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

Postgame: Pacers beat the Magic

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

  • Re: Postgame: Pacers beat the Magic

    Originally posted by purdue101 View Post
    The problem is Murphy is built like a PF with no PF game. He's soft on defense and his post game is obsolete. I haven't seen Troy post up once all year. He's a one trick pony - 6'11" shooter with diminshed supporting skill.

    Danny should be our PF until Hans is ready. Danny is more versatile on offense. It's not like we lose anything on D. We just need to make sure that Rush is in that lineup as he is a long wing who will rebound.
    Jermaine O'Neal was a PF with a PF physique (remember back when when Amare used to struggle mightily against Jermaine?) who was constantly playing against Cs and ended up with chronic injury problems. Jermaine even tried to bulk up and put on mass; that only seemed to make things worse long-term. That's what happens long-term when you play smaller guys at bigger positions. Granger should not be playing against naturally bigger, stronger PFs. If someone needs to play out of position against bigger, stronger players, choose someone other than our best player. Granger is too important, and the last thing he needs is to increase the likelihood he could sustain more injures. I think Granger has a SF's build and belongs on the wing, not banging in the paint against brutes. Just my opinion.

    Comment


    • Re: Postgame: Pacers beat the Magic

      Originally posted by QuickRelease View Post
      I think Head has been good as the starting 2. I really like him there.

      Agreed. Rush also seems to have benefited from coming of the bench. So I'd expect that arrangement for at least the near future. Although if Brandon can really put it together, he could eventually supplant Luther as a starter. No problem there either b/c head's offensive punch and energy would be nice on the second unit.

      How will an eventual Granger return affect them though? I'm assuming he and Dunleavy overlap more.
      I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

      -Emiliano Zapata

      Comment


      • Re: Postgame: Pacers beat the Magic

        I liked when Barnes got called for a charge, walked over Roy not around. Roy got up and showed his displeasure. I like that Roy didn't get pushed around.

        Comment


        • Re: Postgame: Pacers beat the Magic

          That was the strangest officiated game I have seen in quite a while.

          Last edited by Alabama-Redneck; 01-06-2010, 09:45 AM. Reason: old age
          I would rather be the hammer than the nail

          Comment


          • Re: Postgame: Pacers beat the Magic

            Originally posted by Speed View Post
            I liked when Barnes got called for a charge, walked over Roy not around. Roy got up and showed his displeasure. I like that Roy didn't get pushed around.
            I noticed the walking over thing too, wondering if that's actually what caused Roy to respond, not the foul itself.
            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

            Comment


            • Re: Postgame: Pacers beat the Magic

              Originally posted by AesopRockOn View Post
              Notice that in answering the question about being on this recent tear and having a ton of confidence from different guys, the coach isn't mentioned at all. This would indicate that Roy has pretty much tuned him out.
              I notice you didn't mention Hicks and the other administrators in this post. This would indicate that you think they are doing a bad job of maintaining this forum.

              For that matter, I'm not mentioning the five-game win streak in this post, which would indicate . . . oh, never mind.

              You may be right that some players, including Hibbert, aren't fired up about O'Brien. I don't know. But not mentioning the coach in answer to a question that wasn't about the coach doesn't say anything about how he feels about the coach.
              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


              • Re: Postgame: Pacers beat the Magic

                So many things to talk about.

                A bit of a scare on the first couple of possessions by AJ when he tried to do the TJ Ford "drive to the basket like it's 5-on-1". I recall yelling that just because he has a J in his name doesn't mean he has to play like that. He stopped. Coincidence? Of course.

                I think this is a classic example of a favorable matchup that we finally took advantage of. As I recall in the last Magic game it looked like they had no real answer for Roy and it was the typical foul-and-to-the-bench situation that kept us from exploiting it.

                In the after-discussion last night there was a lot of jawing about "what is wrong with Dun". I still believe it is NOT a physical issue with his knee. I made a point last night of watching his legs when he lifted for shots, and I didn't see any unusual movement nor did I see him favor the knees after coming down. I also see him moving without the ball and not losing any kind of a step, while I actually think he has been better this year at moving with his man on defense. Having had 15 (not 17, I remembered wrong at the game) against the T-Wolves shows that he CAN still have a decent night, then a back-to-back knocks it completely out.

                Because of this, I think general conditioning has a lot to do with it (he has all but been off the court unable to do anything resembling game conditioning for all but two of the last 10 months or more). Someone (unfortunately I don't remember who, might have been Hicks) talked about it being more of a confidence level, not really trusting his knees to not give out again. I would go with that.

