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

Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

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

  • #61
    Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
    Screw my negativity, this is my favorite post on the subject. I THINK the pick stinks, but I HOPE it's brilliant.
    The bottom line is, Murphy + Hibbert + Hans + McBob is a great young front court, stacked with potential. It will take great COACHING to make that a great foursome in a few years, but that's a badass foursome nontheless and I think it's sad that people around here, PACER FANS, can't be a fan of one player without knocking another.

    If you like basketball, you should be ecstatic about seeing McBob and Hans together on the same team.

    I want Josh and Hans to be lifting partners and see who can put on the NEXT 20 lbs of solid mass. Josh McRambo and Psycho T could be a couple of bash brothers. The Caucasian Invasion. The Albino Rhinos.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

      Originally posted by Hall O'Point View Post
      The +/- stat user is an empty man with and empty soul.

      Worst statistic in sports. I'm more interested in a player's show size or his favorite color.

      If the Cavs get killed, and Lebron plays the whole game, is he a worse player than the 11th man off the Lakers' bench who has a +20 in his 10 minutes of play?
      I was talking about an overall +/-, it's not fully refined yet but as of now it seems to at least give a ballpark as to how the team players with the player on the court. There are ton of flaws to it, but I like it to describe what happens when said player will usually step on the court. And who knows, maybe some Lakers scrub got hot enough and LBJ got cold enough one game where it could happen, but it shouldn't make a difference in the overall ranking
      (disclaimer: unless there is a really small sample size).

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

        McRoberts had an issue that kept him down - arrogance (apparently) and work ethic. It appeared that perhaps he had an entitlement issue.

        The key is that guys get humbled by a low draft point and lack of PT. McBob was nearly out of the NBA in Portland and last season that appeared to have impacted his effort and desire to prove himself.


        Contrast that to Hansbrough who did peak out his sophmore year, nearly his freshman year. He stopped getting better. He was older, he was in a great program and he was a hard worker all the time. He's the feel-good story over McBob for sure. He's the guy if you draft him 3 years ago at 35th with a star-complex McBob at 10th it becomes this great story how he plays his way on while McBob goes to 6 minutes a game.

        But it's TOO LATE for that story. It's happened already. This is now the COMEBACK story, the guy with promise who squandered it and is recovering. This is UNDRAFTED BRAD MILLER time now. As a Purdue fan I strongly recall his lack of interest despite his talent, and it caught up to him come draft time.

        Next thing you know he's got his head out of his rear down in Charlotte and is playing his way into the league. He didn't instantly turn it on and get respect, he had to grind and he did. He became an all-star. But people weren't predicting that after his first year numbers with the Hornets. Someone might have even said "you think a guy that can barely get off the bench is going to be an all-star".

        Tyler long ago taught McRoberts a lesson about effort, devotion, hard work and not taking your status for granted. That doesn't make him jump higher or play quicker.

        The only advantage I can assume for Tyler right now is that perhaps he is a better awareness guy. That may be enough. Or as Drewtone said, maybe Tyler's play pushes McRoberts' play and they both get better.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

          Because if there's one thing we've learned as Pacers fans, it's all about jumping higher or being faster. Always. Trumps anything.

          I'm talking over-the-top because I feel like I'm reacting to over-the-top.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
            McRoberts had an issue that kept him down - arrogance (apparently) and work ethic. It appeared that perhaps he had an entitlement issue.

            The key is that guys get humbled by a low draft point and lack of PT. McBob was nearly out of the NBA in Portland and last season that appeared to have impacted his effort and desire to prove himself.


            Contrast that to Hansbrough who did peak out his sophmore year, nearly his freshman year. He stopped getting better. He was older, he was in a great program and he was a hard worker all the time. He's the feel-good story over McBob for sure. He's the guy if you draft him 3 years ago at 35th with a star-complex McBob at 10th it becomes this great story how he plays his way on while McBob goes to 6 minutes a game.

