Lucky17's Yahoo! Points Hoops League: 2015 Offseason REBOOT

[byennie]

Yep, those are my two main points. If we propose and vote on amendments to stop such future behavior here and in yahoo, and clarify the insinuation that you can't be in the league if you are not on celticsblog, which byennie did state (see his earlier post in this thread), yet is not a rule, then I'm good. We need to follow the constitution, within reason as LB33 states, to make and amend rules. We can't just make them with no votes and the majority of the league not even present as we go. Honestly, only about 1/4 of the league has been around and participated in any way this offseason, and some may not even know that trading is open.

BFM was removed because he behaved so badly towards other GMs, that he earned a lifetime ban from CelticsBlog. Furthermore he endangered the existence of the league on here. For bonus points, his response to me was a condescending insinuation which you have repeated here, about how I take orders from CBlog mods.

That is absolutely not the same thing as "you must be a member of CBlog to participate".

If you'd like to propose a rule, feel free.

If you can show me a majority of GMs looking to override my decision, let me know, and I'll either accept the veto or step down.

Technically speaking, there are no behavior clauses in our constitution at all. However, we do abide by:

8. For any rule not covered in this constitution, the default Yahoo! rules will apply.

The Yahoo! Terms of Service has a very detailed Member Conduct policy which you are welcome to peruse. I assure you many of those policies were broken.

[hpantazo]

I propose we make a rule that all league members have to maintain a standard of respect towards each other at all times, in celticsblog forums, in yahoo forums, in PMs, in emails, and in all forms of communication between league members. If this standard is not maintained, GMs will be warned once, then kicked out on following offenses.

Second, I propose that we make a rule that GMs must maintain a reasonable level of activity throughout the regular season, including the draft. We should decide on what this means in terms of what entails a reasonable level of activity, but this has been a repeated problem over the years.

[byennie]

The discussion is not about who's offenses are worse, it's that this stuff always goes on every season. We need to make clear rules to stop it.

My other point is, there is no such rule that you have to be a celticsblog member to be part of the league. The commish can't refer to such rule as justification for kicking one person out and not others. If we want to make such a rule, it has to be proposed , and voted on. If you guys want such a rule, propose it and lets vote on it.

For the record, we're in agreement on the 1st point.

I get your 2nd point, but it's just not something we can retroactively apply to this latest incident. There are no rules on behavior in our constitution - the best interpretation available to me would be to follow Yahoo! policies as the default. The answer can't be that it's impossible for anyone to be removed no matter what they do.

So, just to recap one more time:

BFM is out; however, he has not been replaced yet. On the off chance that there is an actual push to veto my decision (despite zero complaints at the time), I can wait a little while to hear from that contingency. You are entitled to an opinion of course, but I would need to know that it's more than just you.

Rules proposals would be great, on this and in general.

There is no rule, written or implied, requiring you to be a member here to be in the league. There is an implication that you can't abuse other GMs, behave horribly, and escape all consequences until proven guilty under league constitution law (all 2.5 pages of it none of which addresses behavior).

I'm not going to dig into history of past bad behavior as precedent, particularly incidents that happened before I was even a member of the league. If someone acted even worse in the past, shame on them, but I can't do anything about it right now.

Finally: the single biggest problem in this league is the behavior of a few GMs spoiling it for others. It is BY FAR the complaint I get most often. I think occasionally doing something about it, while trying to be as fair is possible, is in the best interest of the league.

[byennie]

I propose we make a rule that all league members have to maintain a standard of respect towards each other at all times, in celticsblog forums, in yahoo forums, in PMs, in emails, and in all forms of communication between league members. If this standard is not maintained, GMs will be warned once, then kicked out on following offenses.

Second, I propose that we make a rule that GMs must maintain a reasonable level of activity throughout the regular season, including the draft. We should decide on what this means in terms of what entails a reasonable level of activity, but this has been a repeated problem over the years.

On the second: we already have a pretty strict activity clause. I'm open to suggestions on changes and/or enforcement.

On the first, doesn't that just leave the door wide open for the commissioner to judge? I'm not opposed to it in any way, just not sure how much it adds.

[LarBrd33]

Just an FYI we do have a rule about activity:

6. GM activity is vital. GMs who are inactive without a roster move, post, or other demonstrable proof of logging on and checking one?s lineup for 7 straight days are issued a warning. A second warning is grounds for replacement in the league. 14 straight days of inactivity is also grounds for replacement.

I think byennie plans on making a separate thread for rule discussions.  Theres still a couple we should propose tweaks for and then I can help set up a ballot system where we can group all of them together and have one large vote before the season.

[Rondo2287]

Edit

[LarBrd33]

Forgot to mention this, but I updated all of the individual team history pages here:  http://nedyken.com/cbpl/

If anyone spots a mistake, let me know. In a few instances I didn't know the names of previous GMs who ran teams over the past 8 years.

