the inevitable response of rants about Indiana being about team first and me not knowing what I'm talking about)

                              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


                              • #60
                                Re: Kravitz: Pacers attendance woes not tied to racism

                                Sigh here we go, I have to respond but then I'm done here...

                                Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                                I live in Evansville...
                                Cool. I like Evansville. I lived there from 1985-87. Went to Plaza Park Middle School and lived near Division St. near Green River Rd. before they turned it into a bypass. My stepmom was born and raised there, and my dad met and married her 27 years ago while we lived there. I still have friends from there and I have been back many many many times, most recently in 2009 or so for a few days. Did some riverboat gambling among other things.

                                Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                                (Evansville) is nothing like the fantasy world you are describing.


                                Go back and re-read exactly what I said. What "fantasy world" did I describe?

                                You said, and I quote...

                                Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                                Indiana is no more racist than any other place in the world.


                                Any other place in the world? Really?.... Have you traveled much?

                                I never said Evansville was a bad place, in fact I even said (referring to all of Indiana actually) "Great people for the most part." Please go back and re-read what I actually said, not what you seem to *feel* like I said.

                                Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                                The inner city is a very diverse place and you see just as many black racists as whites. Just check Topix if you don't believe me.
                                This is meaningless, what's your point? There is no racism in Evansville because there are black people and white people in the same place?

                                Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                                The idiotic racism goes both ways.
                                I agree! In fact I never said otherwise.

                                Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                                I have had several black friends and acquaintances over the years. And trust me I have met black people who are racist against other black people.
                                You have several black friends, cool... there couldn't possibly be racism in Evansville if you have black friends right?

                                Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                                So your notion that Evansville is so full of white racism is false.
                                I never said that. Please show me where I said that.

                                Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                                Outside of the city of Evansville in the majority white parts you have more white racism than the inner city.
                                Totally agree.

                                Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                                In the inner city the blacks are more racist than the ones that live in the majority white areas. It's called human nature.
                                EDIT: Sorry, misread what you said here, I actually agree with this

                                Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                                Again it's a two way street. I have been in the black areas and encountered racism for being white. I'm sure black people have been to the white areas and encountered it. But I've been the only white guy in the club and never truly had a problem. And I've seen one black guy in a club full of whites and never have a real problem. Almost no hate crimes occur here, even though the crime rate is pretty high within the city limits.
                                I think you have a pretty different idea of what "racism" is than I do. Racism isn't just overt hate crimes and fighting and name calling. It's MUCH more subtle and institutional than that. It's income and job disparity, education disparity, housing and job discrimination, and a whole host of other things.

                                Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                                I have also lived on the Southside of Indianapolis for many years, which is a majority white as well.
                                So did I. Greenwood High School class of 1992. I was editor of the school paper and had to go to MSA for Pacers games to take pictures of the school band or the color guard or whenever our choir would sing the national anthem, that sort of stuff. I got floor press passes for Pacer games and that's when I fell in love with the team. Chuck Person, Detlef, young Reggie etc.

                                There was a total of ONE black kid in my entire high school until my senior year, when that kid's younger brother became a freshman. Then there were two black kids! (That doesn't have any correlation to racism, just sayin)

                                Did you know that the head of the KKK resided in Greenwood for many years in the early 20th century? One of the town's claims to fame.

                                Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                                I encountered just as much racism in Indianapolis as Evansville, which was some words here and there, but no for real hate crimes.
                                Again, I think you unfortunately have a very superficial idea of what "racism" is. There's a LOT more to it than name calling or hate crimes.

                                Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                                Ever head of Whiteland Indiana? It was called that for a reason at one point in time.
                                Thanks yeah, I lived 5 miles from there for 6-7 years and had close friends who went to their high school. What's your point.

                                Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                                Even if some dumbasses make stupid comments on the Internet.
                                Thanks for the not-so-thinly veiled personal attack! Have a great day. I stand by every single word I said previously, which if you actually chill out for a second and re-read slowly, wasn't anywhere as accusatory as you seem to have taken it.
                                Last edited by rabid; 02-22-2013, 05:56 PM. Reason: lived in Evansville for 2 years, not 12 years - mistyped, fixed

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X