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

Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 15
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 11 15 template Next
  • #1

    Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

    http://www.nypost.com/seven/12082006...sey.htm?page=0

    Bad Answer
    IVERSON ON WAY OUT OF PHILLY
    by Peter Vecsey

    December 8, 2006 -- THE Allen Iverson Period in Philadelphia is rapidly dragging to an undignified conclusion.

    According to two agents whose clients play for the 76ers, Iverson went to team president Billy King this past Tuesday and demanded to be traded, something he professed repeatedly over the years he'd never do.

    According to two general managers King contacted yesterday, the 76ers are aggressively attempting to accommodate their forlorn franchise player, whose prohibitive salary (currently $17.1 million with $19M and $20.8M remaining) makes him a difficult sell despite a 31-point average - at least if the Sixers hope to harvest relatively equal value.

    At the same time, emphasized one of those GMs: "A.I. is not the only player Billy is looking to move. His second breath is about Chris Webber." And that's not where the conversation stops.

    Everybody is gladly available. Andre Iguodala or Sam Dalembert may have to be surrendered in order to move Webber ($20.7M/22.3M next season) or A.I. "But the big push is on to deal Iverson."

    That's not solely because he wants out, but because his attitude leaves management no other option. If he were going along with the program, the 76ers would hide and wait for the right opening.

    The night after filing for divorce, Iverson essentially put his effort on cruise control in Chicago as the Bulls exterminated the 76ers, 121-94, vaulting to a 39-16 first-quarter spread and winning the subsequent three.

    Imagine how competitive it would've been had the Sixers not held a team meeting that afternoon.

    A convulsive back was cited as the explanation for Iverson's 25-point (7-17) seven-assist, seven-turnover, defensively-felonious performance. Don't be foolish enough to fall for it. Or Maurice Cheeks' counterfeit contention the 76ers' spirit is "still there," players "still are trying" and "no one has given up."

    Iverson, indeed, gave up. "If you know your leader doesn't care, how are we supposed to play with the guy?" steamed a teammate to his agent.

    According to the same agent, Iverson told King he likes Cheeks as a person "but not as a coach." In other words, "either he goes or I go."

    Despite numerous people in Philadelphia and Portland (where Cheeks coached for three seasons and 55 games) believing Maurice is overmatched on the sidelines, he has the full support of Chairman Ed Snider and King.

    As yet another GM points out: "The [76ers] didn't make the playoffs last year and didn't do anything of consequence during the offseason to improve. Regardless of what you may think of Cheeks' coaching acumen, how can be his fault?"

    Iverson may not blame Cheeks for the 76ers' worst record in the Atlantic Division, but there's no question they've got differences that aren't going away. One of them pertains to Iverson's lack of attention to detail, lack of respect for authority and unwillingness to practice hard.

    Following a conflict at workout last week, Iverson stormed out of the building. That evening he failed to show for a mandatory team function for corporate sponsors and prime season ticket holders.

    The announced reason was "after-effects of dental surgery." One of the aforementioned agents contends Iverson told teammates earlier in the day he planned to blow off the event and was simply going to take the fine. For whatever it's worth, Iverson apologized to everyone he stiffed.

    Last but certainly not least, it's time to try to figure out Iverson's destination. That is, if it's humanely possible to re-route him. I have to believe there are plenty of teams that would take the plunge because they're desperate for help in the stands, as well as the standings . . . as long as the cost isn't excessive. All it takes is one.

    Eliminate the Knicks from the git-go; there's not a chowder clam's chance of the 76ers taking Stephon Marbury or Steve Francis off Isiah Thomas' Dead Sea payroll.

    Why wouldn't the staggering Celtics still be interested? The 76ers can do a lot worse than accept several of their young players along with, say, chronically injured Theo Ratliff, who would be allowed to retire gracefully.

    The Hawks, too, possess a surplus of young talent at several positions, though the startling play of Tyronn Lue is packing them in (four sellouts in eight home games) so far.

