Author Topic: Future Rules on League Openings - RC Only  (Read 3252 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
  • Daddy: @Braves is always looking. Aint worried about you answering pms.
    Yesterday at 03:42:15 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Back to you as well @Braves. Missed your latest pm
    Yesterday at 03:45:31 PM
  • Braves155: Replied Jwalker
    Yesterday at 04:04:49 PM
  • STLBlues91: Sorry had lunch real quick replying to all now
    Yesterday at 04:10:05 PM
  • indiansnation: Stlblues91 pm
    Yesterday at 04:12:31 PM
  • indiansnation: Braves155 pm
    Yesterday at 04:19:06 PM
  • indiansnation: Colts looking to move 2 1st rd picks and a 2nd rd pick in 2025  for a starting rb and starting te
    Yesterday at 04:22:16 PM
  • Daddy: ^^what he said
    Yesterday at 04:24:45 PM
  • indiansnation: Sorry i just woke up ill lpok at all pms
    Yesterday at 06:25:30 PM
  • indiansnation: Jmntl pm
    Yesterday at 06:30:29 PM
  • indiansnation: Braves 155 pm
    Yesterday at 06:35:13 PM
  • indiansnation: Jmntl82 pm
    Yesterday at 06:42:05 PM
  • Braves155: Replied
    Yesterday at 06:42:46 PM
  • Daddy: Cmon man. If you arent finding a trade. Its because you aint trying. These boyz are dealing.
    Yesterday at 06:45:46 PM
  • Daddy: They moving stars. They moving picks. They moving prospects. They moving depth. Ive made 2 NFL trades in bout 12 hours or something.
    Yesterday at 06:46:59 PM
  • Daddy: Whatever you looking for
    Yesterday at 06:47:09 PM
  • Daddy: My boyz Blues, Braves, Brian, Buc, Dave, Janes, BAB, you name him. They got it. They will deal it.
    Yesterday at 06:48:07 PM
  • Daddy: Baseball & Football bonanza right now
    Yesterday at 06:48:35 PM
  • Daddy: Damn that dinner time trade yesterday and lunch time trade today felt good. I dont care who won it. Im happy. My partners happy. Im gonna take me a gummy and watch a movie. :)
    Yesterday at 06:51:18 PM
  • STLBlues91: Im around the rest of the night. May be around literally all night since. Knocking out roster checks hopefully tonight for the ss for nhl tonight
    Yesterday at 06:51:33 PM
  • indiansnation: Braves155 pm
    Yesterday at 07:00:45 PM
  • Braves155: Replied indiansnation & BAB
    Yesterday at 07:21:08 PM
  • indiansnation: Braves 155 pm
    Yesterday at 07:36:54 PM
  • indiansnation: Jmntl82 pm
    Yesterday at 07:37:02 PM
  • indiansnation: Dang crazy trying to talk trade in mlb live and nfl live same time
    Yesterday at 07:37:33 PM
  • indiansnation: Braves155 pm
    Yesterday at 07:53:43 PM
  • Braves155: Posted indiansnation
    Yesterday at 08:15:02 PM
  • Braves155: Another deal in NFL LIVE
    Yesterday at 08:15:18 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: braves pm
    Yesterday at 08:18:54 PM
  • jimw: Some of these deals are weirder than Draymond Green on Inside the NBA
    Yesterday at 08:23:14 PM
  • Daddy: So what you're saying is... Mimics real life :rofl:
    Yesterday at 08:28:49 PM
  • Daddy: When Braves & Brian make a trade with each other.... There are certain atoms in the universe that collide. Unique atoms. Its like watching Nuclear fusion being born.
    Yesterday at 08:31:10 PM
  • Daddy: Something you arent supposed to really see and you dont know if its harmful. Im going to view it thru the eclipse glasses these idiots gave me.
    Yesterday at 08:32:28 PM
  • Daddy: Finally a good use for them. :)
    Yesterday at 08:32:52 PM
  • jimw: nuclear fusion being born....lol
    Yesterday at 08:33:20 PM
  • STLBlues91: Im just going to put this up in my classroom on Tuesday so the kids can watch the science happen
    Yesterday at 08:34:35 PM
  • Braves155: To see madness in action all you gotta do is look at all the moves Brian posts on a daily basis. He will flip half his team in 2 days or less in certain sports
    Yesterday at 08:50:02 PM
  • Braves155: PM Daddy
    Yesterday at 08:56:09 PM
  • Daddy: Back Braves :)
    Yesterday at 08:58:13 PM
  • Daddy: Congratulations gentlemen
    Yesterday at 08:58:55 PM
  • Daddy: Honestly i love the deal because my GMs love it. I dont say good deal bad deal or i like this side better.  My goal is to provide a fair platform where people are free to trade and not be judged because nobody knows for sure how these trades will play out. Lots of ACLs are gonna tear between now and new years.  Im always happy that two strangers with different backgrounds can meet in our league and enjoy freedom to be themselves and do what THEY THINK is best. I love every deal. (Had to share that @Braves) :toast:
    Yesterday at 09:15:31 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: trade made in fgm w me and braves
    Yesterday at 09:27:52 PM
  • Daddy: Nice! Getm FGM
    Yesterday at 09:42:14 PM
  • Daddy: THE Grandaddy of them all = FGM
    Yesterday at 09:43:08 PM
  • Braves155: Brian traded a Guardians prospect? What is this world coming to?
    Yesterday at 09:48:27 PM
  • indiansnation: Ok im looking for a rb,wr and te and im looking to move remaining picks in 2025
    Yesterday at 09:54:34 PM
  • indiansnation: I got 1st,2nd,4th and x2 5th rd picks
    Yesterday at 09:55:12 PM
  • indiansnation: Looking for starting,te and 1 more wr
    Yesterday at 09:56:08 PM
  • indiansnation: Lets get this done
    Yesterday at 09:56:21 PM
  • Brent: Still looking?
    Yesterday at 11:07:59 PM