Author Topic: Future Rules on League Openings - RC Only  (Read 3176 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

joeshmoe

  • Guest
Re: Future Rules on League Openings - RC Only
« Reply #20 on: May 08, 2013, 09:58:28 AM »
Your point is duly noted, though Rob could trade teams with 28 other owners if he was truly bored :)

To clarify, we are voting on whether to allow internal transfers as a regular practice of filling team openings.  In special cases, internal transfers may be approved, but that is NOT the context of the current vote.

Is me applying for LAD not a special case?  Am I now to remain in SD until I leave this league?  Is that how this whole thing got handled? 
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Offline Colby

  • MLFB Founder
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2009
  • Posts: 28820
  • Bonus inPoints: 27
    • :PIT-NFL:
    • :Blank:
    • :PIT-NHL:
    • :PennState:
    • :UnitedStates:
    • View Profile
Re: Future Rules on League Openings - RC Only
« Reply #21 on: May 08, 2013, 10:25:20 AM »
The RC voted to limit internal transfers and allow them on a case-by-case basis.  It appears there are two primary qualifications:

1) A proven GM wants to downgrade by moving to a bad team in order to rebuild the franchise for the betterment of the league.
2) A GM wants to move to their favorite franchise.

In any case, your Dodgers application fails those two principals (which should go into the rules as the two key guidelines with acceptable internal transfers).  Boston would be the likely choice for you, but that means nerwffej needs to have a qualifying transfer.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
Learn about :Commish: inPoints and the Invitationals.

joeshmoe

  • Guest
Re: Future Rules on League Openings - RC Only
« Reply #22 on: May 08, 2013, 10:49:34 AM »
The RC voted to limit internal transfers and allow them on a case-by-case basis.  It appears there are two primary qualifications:

1) A proven GM wants to downgrade by moving to a bad team in order to rebuild the franchise for the betterment of the league.
2) A GM wants to move to their favorite franchise.

In any case, your Dodgers application fails those two principals (which should go into the rules as the two key guidelines with acceptable internal transfers).  Boston would be the likely choice for you, but that means nerwffej needs to have a qualifying transfer.

This is all done while there was an open vote for the dodgers that I was winning.  It's out of order.  The 'no internal transfers rule' was rushed through once it was seen I had 3 votes for a transfer.  Roy you didn't like the rules so you changed it once, from the rules that had always been...to a vote for the job....I had three votes and you changed the rules again to completely take me out of it...MT had already thought I won the job.  Where is the sanity in this?  What did I do to be chopped out of transfers?  It's been known I have wanted a transfer to a team I prefer for quite some time.  Why is this brand new rule being implemented to rob me?  Am I a bad guy?  Should I not get the same courteousy as the other members who have transferred for whatever reason they imagined? 

This all would have been a non issue had a member of the league not gone out and asked people who's turn it wasn't to come in and apply for the job.  Who took that upon themselves is an interesting piece to the puzzle?  Who wanted Rick here so they asked him?  This is exactly the situation that happened to me with NYY and Corey had already brought OUDAN as the replacement before it was offered internally.  The total lack of respect for myself as a manager in this league for 3 years is utterly crushing.  I never quit this league and wouldn't think of doing so even after this slap to my face.  Roy rammed through his agenda...in a 3-4 vote.  Those 4 people just spoke for 30 people on an issue no small oligarchy should decide.  Disrespectful to this league as a whole. 

And Roy, your management style on this issue has been questionable.  Why change that clear rule midstream?  Why make a vote for the dodgers job that had me at 3 votes and not follow through?  Why suggest a rule that eliminates me from the problem and becomes an end around to the issue rather than managing the issue like it deserved (I had many valid points that were no longer meaningful because the discussion now cant involve me, like I don't count).  Why is our administrator voting on issues?  Shouldn't we seperate the rules and the Admin?  Maybe he should have a voice but no vote?  Maybe rules shouldn't be decided by a 4 person majority when the league has 30 members?  Maybe there should have been accountability for the job posting becoming a feeding frenzy rather than handled appropriately?