    Denver's George Karl expressed interest at one point last season. Andre Miller, Linas Kleiza and Joe Smith might pique the 76ers' interest.

    Or how great would it be to see Iverson and Kevin Garnett paired in Minnesota, giving them the opportunity to win their first championship in concert. That way the 76ers could acquire Randy Foye, the object of their affections last June (in Celtics trade talk) and maybe Mike James. That way Minnesota could dump a particularly burdensome contract or two, either Marko Jaric or Troy Hudson.

    The Pacers, too, are looking to do something big, reveals a league source. Larry Bird is unhappy with his team's chemistry, meaning Stephen Jackson and Jamaal Tinsley aren't fitting into Rick Carlisle's system. Another $4M-to-$5M piece would have to be included.

    peter.vecsey@nypost.com
    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

    Stephen Jackson and Jamaal Tinsley and maybe Harrison for Iverson ?

    SOLD where do i sign ?

    edit: after doing a trade check it looks like that deal wouldnt work...hmmm...ahh well

    edit 2: im guessing if a trade were to happen it would involve a 3rd team ?
    If you havin' depth problems, I feel bad for you son; I got 99 problems but a bench ain't one! - Hicks
    [/center]
    @thatguyjoe84

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

      Thats way too good to be true. Although I'm not a huge fan of Iverson and I don't think he'd mix well with Al & JO, getting that quality of talent would be too good to pass up.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

        I don't like Iverson. I don't think he would improve chemistry.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

          Indiana Trade Breakdown
          Outgoing
          Jermaine O'Neal
          6-11 PF from Eau Claire (HS)
          20.1 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 2.6 apg in 35.3 minutes
          Stephen Jackson
          6-8 SG from Oak Hill Academy (HS)
          16.4 ppg, 3.9 rpg, 2.8 apg in 35.9 minutes
          Jamaal Tinsley
          6-1 PG from Iowa State
          9.3 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 5.0 apg in 26.7 minutes
          Incoming
          Allen Iverson
          6-0 PG from Georgetown
          33.0 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 7.4 apg in 43.0 minutes
          Samuel Dalembert
          6-11 C from Seton Hall
          7.3 ppg, 8.2 rpg, 0.4 apg in 26.7 minutes
          Shavlik Randolph
          6-10 PF from Duke
          2.3 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 0.3 apg in 8.6 minutes

          Successful Scenario

          I don't see any way a trade with us could work without some real financial wrangling and a third, desperate team as a partner.

          That's the best team-to-team trade I could come up with, not that I would do it. No way would I want Iverson here.

          Interesting story, but won't affect us one bit.
          Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

            Big Al
            Jackowacko
            Mel Mel

            for

            AI
            Jones
            #2nd pick 2007

            works in the trade checker!

            We could pair AI with Saras (or Daniels) in the backcourt, and still have a frontcourt of Danger, JO and Feisty.
            Maceo Baston's #1 fan on Pacers Digest!

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

              I consider the stuff on Iverson to be completely separate from the stuff on the Pacers. In other words, I don't think the Pacers will even inquire into what it would take to get Iverson.

              But it is intersting that the Pacers are looking to do something big.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

                Iverson is certainly an exciting player with unquestionable talent. My concern is how would he fit in with JO & Al. I know alot of people just don't like Jamaal and Stephen but you can't deny their talent either. Iverson is 31 years old. He's a ballhog. He shoots .421 from the field for his career. He averages 23 shots a game for his career. He has no three point shot, .309 for career. He also makes the news just as often for off court/nonperformance reasons as he does for his play. At this price, I'd have to say pass.
                I'm in these bands
                The Humans
                Dr. Goldfoot
                The Bar Brawlers
                ME

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

                  Originally posted by Peter Vecsey
                  ....Iverson's lack of attention to detail, lack of respect for authority and unwillingness to practice hard.
                  Include me out. The Pacers must improve their consistency, and that means discipline. Talent alone is not going to help. This means no to Iverson, and no to any other wild talent grabs that may be contemplated, whether they work in the Trade checker or not, unless the player acquired is a good citizen.
                  And I won't be here to see the day
                  It all dries up and blows away
                  I'd hang around just to see
                  But they never had much use for me
                  In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