[Rondo2287]

Just an FYI we do have a rule about activity:

6. GM activity is vital. GMs who are inactive without a roster move, post, or other demonstrable proof of logging on and checking one?s lineup for 7 straight days are issued a warning. A second warning is grounds for replacement in the league. 14 straight days of inactivity is also grounds for replacement.

I think byennie plans on making a separate thread for rule discussions.  Theres still a couple we should propose tweaks for and then I can help set up a ballot system where we can group all of them together and have one large vote before the season.

The commish should handle all voting for new rules

[hpantazo]

I propose we make a rule that all league members have to maintain a standard of respect towards each other at all times, in celticsblog forums, in yahoo forums, in PMs, in emails, and in all forms of communication between league members. If this standard is not maintained, GMs will be warned once, then kicked out on following offenses.

Second, I propose that we make a rule that GMs must maintain a reasonable level of activity throughout the regular season, including the draft. We should decide on what this means in terms of what entails a reasonable level of activity, but this has been a repeated problem over the years.

On the second: we already have a pretty strict activity clause. I'm open to suggestions on changes and/or enforcement.

On the first, doesn't that just leave the door wide open for the commissioner to judge? I'm not opposed to it in any way, just not sure how much it adds.

Cool, thanks Byennie. For the record, I did not ask, and am not asking, for BFM to be re-instated. I just wanted clarification on the situation and the rules going forward, which we are now doing. Mainly because other GMs were also guilty in this most recent situation, and are repeat offenders.

I may be wrong, but I think having the first rule in writing and making it clear that it applies to all forms of communication between GMs, and that after 1 warning you will be kicked out, will go a long way in preventing further problems in the future.

On the second rule regarding activity, our rule is pretty good, but I think we need to add to it that GMs have to reply to trade offers/inquiries within 15 days during the season, and within 30 days in the offseason trading periods. I think these are reasonable expectations and can cut down on people mentally checking out and not communicating with some GMs at all. A simple "no" or hitting the rejection button in yahoo takes two seconds, its not asking much from people.

[hpantazo]

Just an FYI we do have a rule about activity:

6. GM activity is vital. GMs who are inactive without a roster move, post, or other demonstrable proof of logging on and checking one?s lineup for 7 straight days are issued a warning. A second warning is grounds for replacement in the league. 14 straight days of inactivity is also grounds for replacement.

I think byennie plans on making a separate thread for rule discussions.  Theres still a couple we should propose tweaks for and then I can help set up a ballot system where we can group all of them together and have one large vote before the season.

The commish should handle all voting for new rules

Agreed. LB33 should not be involved in handling rule discussions any more than proposing and discussing rules as any other GM does.

[LarBrd33]

Just an FYI we do have a rule about activity:

6. GM activity is vital. GMs who are inactive without a roster move, post, or other demonstrable proof of logging on and checking one?s lineup for 7 straight days are issued a warning. A second warning is grounds for replacement in the league. 14 straight days of inactivity is also grounds for replacement.

I think byennie plans on making a separate thread for rule discussions.  Theres still a couple we should propose tweaks for and then I can help set up a ballot system where we can group all of them together and have one large vote before the season.

The commish should handle all voting for new rules

Agreed. LB33 should not be involved in handling rule discussions any more than proposing and discussing rules as any other GM does.

Lol.  If you guys misinterpreted me, I was saying I could help set up a system for voting. 

We can suggest rule changes on the forum and eventually I can help put them all on an organized webform so we can have one large vote before the season starts.   

Obviously the results of that vote would go directly to the commish

[Rondo2287]

I propose we make a rule that all league members have to maintain a standard of respect towards each other at all times, in celticsblog forums, in yahoo forums, in PMs, in emails, and in all forms of communication between league members. If this standard is not maintained, GMs will be warned once, then kicked out on following offenses.

Second, I propose that we make a rule that GMs must maintain a reasonable level of activity throughout the regular season, including the draft. We should decide on what this means in terms of what entails a reasonable level of activity, but this has been a repeated problem over the years.

On the second: we already have a pretty strict activity clause. I'm open to suggestions on changes and/or enforcement.

On the first, doesn't that just leave the door wide open for the commissioner to judge? I'm not opposed to it in any way, just not sure how much it adds.

Cool, thanks Byennie. For the record, I did not ask, and am not asking, for BFM to be re-instated. I just wanted clarification on the situation and the rules going forward, which we are now doing. Mainly because other GMs were also guilty in this most recent situation, and are repeat offenders.

I may be wrong, but I think having the first rule in writing and making it clear that it applies to all forms of communication between GMs, and that after 1 warning you will be kicked out, will go a long way in preventing further problems in the future.