                Speaking of defense, the one thing that really stood out for me was that we relied more on the man-to-man defense with good timing on the help when needed, unlike previous games where the help comes either too early or (with TJ a major culprit) when unnecessary for anything other than trying to harass the ball. We also were successful challenging shots early, which kept the Magic from getting into rhythm shooting jumpers.

                Overall, a lot of positives.

                Regarding the whole "this is just like the win streak", I think it has become clear that there is a style of play that most of the players are comfortable with that Troy and TJ, for different reasons, don't seem to fit into. In some cases that is the fault of JOB who tried to use them that way for so long, in others it is the fault of the player for not being able to adjust to the rest of the players on the floor. I wholeheartedly believe this is what Dahntay was referring to in his comments. I also believe this style has its flaws (if we can't get the ball into the paint we just don't have a consistent outside attack, for example), and therefore (as we have seen) is just as capable of losing badly as the "other" player combination. In the final analysis, though, it is more uniform in its chemistry and (because of that) is more fun to watch.
                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


                • Re: Postgame: Pacers beat the Magic

                  Originally posted by BillS View Post
                  I think this is a classic example of a favorable matchup that we finally took advantage of. As I recall in the last Magic game it looked like they had no real answer for Roy and it was the typical foul-and-to-the-bench situation that kept us from exploiting it.
                  Did Troy play in that game? Any credence to the suggestions around here that Roy's foul troubles are somewhat related to having to bail out Troy so much?

                  Originally posted by BillS View Post
                  In the after-discussion last night there was a lot of jawing about "what is wrong with Dun". I still believe it is NOT a physical issue with his knee. I made a point last night of watching his legs when he lifted for shots, and I didn't see any unusual movement nor did I see him favor the knees after coming down. I also see him moving without the ball and not losing any kind of a step, while I actually think he has been better this year at moving with his man on defense. Having had 15 (not 17, I remembered wrong at the game) against the T-Wolves shows that he CAN still have a decent night, then a back-to-back knocks it completely out.

                  Because of this, I think general conditioning has a lot to do with it (he has all but been off the court unable to do anything resembling game conditioning for all but two of the last 10 months or more). Someone (unfortunately I don't remember who, might have been Hicks) talked about it being more of a confidence level, not really trusting his knees to not give out again. I would go with that.
                  I appreciate you tackling this, and noticing how bad it is. But the general conditioning thing breaks down for me in the fact that he is making stupid turnovers and airballing and screwing up as soon as the game starts.

                  It seems like he's the one with vertigo, not Tyler.



                  Originally posted by BillS View Post
                  Regarding the whole "this is just like the win streak", I think it has become clear that there is a style of play that most of the players are comfortable with that Troy and TJ, for different reasons, don't seem to fit into. In some cases that is the fault of JOB who tried to use them that way for so long, in others it is the fault of the player for not being able to adjust to the rest of the players on the floor. I wholeheartedly believe this is what Dahntay was referring to in his comments. I also believe this style has its flaws (if we can't get the ball into the paint we just don't have a consistent outside attack, for example), and therefore (as we have seen) is just as capable of losing badly as the "other" player combination. In the final analysis, though, it is more uniform in its chemistry and (because of that) is more fun to watch.
                  Good word.

                  I might note that when Tyler gets back we'll have another low post option besides Troy to make the "Win Streak System" work.
                  "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                  Comment


                  • Re: Postgame: Pacers beat the Magic

                    Admittedly, Roy was also allowed to foul sometimes without a whistle being blown (for whatever reason). That bears mentioning.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Postgame: Pacers beat the Magic

                      Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                      Did Troy play in that game? Any credence to the suggestions around here that Roy's foul troubles are somewhat related to having to bail out Troy so much?
                      Not only Troy. I didn't start watching until the last few TJ games but TJ leaves his man to harrass the ball so often it is like playing 4-on-5. I suspect TJ's man drove the lane as often as Troy's.

                      And let's not fail to note that - as I've often said - Roy forgets how big he is and tries to play like a little guy defending a big guy too often. He jumps in the air, he slaps at the ball when his hands are up - he still makes an awful lot of silly fouls on his own. He's getting better, but usually you chalk up at least 2 fouls per game to playing small like that.


