Quote: Originally Posted By tzentmeyer on 4/09/2010
Our thoughts:

Keep expanded Fair Play Guidelines (what determines a "tanking team").

Remove notice regarding private worlds.

Allow private world commissioners to restrict access between seasons. Rationale for removal must occur prior to the end of the season (heads up to us) and again when the season rolls.

We will continue to review some of these instances subjectively, but this maintains the majority of the power in the commish hands.

For a commish to be removed from commish duty, we will need 10 other owners in the world to state they agree in the world chat during the season.

Thoughts?

Better than a kick in the head but frankly it does not go far enough and most of us belive this is what will really happen.

WIS will boot said owner.

Said owner will whine, complain ect to customer support

WIS will reinstate said owner in essence telling the other 31 owners tough cookies.

So after much ado and fuss things really are not changing at all.

Quote: Originally Posted By tzentmeyer on 4/09/2010
Our thoughts:

Keep expanded Fair Play Guidelines (what determines a "tanking team").

Remove notice regarding private worlds.

Allow private world commissioners to restrict access between seasons. Rationale for removal must occur prior to the end of the season (heads up to us) and again when the season rolls.

We will continue to review some of these instances subjectively, but this maintains the majority of the power in the commish hands.

For a commish to be removed from commish duty, we will need 10 other owners in the world to state they agree in the world chat during the season.

Thoughts?

Looks basically ok to me.

But, what about addressing in-season removal for not following stated league rules--exceeding salary cap for example.

Quote: Originally posted by tzentmeyer on 4/09/2010Our thoughts:

Keep expanded Fair Play Guidelines (what determines a "tanking team").

Remove notice regarding private worlds.

Allow private world commissioners to restrict access between seasons. Rationale for removal must occur prior to the end of the season (heads up to us) and again when the season rolls.

We will continue to review some of these instances subjectively, but this maintains the majority of the power in the commish hands.

For a commish to be removed from commish duty, we will need 10 other owners in the world to state they agree in the world chat during the season.

Thoughts?

Seems like a fair compromise to me.

Quote: Originally posted by tzentmeyer on 4/09/2010Our thoughts:

Keep expanded Fair Play Guidelines (what determines a "tanking team").

Remove notice regarding private worlds.

Allow private world commissioners to restrict access between seasons. Rationale for removal must occur prior to the end of the season (heads up to us) and again when the season rolls.

We will continue to review some of these instances subjectively, but this maintains the majority of the power in the commish hands.

For a commish to be removed from commish duty, we will need 10 other owners in the world to state they agree in the world chat during the season.

Thoughts?

It seems to be a good combination of Mike's idea and mine. It places a lot of the emphasis on admin acting as an arbitrator. But over all is an acceptable resolution, as long as commissioners have a explicitly stated "world rules" somewhere that can be referenced. That way a player knows their reservations can be denied in the case that they violate the rules.

Quote: Originally Posted By tzentmeyer on 4/09/2010For a commish to be removed from commish duty, we will need 10 other owners in the world to state they agree in the world chat during the season

The logistics of this one tiny piece are weird... how do you remove a commish without appointing a new one? How is the new one chosen? What if 11 owners want a commish out but 21 want him to stay? Do you get into a loop of removing him and re-electing him?

Do the other stuff first and then fine tune this piece before implementing it.

Thanks for listening.

Quote: Originally Posted By sergei91 on 4/09/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By tzentmeyer on 4/09/2010
Our thoughts:

Keep expanded Fair Play Guidelines (what determines a "tanking team").

Remove notice regarding private worlds.

Allow private world commissioners to restrict access between seasons. Rationale for removal must occur prior to the end of the season (heads up to us) and again when the season rolls.

We will continue to review some of these instances subjectively, but this maintains the majority of the power in the commish hands.

For a commish to be removed from commish duty, we will need 10 other owners in the world to state they agree in the world chat during the season.

Thoughts?



make it so

bravo. well said.

Quote: Originally Posted By tzentmeyer on 4/09/2010Our thoughts:

Keep expanded Fair Play Guidelines (what determines a "tanking team").

Remove notice regarding private worlds.

Allow private world commissioners to restrict access between seasons. Rationale for removal must occur prior to the end of the season (heads up to us) and again when the season rolls.

We will continue to review some of these instances subjectively, but this maintains the majority of the power in the commish hands.

For a commish to be removed from commish duty, we will need 10 other owners in the world to state they agree in the world chat during the season.

Thoughts

TZ you are making this harder for WIS than it needs to be. WIS should make it known they will exercise one of 2 options (both precovered by disclaimers), and only those 2 options will be considered (1) 98% of the time they should support the commish and remove the owner in question and (2) 2% after special investigation they will remove the commish. Knowledge that these are the only 2 options WIS will entertain will stop most of the issues. (WIS should NEVER do what was done in Cooperstown - keep the owner in the league and keep the commish -- needs to be one or the other. It should rarely, and only with compelling evidence, that it be the Commish that is removed)

Quote: Originally Posted By tzentmeyer on 4/09/2010Our thoughts:

Keep expanded Fair Play Guidelines (what determines a "tanking team").

Remove notice regarding private worlds.

Allow private world commissioners to restrict access between seasons. Rationale for removal must occur prior to the end of the season (heads up to us) and again when the season rolls.

We will continue to review some of these instances subjectively, but this maintains the majority of the power in the commish hands.

For a commish to be removed from commish duty, we will need 10 other owners in the world to state they agree in the world chat during the season.

Thoughts

This sounds good. But, I think you should review the instances objectively. ie; The commissioner has total authority to do what he wants pending an owner revolt.

Also, what happens in Cooperstown?

Well I think that still gives too much power to the commissioner, but I trust admin to review cases in a fair manner.

Quote: Originally posted by mrdanielx on 4/09/2010
Well I think that still gives too much power to the commissioner, but I trust admin to review cases in a fair manner.

And I trust prospective owners to check out the worlds they join. I guarantee that these rogue commissioners don't suddenly become that way without any warning.

Quote: Originally posted by travisg on 4/09/2010

Quote: Originally posted by mrdanielx on 4/09/2010Well I think that still gives too much power to the commissioner, but I trust admin to review cases in a fair manner.

And I trust prospective owners to check out the worlds they join. I guarantee that these rogue commissioners don't suddenly become that way without any warning.

Ideally... but I don't.

Cool, now I can go back to not working at work.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

Quote: Originally Posted By tzentmeyer on 4/09/2010Our thoughts:

Keep expanded Fair Play Guidelines (what determines a "tanking team").

Remove notice regarding private worlds.

Allow private world commissioners to restrict access between seasons. Rationale for removal must occur prior to the end of the season (heads up to us) and again when the season rolls.

We will continue to review some of these instances subjectively, but this maintains the majority of the power in the commish hands.

For a commish to be removed from commish duty, we will need 10 other owners in the world to state they agree in the world chat during the season.

Thoughts

What constitutes an acceptable "rationale" from a commish?

Also what does "remove notice regarding private worlds" mean?