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 Take on Mayo Trade Collapse: NO backs out when we're on hold with the league /// Wells Article with Trade Details

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

  • Re: Kravitz Take on Mayo Trade Collapse: NO backs out when we're on hold with the league /// Wells Article with Trade Details

    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
    So you're telling me that Memphis didn't think they could flip two 1st round draft picks that were given to them into a solid PF?

    Two 1st rounders can get a lot done in this league.
    Unless you're the Bulls.

    Comment


    • Re: Kravitz Take on Mayo Trade Collapse: NO backs out when we're on hold with the league /// Wells Article with Trade Details

      Didn't we have a team with a few OJ Mayos and we got rid of them? I don't see how getting him would have helped this franchise.

      Comment


      • Re: Kravitz Take on Mayo Trade Collapse: NO backs out when we're on hold with the league /// Wells Article with Trade Details

        Originally posted by beast23 View Post
        I'll listen to the show once it's available online. But I'm sure that it was a what if kind of statement rather than an absolute. Otherwise, we would have read it from another source by now. Regardless, how can you net West from a trade of Rush and SJones, and why would NO be giving up a first to us in the same trade?

        Jeez, we could have also attempted to throw in all-nighters with each of the Pacemates and NO would never have made that trade. It would have been the Collison trade x 10.

        No effing way. So here I'm calling that BS. Grady pulled this one from the southern end of his torso.
        Listen to it than since im just full of **** right? I dont care what you want to call it, it is what it is. Grady knows more hears more than the average fan so Im sure he knows what hes talking about. We would of included Mayo as well and a pick. Makes sense for all involved, at least to me I guess.

        Comment


        • Re: Kravitz Take on Mayo Trade Collapse: NO backs out when we're on hold with the league /// Wells Article with Trade Details

          Originally posted by Hibbert View Post
          Why? They obviously almost did. The are 3rd to last in scoring in the NBA. West is a free agent after the year, why wouldnt they try to get some value for him? OJ becomes their starting 2, a position they definitely needed an upgrade, plus he's a scorer. Landry would of slid into the starting 4 spot, who averaged 18 and 6.5 after the trade that sent him to Sactown where he became the starter. Thats a point and a rebound less than West is averaging right now. Makes sense but who cares anymore, nothing happened. Just thought I would share what I heard.
          Ignoring that Landry isn't half the rebounder and not nearly as good of a scorer as David West is.......this is not one of those cases where "OJ+Landry EQUALS the loss of West"....if anything...it would likely affected their Playoff chances by losing a proven vet like West.

          One more thing...Monty Williams benched then traded Marcus Thornton ( their highly touted rookie last season ) because Thornton sucked it up on the defensive end....OJ Mayo ( from what I have heard ) defense isn't that good. This is why I could see the Hornets having more interest in a Player like BRush ( who does play defense ) while keeping David West over making some trade involving OJ+Landry while losing David West in the process.
          Last edited by CableKC; 02-25-2011, 01:56 PM.
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • Re: Kravitz Take on Mayo Trade Collapse: NO backs out when we're on hold with the league /// Wells Article with Trade Details

            These were Jason Whitlock's tweets yesterday:

            Indianapolis marijuana dealers planning to protest NBA offices demanding that Mayo be united with Stephenson and Rush. #blow2theconomy


            Thank God Bird missed the trade deadline. Word is w/Mayo, Lance Stephenson and BRush on same team, u couldn't buy any good weed in Indy.

            OJ Mayo! OJ Mayo! Did Larry Bird learn nothing from Artest era? I got 2 root for OJ Mayo? Why? Please let Larry Legend take over the Celtics

            Whether you liked the trade or not, do we really want the national media talking about us like this again? I know Whitlock can be a douche, but still reading those yesterday made me sick.
            Passion. Pride. Patience. Pacers

            Comment


            • Re: Kravitz Take on Mayo Trade Collapse: NO backs out when we're on hold with the league /// Wells Article with Trade Details

              Originally posted by BPump33 View Post
              These were Jason Whitlock's tweets yesterday:

              Indianapolis marijuana dealers planning to protest NBA offices demanding that Mayo be united with Stephenson and Rush. #blow2theconomy


              Thank God Bird missed the trade deadline. Word is w/Mayo, Lance Stephenson and BRush on same team, u couldn't buy any good weed in Indy.