                      Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                      I appreciate you tackling this, and noticing how bad it is. But the general conditioning thing breaks down for me in the fact that he is making stupid turnovers and airballing and screwing up as soon as the game starts.

                      It seems like he's the one with vertigo, not Tyler.
                      Definitely understand what you are saying, and I know that's a big part of a lot of people's arguments. If I remember correctly - and I have no film to review - one of the games in question was Atlanta, where the Hawks were forcing turnovers on everyone by cutting off passing lanes and preventing Pacers from moving into position. In another of the games I remember a couple of the turnovers coming when Dun wasn't set right as he tried to stop and pass, he slipped a bit. I'm not yet convinced those aren't isolated instances, but I'm willing to keep my eye on them. All I can say is that passing and ball handling require concentration that flags when fatigued, just like shooting. The explanation given by many - that Dun is p***ed off that he might get traded so simply doesn't care any more - needs a heck of a lot more than anecdotal "well it looks like" for me to accept it, since he has shown zero sign of being that kind of player in the past.
                      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


                      • Re: Postgame: Pacers beat the Magic

                        Originally posted by BillS View Post
                        The explanation given by many - that Dun is p***ed off that he might get traded so simply doesn't care any more - needs a heck of a lot more than anecdotal "well it looks like" for me to accept it, since he has shown zero sign of being that kind of player in the past.
                        Agreed. He doesn't have the character or history.

                        I keep wondering if he is somehow impaired, affecting his coordination. It's really weird.
                        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                        Comment


                        • Re: Postgame: Pacers beat the Magic

                          Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                          Admittedly, Roy was also allowed to foul sometimes without a whistle being blown (for whatever reason). That bears mentioning.
                          I personally think he learned to jump straight up, with his arms straight up.

                          A lot of his fouls are due to opposing players jumping into him, and Roy jumps straight up, but would bring his arms down still attempting to block a shot in the process.

                          Last night he seemed to be happy with just jumping straight up, arms in the air, and altering the shot instead of trying to block them.

                          Perhaps the refs were easy on him, but hopefully it's a sign of things to come

                          Comment


                          • Re: Postgame: Pacers beat the Magic

                            I was sitting pretty close last night in the LL (row 16) at a diagonal angle, and I know I saw him get someone on the arm with no call, and that's primarily what I have in mind, but other times he was bumping people in ways that a lot of refs will call that.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Postgame: Pacers beat the Magic

                              Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
                              I personally think he learned to jump straight up, with his arms straight up.

                              A lot of his fouls are due to opposing players jumping into him, and Roy jumps straight up, but would bring his arms down still attempting to block a shot in the process.

                              Last night he seemed to be happy with just jumping straight up, arms in the air, and altering the shot instead of trying to block them.

                              Perhaps the refs were easy on him, but hopefully it's a sign of things to come
                              IMHO, when Hibbert is guarding someone inside the paint whose trying to get position to score.....Hibbert is so long that he doesn't even have to jump at all.....he can plant his feet, raise his hands in the air and do as good of a job of altering a shot ( while not risking getting called on a foul ) as he would if he tried jumping in the air.
                              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Postgame: Pacers beat the Magic

                                Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
                                I personally think he learned to jump straight up, with his arms straight up.

                                A lot of his fouls are due to opposing players jumping into him, and Roy jumps straight up, but would bring his arms down still attempting to block a shot in the process.

                                Last night he seemed to be happy with just jumping straight up, arms in the air, and altering the shot instead of trying to block them.

                                Perhaps the refs were easy on him, but hopefully it's a sign of things to come
                                O'Brien has talked about this a lot. He says that prior to coming to the NBA, Hibbert was basically taught that the best way to maximize his size was to basically make himself as big as possible. The meant standing as straight as possible and reaching for the skies.

                                That works fine in college, but doing that in the NBA just makes you less mobile. A whole bunch of players will either go around or over you. What they've been working with him on is creating a lower base for movement. Give up a little of the standing height, in exchange for some lateral mobility and more upward explosion. He's gotten better at it, but he's still a ways off.

                                Another thing with Roy is that I think his mind outraces his body. This is a problem that usually happens with older players, but I think it fits here. An older player can still see the play, and knows where and what to do, but his body can't get there fast enough any more. I think the same is true with Roy. He can see the play, but his body can't get him there.

                                It's my opinion that this will improve over time as he adapts to the speed of the players, and, perhaps more importantly, learns to gauge what he can and can't do, depending on the player and the situation.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X