This whole situation has me sick to my stomach.  Go :SD: Padres...Rah Rah Rah!  And just watch out all you fools who questioned my Padres.  Baez has 21 RBI...in May.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Offline Colby

  • MLFB Founder
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2009
  • Posts: 28820
  • Bonus inPoints: 27
    • :PIT-NFL:
    • :Blank:
    • :PIT-NHL:
    • :PennState:
    • :UnitedStates:
    • View Profile
Re: Future Rules on League Openings - RC Only
« Reply #23 on: May 08, 2013, 10:56:14 AM »
It's not an issue of a mid-stream change of protocol for hiring.  With the questions surrounding how to fill the Dodgers, and all of the other teams that opened up in the past week, there was a clear need for direction.  Roy put the hiring on hold, sought the RC for legislation, and now there is a clear direction (although more subjective than I anticipated).
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
Learn about :Commish: inPoints and the Invitationals.

joeshmoe

  • Guest
Re: Future Rules on League Openings - RC Only
« Reply #24 on: May 08, 2013, 11:06:10 AM »
It's not an issue of a mid-stream change of protocol for hiring.  With the questions surrounding how to fill the Dodgers, and all of the other teams that opened up in the past week, there was a clear need for direction.  Roy put the hiring on hold, sought the RC for legislation, and now there is a clear direction (although more subjective than I anticipated).

It is an issue of midstream change.  The change occurred twice as well.  The consent was given by the RC (those who voted) and by Roy as the Admin (by creating the format) to use a vote to decide the Dodgers and specifically the Dodgers.  Then when the votes were 3 for me the rules were changed again.  This is clearly the case.  I am not making any subjective statements, bar the first (possibly).

The rules were specifically written knowing that it would exclude me, without thought for grandfathering or any other such.  Then passed by a small oligarchy, in a tight controversial vote.  The issue however, had already been subjected to a vote by consent of the league.  Now for the Nationals and any team not already having an OPEN vote should have to go by the rules.  But there was already a VOTE on the floor, everything else is out of order.  Or is this a Bananana Republic?
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Corey

  • Guest
Re: Future Rules on League Openings - RC Only
« Reply #25 on: May 08, 2013, 11:15:09 AM »
Its a great rule. Roy and the RC handled it correctly and timely.

The new rule is for the betterment of the league.

Good job guys.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

joeshmoe

  • Guest
Re: Future Rules on League Openings - RC Only
« Reply #26 on: May 08, 2013, 11:18:55 AM »
Its a great rule. Roy and the RC handled it correctly and timely.

The new rule is for the betterment of the league.

Good job guys.

Are you in this league?
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Corey

  • Guest
Re: Future Rules on League Openings - RC Only
« Reply #27 on: May 08, 2013, 11:43:03 AM »
Yep. And proud that the RC made the right choice. 
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

joeshmoe

  • Guest
Re: Future Rules on League Openings - RC Only
« Reply #28 on: May 08, 2013, 02:58:32 PM »
Yep. And proud that the RC made the right choice.

I thought you quit in a big huff and puff about the Dodgers situation?

http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?action=post;quote=520465;topic=94699.0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Corey

  • Guest
Re: Future Rules on League Openings - RC Only
« Reply #29 on: May 08, 2013, 03:23:56 PM »
I thought you quit in a big huff and puff about the Dodgers situation?

http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?action=post;quote=520465;topic=94699.0

I would have resigned and stayed resigned if the rules were not changed for the betterment of the league, there is no doubt about that.

