Commissioners, how would you handle this? (1 Viewer)

[MrPack]

I am the commish, and I have a rule that states the following:

• All trades can be vetoed by the commissioner, (me), if deemed to be driven by collusion, and detrimental to the league. If there is an objection to ANY trade or trade veto, a majority vote of all owners NOT involved, will be needed to overturn any decision. If after a first vote, the vote is 50-50. I will take all the vote’s (10), put them in a hat, and draw out 5 votes, with the majority prevailing.

• All rule change’s, or scoring changes can be put to a vote, and a majority vote rules.(Same voting rules as above will be applied)

The part in bold is what this pertains to.

I put up a vote to add 1pt per reception this year and the vote tied at 6-6. Now the way the rule is written it follows the same rule as if there was a trade objection which would work out because there couldn't be a tie with taking 5 votes.

I forgot about this rule and had my daughter and her friend split the tie by flipping a coin, before I remembered this rule.

Should I let the coinflip stand, or maybe toss 10 votes in and draw out 5 and go from there?

I want to be fair here and am not sure how I should break this tie.

 

[Godsbrother]

I wouldn't implement a new rule without a majority vote.

 

[stealthrunner]

I am the commish, and I have a rule that states the following:

• All trades can be vetoed by the commissioner, (me), if deemed to be driven by collusion, and detrimental to the league. If there is an objection to ANY trade or trade veto, a majority vote of all owners NOT involved, will be needed to overturn any decision. If after a first vote, the vote is 50-50. I will take all the vote’s (10), put them in a hat, and draw out 5 votes, with the majority prevailing.

• All rule change’s, or scoring changes can be put to a vote, and a majority vote rules.(Same voting rules as above will be applied)

The part in bold is what this pertains to.

I put up a vote to add 1pt per reception this year and the vote tied at 6-6. Now the way the rule is written it follows the same rule as if there was a trade objection which would work out because there couldn't be a tie with taking 5 votes.

I forgot about this rule and had my daughter and her friend split the tie by flipping a coin, before I remembered this rule.

Should I let the coinflip stand, or maybe toss 10 votes in and draw out 5 and go from there?

I want to be fair here and am not sure how I should break this tie.

Go by the rules, but whoever suggested the rule should not vote. So if it is a 12 team league, that leaves 11 people to vote. I assume this is before the draft. After the draft, you should be talking about next year's draft. 1 pt per reception can change draft strategies.

 

[JohnnyU]

What you should have done is this, if a vote ends in a tie, the vote doesn't pass. If it's a rule change vote and there is a tie, then the rule change doesn't pass. If it's a trade veto vote and there's a tie, then there is no veto. That's the way it should be done.

Edited to say also, that rule changes affecting scoring and how someone will draft should not even be considered before 2 years in the future if the league is a dynasty league (not saying yours is).

Edited again to say, that for your problem, just follow what your league rules say.

 

[Todem]

I am the commish, and I have a rule that states the following:

• All trades can be vetoed by the commissioner, (me), if deemed to be driven by collusion, and detrimental to the league. If there is an objection to ANY trade or trade veto, a majority vote of all owners NOT involved, will be needed to overturn any decision. If after a first vote, the vote is 50-50. I will take all the vote’s (10), put them in a hat, and draw out 5 votes, with the majority prevailing.

• All rule change’s, or scoring changes can be put to a vote, and a majority vote rules.(Same voting rules as above will be applied)

The part in bold is what this pertains to.

I put up a vote to add 1pt per reception this year and the vote tied at 6-6. Now the way the rule is written it follows the same rule as if there was a trade objection which would work out because there couldn't be a tie with taking 5 votes.

I forgot about this rule and had my daughter and her friend split the tie by flipping a coin, before I remembered this rule.

Should I let the coinflip stand, or maybe toss 10 votes in and draw out 5 and go from there?

I want to be fair here and am not sure how I should break this tie.

Forget the coin flip and abide by the by-laws that you wrote.Integrity of the rules must be maintained by the Commish.

 

[LGOA]

I'd go back to the rule book and do it by drawing the five votes. Thta way, your covered as "having followed the rules".