              OJ Mayo! OJ Mayo! Did Larry Bird learn nothing from Artest era? I got 2 root for OJ Mayo? Why? Please let Larry Legend take over the Celtics

              Whether you liked the trade or not, do we really want the national media talking about us like this again? I know Whitlock can be a douche, but still reading those yesterday made me sick.
              Well he has a point with Rush, but I didn't know Lance and OJ were considered stoners?

              People just love to hate the Pacers and want them to be bad boys... even 7 years after the brawl with all the milk drinking american role models we have had.

              Comment


              • Re: Kravitz Take on Mayo Trade Collapse: NO backs out when we're on hold with the league /// Wells Article with Trade Details

                Originally posted by MyFavMartin View Post
                Agree to disagree. Landry is a FA this summer and NO has a strong possibility of losing him for nothing and converting him into a SG that would pair nicely with CP3 and is on a rookie contract is something I'm all over if I'm NO.
                You're losing me here.....Landry being a UFA ( and therefore the Hornets could lose him and get nothing in return for him ) has nothing to do with including him in some last minute "2nd deal" involving BRush.

                Unless the intention of the Hornets FO was to "flip" Landry immediately to a Team looking for some Frontcourt Depth......it simply doesn't make sense to have 2 separate deals that get them Landry instead of making some 3-Team trade involving Indy/SacTown/NO.

                To me, that wouldn't only make any sense...it would be risky without having a deal in place with Indy ALREADY. If that was the case ( as in having 2 separate deals instead of a single 3 Team trade ), then the Hornets run the risk of being stuck with Landry ( a Player that they had no intention of keeping in the first place because...as you say....they don't want to lose a Player that they just traded for a day before for nothing ) IF ( for some reason ) the separate "Landry for BRush" deal with the Pacers falls through ( which ended up happening ).

                It's more reasonable to assume that the Hornets picked up Landry for the same reason why the Thunder jettisoned Jeff Green for Kendrick Perkins ( a UFA )....to add some solid depth in the Frontcourt for a Playoff Push...even if it meant renting him for a few months.

                Originally posted by MyFavMartin View Post
                And I'm not sure that the draft pick from NO would be all that good to warrant giving up BRush for Mbenga or other non-Landry filler.
                JMHO....but the Pacers clearly have little interest in keeping BRush for the long-haul....IF they are able to get a 1st round pick for him ( my guess is that it would have been a 1st...not a 2nd round pick for him ) while adding little to no 2011-2012 Salary..then it's fair value. With the multiple attempts at moving BRush over the last couple of seasons....getting a 1st round pick for him maybe worth it to the Pacers FO.

                But as you say....this is all based off of our own assumptions....so overall....yes, we agree to disagree.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • Re: Kravitz Take on Mayo Trade Collapse: NO backs out when we're on hold with the league /// Wells Article with Trade Details

                  Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                  So you're telling me that Memphis didn't think they could flip two 1st round draft picks that were given to them into a solid PF?

                  Two 1st rounders can get a lot done in this league.
                  I read somewhere that the Grizzlies owner (Michael Heisley) still owns a house in the Chicago area and he doesn't want to help them gain any sort of competitive advantage. I think it was ESPN somewhere. Also, the Grizzlies had their rendezvous with Brewer last year and obviously didn't want him back. They are trying to make the playoffs this year and had plenty of wing depth, so they wanted another frontcourt player to prepare for the Lakers, Spurs, and Thunders of the world. I think our first round pick is more attractive to them as well. You know the Bulls will be picking in the late 20s for the forseeable future, while our pick has a chance to be lottery (or mid teens) this year. At first glance the Chicago offer clearly looks superior, but upon further investigation I think the offers were closer than it might seem.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Kravitz Take on Mayo Trade Collapse: NO backs out when we're on hold with the league /// Wells Article with Trade Details

                    Originally posted by Thingfish View Post
                    Well he has a point with Rush, but I didn't know Lance and OJ were considered stoners?

                    People just love to hate the Pacers and want them to be bad boys... even 7 years after the brawl with all the milk drinking american role models we have had.
                    OJ got picked up for possession in HS, but charges were dropped when somebody else in the car later claimed it.
                    PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

                    Comment


                    • Re: Kravitz Take on Mayo Trade Collapse: NO backs out when we're on hold with the league /// Wells Article with Trade Details

                      I just can't wait for the game tonight i'm done thinkin about what could have been. I didn't really like the trade to begin with so I guess i'm not as frustrated, but I wouldn't continually torture myself on something that's not happening.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Kravitz Take on Mayo Trade Collapse: NO backs out when we're on hold with the league /// Wells Article with Trade Details

                        This is how I reconstruct the events of the Mayo trade, and it all sort of makes sense in my mind. So anyway...