On the second rule regarding activity, our rule is pretty good, but I think we need to add to it that GMs have to reply to trade offers/inquiries within 15 days during the season, and within 30 days in the offseason trading periods. I think these are reasonable expectations and can cut down on people mentally checking out and not communicating with some GMs at all. A simple "no" or hitting the rejection button in yahoo takes two seconds, its not asking much from people.

Meh I don't like forced replys to trades.  I just ignore a good amount, it's not because I am not active though . 

[Rondo2287]

Just an FYI we do have a rule about activity:

6. GM activity is vital. GMs who are inactive without a roster move, post, or other demonstrable proof of logging on and checking one?s lineup for 7 straight days are issued a warning. A second warning is grounds for replacement in the league. 14 straight days of inactivity is also grounds for replacement.

I think byennie plans on making a separate thread for rule discussions.  Theres still a couple we should propose tweaks for and then I can help set up a ballot system where we can group all of them together and have one large vote before the season.

The commish should handle all voting for new rules

Agreed. LB33 should not be involved in handling rule discussions any more than proposing and discussing rules as any other GM does.

Lol.  If you guys misinterpreted me, I was saying I could help set up a system for voting. 

We can suggest rule changes on the forum and eventually I can help put them all on an organized webform so we can have one large vote before the season starts.   

Obviously the results of that vote would go directly to the commish.

I don't think that's necessary. 

[LarBrd33]

Just an FYI we do have a rule about activity:

6. GM activity is vital. GMs who are inactive without a roster move, post, or other demonstrable proof of logging on and checking one?s lineup for 7 straight days are issued a warning. A second warning is grounds for replacement in the league. 14 straight days of inactivity is also grounds for replacement.

I think byennie plans on making a separate thread for rule discussions.  Theres still a couple we should propose tweaks for and then I can help set up a ballot system where we can group all of them together and have one large vote before the season.

The commish should handle all voting for new rules

Agreed. LB33 should not be involved in handling rule discussions any more than proposing and discussing rules as any other GM does.

Lol.  If you guys misinterpreted me, I was saying I could help set up a system for voting. 

We can suggest rule changes on the forum and eventually I can help put them all on an organized webform so we can have one large vote before the season starts.   

Obviously the results of that vote would go directly to the commish.

I don't think that's necessary.

What part is unnecessary ?  Voting?  Lol. Are you suggesting that we just suggest rule amendments and let the commish decide on them?  Or are you suggesting that having one large vote on the dozens of potential rule suggestions is "unnecessary"?

I can already think of 4 rule ammendment suggestions previously recommended. 

This forum isn't going to be organized enough for the vote.  For Harry's previous suggestions, for example, I can I think of valid pros and cons.  A brief synopsis of those pros and cons should be included for each ammendment suggestion... That way someone who doesn't necessarily read every single forum post and doesn't have a ton of time (like Bada bing for instance) only has to read the ammendment suggestions once in a large pre-season vote... As opposed to expecting each rule to be voted on individually... Which is unrealistic.

[hpantazo]

Just an FYI we do have a rule about activity:

6. GM activity is vital. GMs who are inactive without a roster move, post, or other demonstrable proof of logging on and checking one?s lineup for 7 straight days are issued a warning. A second warning is grounds for replacement in the league. 14 straight days of inactivity is also grounds for replacement.

I think byennie plans on making a separate thread for rule discussions.  Theres still a couple we should propose tweaks for and then I can help set up a ballot system where we can group all of them together and have one large vote before the season.

The commish should handle all voting for new rules

Agreed. LB33 should not be involved in handling rule discussions any more than proposing and discussing rules as any other GM does.

Lol.  If you guys misinterpreted me, I was saying I could help set up a system for voting. 

We can suggest rule changes on the forum and eventually I can help put them all on an organized webform so we can have one large vote before the season starts.   

Obviously the results of that vote would go directly to the commish.

I don't think that's necessary.

What part is unnecessary ?  Voting?  Lol. Are you suggesting that we just suggest rule amendments and let the commish decide on them?  Or are you suggesting that having one large vote on the dozens of potential rule suggestions is "unnecessary"?

I can already think of 4 rule ammendment suggestions previously recommended. 

This forum isn't going to be organized enough for the vote.  For Harry's previous suggestions, for example, I can I think of valid pros and cons.  A brief synopsis of those pros and cons should be included for each ammendment suggestion... That way someone who doesn't necessarily read every single forum post and doesn't have a ton of time (like Bada bing for instance) only has to read the ammendment suggestions once in a large pre-season vote... As opposed to expecting each rule to be voted on individually... Which is unrealistic.

I think it was clear what Kevin meant. We have handled this stuff very well in the past by having threads to discuss pros and cons of amendments, and have GMs send their votes to the commish or vote on yahoo in a poll. I see no reason why this should be changed.