By the way, who wouldn't want to chnage to PPR? It's a lot of fun....and higher scoring.

 

[mtffl2]

the rules state that you put the names in the hat.

in my league, we don't use a hat. in my league 8 of the 12 teams must approve it. there can never be a tie with this system and if a rule doesn't pass, then we wait until next year to pass it again.

can't you pay somone off and get 7 votes to approve it?

 

[shredhead]

Do the other owners know the results of the coin flip? If so, let it stand. If not, follow the rules as stated in the rule book.

Count me as 1 vote to change your rule about how to break a tie in league votes.

 

[Dreamer]

Do the other owners know the results of the coin flip? If so, let it stand. If not, follow the rules as stated in the rule book. Count me as 1 vote to change your rule about how to break a tie in league votes.

 

[Bluestaples]

You guys should vote on what majority constitutes. I vote for two/thrids

 

[BigRed]

I want to be fair here and am not sure how I should break this tie.

Then you have to leave it a tie, since the rules state you need a majority. PS and FWIW "All trades can be vetoed by the commissioner" is not exactly fair and therefore makes no sense. I'm amazed how many leagues still have this kind of rule. All decisions about the league should be by a majority vote, ie the majority of those who do in fact vote.

 

[BigRed]

You guys should vote on what majority constitutes. I vote for two/thrids

er "majority" by definition means more than half FYI. GDB a league getting "vote happy"

 

[MrPack]

Ok, I agree with pretty much all of you. I am going to rewrite the rule to state that there must be a majority (7 votes) vote for a rule to pass, and the same for a trade veto. On the trade veto, I will only put it up to a vote if I think there is collusion. I have never vetoed a trade in the history of the league, and doubt I ever will. But it's in the rules just in case.

The rule was brought up by me, because I like the 1pt/rec. The coinflip came up a "Yes" vote, but I just felt like that wasn't right.

I am going to put 10 votes, 5 yes, 5 no, in a hat draw out 5 and go by that for this year.

Thanks for your input.

 

[MrPack]

I want to be fair here and am not sure how I should break this tie.

Then you have to leave it a tie, since the rules state you need a majority. PS and FWIW "All trades can be vetoed by the commissioner" is not exactly fair and therefore makes no sense. I'm amazed how many leagues still have this kind of rule. All decisions about the league should be by a majority vote, ie the majority of those who do in fact vote.

See I believe it has to be in there. Otherwise you could have guys objecting all the time if they don't like the trade. This way I am the only one who can make that decision. Owners can object to me, I will decide if there is obvious collusion thus putting it up for a vote.I will not put every trade objection up for a vote. Not a chance.

 

[bentley]

Ok, I agree with pretty much all of you. I am going to rewrite the rule to state that there must be a majority (7 votes) vote for a rule to pass, and the same for a trade veto. On the trade veto, I will only put it up to a vote if I think there is collusion. I have never vetoed a trade in the history of the league, and doubt I ever will. But it's in the rules just in case.The rule was brought up by me, because I like the 1pt/rec. The coinflip came up a "Yes" vote, but I just felt like that wasn't right.I am going to put 10 votes, 5 yes, 5 no, in a hat draw out 5 and go by that for this year.Thanks for your input.

If it matters, I'm pretty sure that's the correct interpretation of your current rule.

 

[MrPack]

You guys should vote on what majority constitutes. I vote for two/thrids

er "majority" by definition means more than half FYI. GDB a league getting "vote happy"

I agree, which is one reason for the trade veto clause.I do put rule changes up for votes because afterall, it's everyones league, not just mine.

 

[Bluestaples]

You guys should vote on what majority constitutes. I vote for two/thrids

er "majority" by definition means more than half FYI. GDB a league getting "vote happy"

but where is the majority in a tie? The way I figure it , even in the case of a 7-5 "majority" vote nearly half the people inthe league do not want to make a change. A 2/3s vote is a sunstantial enough majortiy to base chnages off of.

 

[bentley]

You guys should vote on what majority constitutes. I vote for two/thrids

er "majority" by definition means more than half FYI. GDB a league getting "vote happy"

but where is the majority in a tie? The way I figure it , even in the case of a 7-5 "majority" vote nearly half the people inthe league do not want to make a change. A 2/3s vote is a sunstantial enough majortiy to base chnages off of.

