Quote: Originally Posted By sanderbear on 4/08/2010
The words "during rollover" aren't used. I don't think that's what they meant. I think they mean from the point a new season begins, after the rollover is over.

In other words, from the point that budgeting, FA signing, arbitration begins ... to the end of the season.

I dont think kicking an owner during that time period is common at all--not enough that theyd put the exception in. I did try to kick dblaine out many seasons ago in a world after he went nuts right after rollover and was unsuccessful. The only window where there was any leeway to remove an owner was during rollover. This obviously removes that option.

Agreed, but the timing of the announcement seems to be in direct reaction to all the complaints about tanking/semi-abandoning owners recently.

I don't think their intent is to neuter private worlds of unique, well-explained rules, nor the leeway those rules give commishes to deny owners the ability to renew. If that was their intent, there would be some language to that regard.

From what I can tell, their timing is a direct response to a couple of commishes trying to remove owners during rollover.

(no exceptions, even for private worlds at the start of a new season):

I think this language is pretty direct. Commishes never had the ability to prevent an owner from renewing, only the ability to have them removed prior to rollover.

What I think is comical is the way that it is written, anybody in a public world can bring a violation to their attention but only the commish in a private world.

So rather than ******* the few tankers off. ADMIN goes and ****** off tons of decent owners? How is that good for the bottom line?

sucks balls

Hi Mike,

We updated our Fair Play Guidelines today and have clarified our definition of what qualifies as a tanking franchise as it was confusing and not clear. Smoelheim does not meet the criteria for removal due to tanking and cannot be removed from the league for that reason. A franchise must be violating one of the three conditions to be removed from a world. If smoelheim ever does meet the criteria, please let us know and we'll remove the owner.

If the owner has performed any other actions that violate our Fair Play Guidelines, please let us know and we'll investigate and act accordingly.

The Fair Play Guidelines can be found here: http://www.whatifsports.com/locker/fairplay.shtm

Read the post right above you there, sander...

Well, that changes things.

Sure does, doesn't it? I was booted from Cooperstown. After ranting for a couple of days, I removed my asterisk and I of my own volition. I'm still ****** that I had to give my team up.

And this decision that ADMIN has made has even me trying to figure out if I want to spend any more money on this game. This is insane.

I was in cooperstown and was stinking it up. I before I would have been booted--I knew the rules and fully expected that if I didnt meet the criteria Mike set up that I'd be gone.

If I read correctly, someone has to send in a ticket if you are below the standards. To me- that means someone has to complain, it won't be sought out.

Quote: Originally posted by asher413 on 4/08/2010If I read correctly, someone has to send in a ticket if you are below the standards. To me- that means someone has to complain, it won't be sought out.

Correct

I guess it was too much trouble for WIS to provide a link to their Fair Play Guidelines within their announcement today on World Chat--or at least pointed us to them. Dissatisfaction swells among the ranks.

Each world ought to have the option to set its own "Fair Play Guidelines" and enforce them. When you're plopping down $25/per (or thereabouts) for a silly, frivilous game, it's not unreasonable to expect bang for the buck in the form of playing with a group of good, involved, competent competitors.

Leagues should be able to weed out by whatever standard they commit to and avoid carrying crappy owners. The generic, one-size-fits-all standards set by WIS do nothing but weed out the EXCEPTIONALLY, dragging the bottom of the barrel, half-step from braindead owners.