                    Another thing, if you held the rights to Allen Iverson wouldn't you want more in return than the players I'd expect the Pacers to be willing to part with. The way our roster is currently contructed, we can't afford to give up any big guys. Outside of JO,Al & Foster, I'm not comfortable riding any of the other guys for 25+ minutes a game. At the point we have Jamaal & Runi past that I'm not comfortable with the game of Armstong or Greene for 25+ either. There is an overflow at the swingman (2/3) position with Jack, Daniels, Marshall, Granger and Runi can play the 2 while Al can play the 3. I think that's where you'll see movement. It won't be for AI though. I think you'll see a couple of those guys + maybe a big we aren't using sent packing for a big (5) we will use.
                    I'm in these bands
                    The Humans
                    Dr. Goldfoot
                    The Bar Brawlers
                    ME

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

                      JO for AI straight up, nothing else.

                      AI
                      Jack
                      Granger
                      Al
                      Foster

                      ^ Not sure if its a better team but its more balanced, plus AI's insanely stupid deal is slightly better than JO's insanely stupid deal.

                      BTW I know it ain't going to happen

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

                        Originally posted by Skaut_Ech View Post
                        Indiana Trade Breakdown
                        Outgoing
                        Jermaine O'Neal
                        6-11 PF from Eau Claire (HS)
                        20.1 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 2.6 apg in 35.3 minutes
                        Stephen Jackson
                        6-8 SG from Oak Hill Academy (HS)
                        16.4 ppg, 3.9 rpg, 2.8 apg in 35.9 minutes
                        Jamaal Tinsley
                        6-1 PG from Iowa State
                        9.3 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 5.0 apg in 26.7 minutes
                        Incoming
                        Allen Iverson
                        6-0 PG from Georgetown
                        33.0 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 7.4 apg in 43.0 minutes
                        Samuel Dalembert
                        6-11 C from Seton Hall
                        7.3 ppg, 8.2 rpg, 0.4 apg in 26.7 minutes
                        Shavlik Randolph
                        6-10 PF from Duke
                        2.3 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 0.3 apg in 8.6 minutes


                        Successful Scenario

                        I don't see any way a trade with us could work without some real financial wrangling and a third, desperate team as a partner.

                        That's the best team-to-team trade I could come up with, not that I would do it. No way would I want Iverson here.

                        Interesting story, but won't affect us one bit.
                        That would be a pretty fair trade. We need AI's quickness and shooting...and particularly his ability to hit in the clutch. We need Sam's toughness and interior presence. We already have a good PF in Harrington who does many of the same things as JO. We need Granger to start. We have Quis who can start at SG....and with AI our perimeter game just got a boost. The only concern would be AI's age...but he's only 3 years older than JO, while Sam is 3 years younger. I think we would be a more dangerous team with AI.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

                          Did I just hear AI and clutch in the same sentence without the word, Isn't. Maybe my definition of clutch is warped by having reggie around, but IMO a guy that doesn't hit his first game winning shot till he is 30, Isn't clutch.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

                            You're willing to trade three starters for AI? Not just three starters but our current franchise player and the starting point guard and starting shooting guard.
                            I'm in these bands
                            The Humans
                            Dr. Goldfoot
                            The Bar Brawlers
                            ME

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

                              This looks like a fit for Danny Ainge. I could see the C's dangling a package including a lot of youth (Jefferson or Gomes or Perkins, Delonte West, perhaps Gerald Green) and some salary ballast like Theo Ratliff or Sczerbiak and some mid-level guys like Scalabrine to make the numbers work, and draft picks too.

                              An AI/ Paul Pierce backcourt would be pretty scary.

                              Doc Rivers needs to be fired first, though.
                              The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 11 15 template Next
                              Working...
                              X