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

A face to face sitdown at the location of my chosing to commence negotiations. Viva La Resistance!

If the owner violates a written rule implemented by the world, then let the commish remove him.

If the commish/owners want a guy out of the world, let it happen. A world will die on its own if something is done unfairly. Let the owners in the world choose whether the commish has final say on these matters.

High level;

WIFS need a fair play guideline that applies to open leagues.

Private league guidelines override the WIFS fair play guidelines.

If the private league guidelines are not breached, then WIFS are within their right to not eject a user.

If they are breached, the league commish with the support of the other team owners have the right to eject the owner.

Which means two things are needed;

• a repository of Private League guidelines
• the ability of team owner in Private Leagues to vote.

I think a number of good ideas have been posted, but check out griv's suggestion regarding a disclaimer in the ToS regarding private worlds.

Also, you may also consider a simple voting mechanism to retain commissioners at the end of the season. This will allow frustrated owners a mechanism to remove a problem commish. And it will also serve as validation that the world backs the rules and commissioner performance in leading the league.

For example, in Coop, you have a situation where almost every single owner removed their franchise in protest. This is a pretty clear message that the world supports their commissioner and his stance with respect to booting problematic owners.

You must allow commissioners the power to enforce their league rules/norms. And power comes in the form of owner removal at rollover.

Quote: Originally posted by tzentmeyer on 4/09/2010Guys,

We thought we were releasing guidelines yesterday that would help the HBD tanking situation. We wanted to make things less vague and more concrete.

And to be clear, we are far more interested in protecting and helping our veteran, loyal users than the small percentage that either choose to tank their ML team or quit playing.

So..let's work this out together.

Our goal is to have some set guidelines so there's less subjectivity when deciding whether an owner should be replaced or not. On the other hand, we have to be careful because it's not good business practice for us to boot an owner from a world in which he's been playing for several seasons (private or public).

And we want private worlds to be able to control who gets in their world. The tricky thing is when they want to prevent a user who had a team in the world from staying in the world.

Help us out. What do you suggest?

Thanks

You might just have to bite the bullet and decide each booting situation based on that specific world.

Does the situation come up often enough that warrants a text-book rule?

On a related topic, I would suggest to have more ways that each world can individualize themselves. That would make judging these situations more clear-cut for you when they do come up.

Thanks.

New owners to private worlds have to APPLY. In so doing they have agreed to play by the rules of said Private world. If they do not abide by said rules that is their choice and they risk expulsion.

Quote: Originally posted by tzentmeyer on 4/09/2010Guys,
We thought we were releasing guidelines yesterday that would help the HBD tanking situation. We wanted to make things less vague and more concrete.

And to be clear, we are far more interested in protecting and helping our veteran, loyal users than the small percentage that either choose to tank their ML team or quit playing.

So..let's work this out together.

Our goal is to have some set guidelines so there's less subjectivity when deciding whether an owner should be replaced or not. On the other hand, we have to be careful because it's not good business practice for us to boot an owner from a world in which he's been playing for several seasons (private or public).

And we want private worlds to be able to control who gets in their world. The tricky thing is when they want to prevent a user who had a team in the world from staying in the world.

Help us out. What do you suggest?

Thanks

The best suggestion I've seen so far is to have an authorization box (similar to a licensing agreement for software) listing the specific rules/requirements for participation in the private league, whether it's minimum win standards, MLB cities only, what have you. Owners must accept those requirements to join the league, and must re-accept if the commish changes those requirements (which can only be done in the offseason).

The commish has the authority to dismiss any owner who does not meet the listed requirements.

Now, that's probably not a small coding job and wouldn't be available overnight. But that's the best long-term solution for protecting private worlds.

Quote: Originally Posted By tzentmeyer on 4/09/2010Guys,

We thought we were releasing guidelines yesterday that would help the HBD tanking situation. We wanted to make things less vague and more concrete.

And to be clear, we are far more interested in protecting and helping our veteran, loyal users than the small percentage that either choose to tank their ML team or quit playing.

So..let's work this out together.

Our goal is to have some set guidelines so there's less subjectivity when deciding whether an owner should be replaced or not. On the other hand, we have to be careful because it's not good business practice for us to boot an owner from a world in which he's been playing for several seasons (private or public).

And we want private worlds to be able to control who gets in their world. The tricky thing is when they want to prevent a user who had a team in the world from staying in the world.

Help us out. What do you suggest?

Thank

At a minimum, allow numerical, quantitative rules to be enforced. I understand the queasiness about arbitrary decisions, and about a rogue commish who might start removing owners for winning too much, or personal issues, etc. But at the very least, any world rule that is cut-and-dried should be enforceable by having the player removed at the following rollover.

So-- if Branch Rickey wants to not allow more than $20M in prospects, that's numerical, and they are allowed to remove at the next rollover anyone who makes such a transfer. If Coop wants to require teams to win 125 games in 2 seasons, that's a numerical rule too.

If you need to have worlds register these rules, it shouldn't be hard to create a site for that.

Let private world be just that, private. As a private world we have a right to make our own decisions on what is fair play and what is not and WIS should not interfere with that.

When the crybaby cheaters come to you with a sob story remind them that they could have joined a public world but they chose to join a private world. Since they chose to join a private world they agreed to abide by that worlds rules.

As far as having to register the league rules frankly I think that is a pretty bad idea once you really start to examine it. No one can come up with a set of rules that cover everything. Private worlds should simply be able to remove any owner at will. If a comish goes nuts it would be pretty easy for WIS to contact all of the owners in the world and ask has this guy been abusing his power or do we just have 2 guys who broke the rules and now want to cry about it.

Most public worlds are a disgrace. WIS' "policies" lead to the destruction of Maris. Private worlds were the one place where we can make real rules instead of the ridiculous "fair play guidelines." If you take that away from us, you'll without a doubt destroy your loyal customer base.

tzent, this is pretty simple. Good commishes aren't going to have owners removed willy-nilly. Worlds are hard to fill. If a commish begins unjustly removing owners at rollover, he will create his own problem. The other owners will speak out. ADMIN can consider removing the commish or removing his title of commish. $5 isn't an incentive to be a commish. Commishes are commishes because they want to play in a world with certain guidelinesof their liking that can be enforced. Then they have to find 31 other like-minded owners to join them.

Then again Mike if we just let this go in a few seasons Foxx will be an elite world!!!

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 4/09/2010tzent, this is pretty simple. Good commishes aren't going to have owners removed willy-nilly. Worlds are hard to fill. If a commish begins unjustly removing owners at rollover, he will create his own problem. The other owners will speak out. ADMIN can consider removing the commish or removing his title of commish. $5 isn't an incentive to be a commish. Commishes are commishes because they want to play in a world with certain guidelinesof their liking that can be enforced. Then they have to find 31 other like-minded owners to join them.

Exactly!

public worlds, private worlds, theme worlds. same as SIM baseball