Technically, that's a supermajority, not a majority.

 

[MrPack]

Ok, I agree with pretty much all of you. I am going to rewrite the rule to state that there must be a majority (7 votes) vote for a rule to pass, and the same for a trade veto. On the trade veto, I will only put it up to a vote if I think there is collusion. I have never vetoed a trade in the history of the league, and doubt I ever will. But it's in the rules just in case.The rule was brought up by me, because I like the 1pt/rec. The coinflip came up a "Yes" vote, but I just felt like that wasn't right.I am going to put 10 votes, 5 yes, 5 no, in a hat draw out 5 and go by that for this year.Thanks for your input.

If it matters, I'm pretty sure that's the correct interpretation of your current rule.

Right, my problem was because there were twelve of us voting, I was thinking I had to put 6 votes in the hat (Half of the votes), which could cause tie after tie. I was overthinking this.

 

[brewer]

Wait,

you are a running a league presumably drafting sometime over the next few days and you haven't decided if it is a PPR league or not yet?

All substantial rule changes should be long done by now. If I were one of the 6 owners who voted against this change, I'd be pretty upset if this went through now.... coin flip, drawn from a hat, whatever.

Personally, I would shelf this idea until early next offseason. The owners who would like to see the change can lobby the others this year and in the meantime, nobody should be upset that a new rule didn't get rushed in at the 11th hour.

 

[Moniker]

Wait,you are a running a league presumably drafting sometime over the next few days and you haven't decided if it is a PPR league or not yet?All substantial rule changes should be long done by now. If I were one of the 6 owners who voted against this change, I'd be pretty upset if this went through now.... coin flip, drawn from a hat, whatever.Personally, I would shelf this idea until early next offseason. The owners who would like to see the change can lobby the others this year and in the meantime, nobody should be upset that a new rule didn't get rushed in at the 11th hour.

Agree. Our league votes on all new rules at our end-of-the-year party.I also wouldn't put in a new rule that did not have majority vote (our league's rule is now 10/12 majority).

 

[ffchamp1]

I am the commish, and I have a rule that states the following:

• All trades can be vetoed by the commissioner, (me), if deemed to be driven by collusion, and detrimental to the league. If there is an objection to ANY trade or trade veto, a majority vote of all owners NOT involved, will be needed to overturn any decision. If after a first vote, the vote is 50-50. I will take all the vote’s (10), put them in a hat, and draw out 5 votes, with the majority prevailing.

• All rule change’s, or scoring changes can be put to a vote, and a majority vote rules.(Same voting rules as above will be applied)

The part in bold is what this pertains to.

I put up a vote to add 1pt per reception this year and the vote tied at 6-6. Now the way the rule is written it follows the same rule as if there was a trade objection which would work out because there couldn't be a tie with taking 5 votes.

I forgot about this rule and had my daughter and her friend split the tie by flipping a coin, before I remembered this rule.

Should I let the coinflip stand, or maybe toss 10 votes in and draw out 5 and go from there?

I want to be fair here and am not sure how I should break this tie.

Take your (commish) vote out. that way it will never end in a tie. Explain the rule and let them vote.Tom

 

[PMENFAN]

I am the commish, and I have a rule that states the following:

• All trades can be vetoed by the commissioner, (me), if deemed to be driven by collusion, and detrimental to the league. If there is an objection to ANY trade or trade veto, a majority vote of all owners NOT involved, will be needed to overturn any decision. If after a first vote, the vote is 50-50. I will take all the vote’s (10), put them in a hat, and draw out 5 votes, with the majority prevailing.

• All rule change’s, or scoring changes can be put to a vote, and a majority vote rules.(Same voting rules as above will be applied)

The part in bold is what this pertains to.

I put up a vote to add 1pt per reception this year and the vote tied at 6-6. Now the way the rule is written it follows the same rule as if there was a trade objection which would work out because there couldn't be a tie with taking 5 votes.

I forgot about this rule and had my daughter and her friend split the tie by flipping a coin, before I remembered this rule.