                        1. Grizz have just completed a deal for Battier, creating a logjam at 2/3. At the same time they needed an extra big. So they started looking at bigs they like, one of which is McBob.

                        2. Pacers and Grizz agree in principle to a trade involving Mayo for McBob and first. However, Memphis doesn't want to add any salary - part of their rationale for trading Mayo is to clear cap to re-sign Gasol and Randolph. Mayo for McBob straight up doesn't work though.

                        3. Pacers look for a third team to absorb salary that otherwise would have gone to Memphis. They find NOH willing to take Rush and Solo for a package of their excess bigs (probably Smith or Andersen, plus another player).

                        4. By now it's almost deadline. The teams put in the conference call, but while on hold NOH pulls out (as per Wells). No reason has been given for their pullout.

                        5. Pacers ask for extension to find another team to complete the deal. NOH's part is relatively minor after all - it shouldn't be too hard to recruit another team. Perhaps Pacers even succeeded, as per some reports. In any case, league says they're past the deadline.

                        Seems to me this timeline satisfactorily explains those reports we've had. Or maybe not.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Kravitz Take on Mayo Trade Collapse: NO backs out when we're on hold with the league /// Wells Article with Trade Details

                          This is how Bucher reconstructs events
                          http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/37104

                          Matt (Indy)
                          Give us the scoop, Ric: Exactly how and why did the Pacers/Grizzlies/Hornets trade fall through? Also, it sounds like it was Rush and Solo going to N.O., but who was coming FROM N.O.? How big of a set-back was this for all teams involved?

                          Ric Bucher (1:20 PM)
                          As I understand it, Brandon Rush was supposed to go to NO. NO wasn't putting anybody in the deal, if I have it correctly, they were merely offering cap room for Indy. I believe the problem arose because NO is league-owned and Mark Cuban already was upset that a team he owns 1/30th spent money to make the Carl Landry deal without his approval. I don't have the numbers in front of me, so I can't check on NO's cap situation, but as I understand it they were not putting anything into the deal. When the deal came into the league office, the league balked at NO being involved and it was too late to go back an construct the deal as straight between Memphis and Indy. But, as I understand it, it was the Pacers who wanted NO to be part of the deal and initially passed on the two-team deal.
                          This is the darkest timeline.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Kravitz Take on Mayo Trade Collapse: NO backs out when we're on hold with the league /// Wells Article with Trade Details

                            Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                            This is how I reconstruct the events of the Mayo trade, and it all sort of makes sense in my mind. So anyway...

                            1. Grizz have just completed a deal for Battier, creating a logjam at 2/3. At the same time they needed an extra big. So they started looking at bigs they like, one of which is McBob.

                            2. Pacers and Grizz agree in principle to a trade involving Mayo for McBob and first. However, Memphis doesn't want to add any salary - part of their rationale for trading Mayo is to clear cap to re-sign Gasol and Randolph. Mayo for McBob straight up doesn't work though.

                            3. Pacers look for a third team to absorb salary that otherwise would have gone to Memphis. They find NOH willing to take Rush and Solo for a package of their excess bigs (probably Smith or Andersen, plus another player).

                            4. By now it's almost deadline. The teams put in the conference call, but while on hold NOH pulls out (as per Wells). No reason has been given for their pullout.

                            5. Pacers ask for extension to find another team to complete the deal. NOH's part is relatively minor after all - it shouldn't be too hard to recruit another team. Perhaps Pacers even succeeded, as per some reports. In any case, league says they're past the deadline.

                            Seems to me this timeline satisfactorily explains those reports we've had. Or maybe not.
                            I'm right there with you....but with all the odd questions here and there that are left unanswered....this whole fiasco/conspiracy is beginning to rank up there with whether we truly landed on the moon or not and whether there truly was shooter on the grassy knoll....we may simply never know.
                            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Kravitz Take on Mayo Trade Collapse: NO backs out when we're on hold with the league /// Wells Article with Trade Details

                              I still think we were getting Dwest from NO, the rumor was that Rush and Solo were going there, I think it was Rush+Solo+ trade exception for Dwest.

                              I think the main issue for New Orleans to get out of this deal was because they don't want to remove him from CP3 and make him mad.
                              Last edited by vnzla81; 02-25-2011, 04:42 PM.
                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment


                              • Re: Kravitz Take on Mayo Trade Collapse: NO backs out when we're on hold with the league

                                Originally posted by rexnom View Post
                                I don't want to read about this anymore.
                                Seconded.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X