But since the league made the important decision to improve its future, than I will stay.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

 

Forum Search


Quick Profile

 
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

* Chat Room

Refresh History
  • OUDAN: When the league starts they will be SEC
    Today at 05:19:44 PM
  • OUDAN: Your league so of course its ok either way
    Today at 05:20:38 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: Ik this because I currently live in y'all's rival team
    Today at 05:20:40 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: I'll be going to some UT Austin games again
    Today at 05:21:22 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: I've gone to some for baseball and one football
    Today at 05:21:39 PM
  • OUDAN: Im sorry you are going to have to watch that Crap school do anything
    Today at 05:22:11 PM
  • Daddy: Im still setting it up Dan
    Today at 05:22:37 PM
  • OUDAN: Gotcha, I trust you either way
    Today at 05:22:56 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: Honestly it's not the school I even support but it's greats sports environment
    Today at 05:24:09 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: Baseball is a great vibe. Football was fun. Basketball is next on my list
    Today at 05:24:58 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: UT ain't Crap I'll tell you that. From what I've seen and follow
    Today at 05:25:26 PM
  • OUDAN: They sure think they are the best at everything lol
    Today at 05:26:21 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: I enjoyed the games I've gone to so far
    Today at 05:26:59 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: That's mainly why I went was cuz I enjoy going to sports games
    Today at 05:28:05 PM
  • OUDAN: You gonna have to pay PJ washington in CCD the way he is playing
    Today at 05:28:13 PM
  • OUDAN: College games always have great atmospheres
    Today at 05:28:31 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: I'm kinda glad he's off books way too overpriced
    Today at 05:33:16 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: He was killing me in cap
    Today at 05:33:27 PM
  • OUDAN: He was for sure but he has been on fire in the playoffs
    Today at 05:34:06 PM
  • OUDAN: Makes it hard to just let him walk
    Today at 05:34:15 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: I guess but havta see if he's worth his extension price
    Today at 05:34:33 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: I also need cap for some guys that expire after this yr
    Today at 05:35:05 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: Hence why I haven't made a decision on him
    Today at 05:35:27 PM
  • OUDAN: fantrax loves him his extension is 27m yikes
    Today at 05:36:03 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: And why else do you think I say he's overpriced
    Today at 05:37:05 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: That's horrible cost
    Today at 05:37:13 PM
  • OUDAN: Yeah thats brutal I didnt wanna pay Mobley that lol
    Today at 05:37:27 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: Hard pass
    Today at 05:38:14 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: That price alone makes it easier to let him walk
    Today at 05:38:35 PM
  • OUDAN: lol
    Today at 05:38:36 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: I dunno what you were trying to do by telling me his performance
    Today at 05:40:18 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: But I'm gonna save my cap by letting him walk
    Today at 05:40:39 PM
  • OUDAN: Was just looking over rosters for trades and saw that
    Today at 05:40:40 PM
  • OUDAN: Definetely not trying to trade for him lol
    Today at 05:40:54 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: Yeah he was paid Abt 25 last yr
    Today at 05:41:01 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: And I was waiting for him to come of books
    Today at 05:41:16 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: He's not worth 27
    Today at 05:41:36 PM
  • OUDAN: Agreed
    Today at 05:44:05 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: I also let one more walk
    Today at 05:45:40 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: I have not signed 2 players
    Today at 05:45:54 PM
  • OUDAN: I se that
    Today at 05:50:55 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: yepp
    Today at 06:01:41 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: both on purpose
    Today at 06:01:49 PM
  • Brent: I can afford Mobley.  I'll send a 2024 1st for him.
    Today at 07:17:03 PM
  • TheGOAT: Would the NBA Live Draft be based on the actual NBA draft for the first year?
    Today at 07:48:03 PM
  • OUDAN: Already traded him Brent
    Today at 08:02:00 PM
  • Daddy: @TheGoat yes. As addressed yesterday the exception is the expansion Franchises are guaranteed #1 & #2 overall.
    Today at 08:26:42 PM
  • Daddy: Updated NBA LIVE Pre-Reserve sign up sheet [link]
    Today at 08:27:10 PM
  • Braves155: Evening gents
    Today at 08:47:28 PM
  • Braves155: I love the challenge of rebuilding Franchises. Nice having 3 1sts and loads of cap in NFL LIVE to help
    Today at 09:07:56 PM