            But it's TOO LATE for that story. It's happened already. This is now the COMEBACK story, the guy with promise who squandered it and is recovering. This is UNDRAFTED BRAD MILLER time now. As a Purdue fan I strongly recall his lack of interest despite his talent, and it caught up to him come draft time.

            Next thing you know he's got his head out of his rear down in Charlotte and is playing his way into the league. He didn't instantly turn it on and get respect, he had to grind and he did. He became an all-star. But people weren't predicting that after his first year numbers with the Hornets. Someone might have even said "you think a guy that can barely get off the bench is going to be an all-star".

            Tyler long ago taught McRoberts a lesson about effort, devotion, hard work and not taking your status for granted. That doesn't make him jump higher or play quicker.

            The only advantage I can assume for Tyler right now is that perhaps he is a better awareness guy. That may be enough. Or as Drewtone said, maybe Tyler's play pushes McRoberts' play and they both get better.
            Man, what happened to you...
            There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

              Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
              Hansbrough has Carlos Boozer-like potential. McRoberts' best case is good role player.
              I think some people around here need a bit of a reality check.
              "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

              - ilive4sports

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                McRoberts had an issue that kept him down - arrogance (apparently) and work ethic. It appeared that perhaps he had an entitlement issue.

                The key is that guys get humbled by a low draft point and lack of PT. McBob was nearly out of the NBA in Portland and last season that appeared to have impacted his effort and desire to prove himself.


                Contrast that to Hansbrough who did peak out his sophmore year, nearly his freshman year. He stopped getting better. He was older, he was in a great program and he was a hard worker all the time. He's the feel-good story over McBob for sure. He's the guy if you draft him 3 years ago at 35th with a star-complex McBob at 10th it becomes this great story how he plays his way on while McBob goes to 6 minutes a game.

                But it's TOO LATE for that story. It's happened already. This is now the COMEBACK story, the guy with promise who squandered it and is recovering. This is UNDRAFTED BRAD MILLER time now. As a Purdue fan I strongly recall his lack of interest despite his talent, and it caught up to him come draft time.

                Next thing you know he's got his head out of his rear down in Charlotte and is playing his way into the league. He didn't instantly turn it on and get respect, he had to grind and he did. He became an all-star. But people weren't predicting that after his first year numbers with the Hornets. Someone might have even said "you think a guy that can barely get off the bench is going to be an all-star".

                Tyler long ago taught McRoberts a lesson about effort, devotion, hard work and not taking your status for granted. That doesn't make him jump higher or play quicker.

                The only advantage I can assume for Tyler right now is that perhaps he is a better awareness guy. That may be enough. Or as Drewtone said, maybe Tyler's play pushes McRoberts' play and they both get better.
                Agree 100%.

                Ill tell you one thing. The two of us are gonna look like geniuses if you are right because we are almost all alone on this one. Saying you think Josh has the potential to be a good player is enough to get you sent to the nut house around here.
                Last edited by Infinite MAN_force; 06-27-2009, 02:53 PM.
                "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                - ilive4sports

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

                  Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                  Man, what happened to you...
                  He's going to be OK.

                  ITs just post draft depression.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

                    I'm with Seth. I too think McRob has a big upside and will be voted the most improved pacer for the coming season. The Pacers must think he has some upside too because he is working out 5 days/week with Billy Keller (who told me this himself today when I ran into him). He said Josh has also gained 20 pounds which most of us knew from this forum.

                    I feel confident now that TPTB think likewise and will resign Josh.

                    Billy also ventured that TH was clearly going to help the low post game and now my words will certainly not be a dud.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

                      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                      Because if there's one thing we've learned as Pacers fans, it's all about jumping higher or being faster. Always. Trumps anything.

                      I'm talking over-the-top because I feel like I'm reacting to over-the-top.
                      The funny thing is, if you read through the post, people think that McRoberts is a better athlete than Hansbrough.

                      Here are the draft measurements for both players.

                      Josh "The Athlete" McRoberts - 6'10", 240lbs
                      Standing Reach: 8'10.5"
                      No Step Vert: 27.5
                      Max Vert: 31.5
                      Bench: 12
                      Lane Agility: 11.70
                      3/4 sprint: 3.47

                      Tyler Hansbrough - 6'9.5", 235lbs
                      Standing Reach: 8'10"
                      No Step Vert: 27.5
                      Max Vert: 34
                      Bench: 18
                      Lane Agility: 11.12
                      3/4 sprint: 3.27

                      I'm sorry guys, but the only thing Josh has Tyler beat on is a half inch of reach. Now, that's as good a side by side of athleticism as we are going to get as it is likely that McRoberts is in much better shape now. But according to this, Tyler is the better athlete, and it's not close.

                      http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/...ansbrough-288/
                      http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Josh-McRoberts-227/
                      "man, PG has been really good."

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

                        Originally posted by Hall O'Point View Post
                        The bottom line is, Murphy + Hibbert + Hans + McBob is a great young front court, stacked with potential.
                        Take Murphy out, I don't think anyone is psyched about him being here long term.

                        You're left with Hibs/Hans/Mac. That's a frontcourt that could be very good or very bad. Too soon to say.

                        Originally posted by Hollow
                        I want Josh and Hans to be lifting partners and see who can put on the NEXT 20 lbs of solid mass. Josh McRambo and Psycho T could be a couple of bash brothers. The Caucasian Invasion. The Albino Rhinos.
                        Albino Rhinos? That's awesome.
                        This space for rent.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

                          Also, I like both players and think they can be our PF rotation of the future. Josh's anticipation, timing, whatever is simply phenominal. He can be a big time shot blocker, maybe a defender around the level of Tyson Chandler.

                          Hansbrough can get to the line and he makes the shots at 80+%. He is solid at everything he does.

                          Hell, I think in a year or two, we can be playing with both them on the court and be successful.
                          "man, PG has been really good."

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

                            You have to play minutes to even begin to be considered a good player. And from what I have seen of the last season, every time Josh was on the court good things happened, he made a few mental mistakes but the positive outweighed the negatives. You have to wonder why he was stuck on the bench? Our coaching staff is not full of idiots... right? Right?!

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

                              Originally posted by Ozwalt72 View Post
                              The funny thing is, if you read through the post, people think that McRoberts is a better athlete than Hansbrough.

                              Here are the draft measurements for both players.

                              Josh "The Athlete" McRoberts - 6'10", 240lbs
                              Standing Reach: 8'10.5"
                              No Step Vert: 27.5
                              Max Vert: 31.5
                              Bench: 12
                              Lane Agility: 11.70
                              3/4 sprint: 3.47

                              Tyler Hansbrough - 6'9.5", 235lbs
                              Standing Reach: 8'10"
                              No Step Vert: 27.5
                              Max Vert: 34
                              Bench: 18
                              Lane Agility: 11.12
                              3/4 sprint: 3.27

                              I'm sorry guys, but the only thing Josh has Tyler beat on is a half inch of reach. Now, that's as good a side by side of athleticism as we are going to get as it is likely that McRoberts is in much better shape now. But according to this, Tyler is the better athlete, and it's not close.

                              http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/...ansbrough-288/
                              http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Josh-McRoberts-227/
                              ERRRR...... Wrong.

                              Those measurements were done well over 2 years ago for Josh which by the way was the fattest PF in the draft. Measurements can be tricky but your eyes don't lie. Josh is a better athlete plan and simple.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Three years from now, who's the better NBA player? Tyler or McBob?

                                Originally posted by Burtrem Redneck View Post
                                You have to play minutes to even begin to be considered a good player. And from what I have seen of the last season, every time Josh was on the court good things happened, he made a few mental mistakes but the positive outweighed the negatives. You have to wonder why he was stuck on the bench? Our coaching staff is not full of idiots... right? Right?!
                                Not as if Rush, Hibbert, and Graham didn't make mental mistakes. I honestly don't know why McRob did not play more as most saw more positives than negatives. But he wasn't a first round draft choice so he wasn't going to get the minutes that the others got. As i remember we were saying the same about Rush not getting minutes early in the seasoon.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X