Should I let the coinflip stand, or maybe toss 10 votes in and draw out 5 and go from there?

I want to be fair here and am not sure how I should break this tie.

You have to follow what your rules say. But, the next rule change I'd put to vote would be a 2/3 (you have 10 teams, so I'd say 7/10) needed for further rule changes. On the issues or trade vetoes. I hate vetoes. They're the owners. It's their teams. You shouldn't be vetoing trades unless it's blatant collusion, and then it should be up to the commish. If it involves the commish, the other owners should stand up to him and demand he back out of the trade.

 

[Nemesis]

Ok, I agree with pretty much all of you. I am going to rewrite the rule to state that there must be a majority (7 votes) vote for a rule to pass, and the same for a trade veto. On the trade veto, I will only put it up to a vote if I think there is collusion. I have never vetoed a trade in the history of the league, and doubt I ever will. But it's in the rules just in case.

The rule was brought up by me, because I like the 1pt/rec. The coinflip came up a "Yes" vote, but I just felt like that wasn't right.

I am going to put 10 votes, 5 yes, 5 no, in a hat draw out 5 and go by that for this year.

Thanks for your input.

Why not just keep discussing the issue a little further or compromise?I'd suggest that you propose using .5 pts per reception...........and see if THAT changes the vote outcome.

That way, it doesn't skew the scoring as much and some owner on the fence might decide that he can live with that rule change. (an added benefit is that using .5 points reduces the chances of a tie)

If you still are deadlocked.......then I say it doesn't pass...........Easier to tell the owners that want it to "wait til next year"........than to stuff it down the owners that didn't want it. As a commissioner, I wouldn't want this issue to divide the league and cause future issues.

Suggestion #2: If suggesting .5 pts per reception doesn't work.......then maybe suggest 1 pt per every 3 receptions.

This is what I did in my league to implement the PPR rule as many didn't want it to totally change the league's feel.

 

[rolliehouliranson]

I'd eliminate the entire democratic process. Commish rules.

Policy changes would be made well in advance and be made after hearing group discussion. Listen to everyone's opinion, but commish has final say. That being said, it's way too late to change policy for this year.

 

[The Redbeard]

Not to hijack - but I have a situation that is very similar -

Two weeks ago, my commishoner sent uot notice that after 15 years of Monday morning papers and a pencil - it was time to go online. Fair enough, couldn't agree more. He played in a CBS league a few years ago, is comfortable with their interface, and therefor wants to be there. Fair enough, but there's a catch. CBS cannot handle many of the unique scoring options our league utilizes - even though I suggest myfantasyleague (among other options) I am told that the commish has already put 7 hours into customizing the scoring and we're going with CBS. Hmmmm. I write an email saying that I'd like a league vote. Too late. We're on CBS. Now I'm fuming a little, but I'm willing to go with the flow.

Now, 4 days ago (less than 2 weeks before our draft) we get an email that the Commish wants to institute a new draft order. 12 teams draft normally in round one, then the first 5 teams get moved to the back of the line.

RD 1: 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11-12

RD 2: 6-7-8-9-10-11-12-1-2-3-4-5

RD 3: 11-12-1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10

etc.

You always move left to right - which means that not do you NOT want to be team 5 or 10 - you also draft behind the same couple teams all night. Commish tried to get this change in a couple years ago, and was voted down.

I immediately send in my franchises' vote. 2 days later we get an email that, in brief, says that on the suggestion of another owner - he is going to take chrge. He is the Commish. It is his league and we will have the new draft. Now I am on the verge of wanting to walk away from the whole thing - but it is very hard to after 15 years. We put ourselves in a big hole by never writing out a league constitution -

But, what would you do? Thank you in advance.

 

[renesauz]

I want to be fair here and am not sure how I should break this tie.

Then you have to leave it a tie, since the rules state you need a majority. PS and FWIW "All trades can be vetoed by the commissioner" is not exactly fair and therefore makes no sense. I'm amazed how many leagues still have this kind of rule. All decisions about the league should be by a majority vote, ie the majority of those who do in fact vote.

IN our rules (which I wrote), the commissioner has the power to APPROVE trades not involving his own team (my team), but only a radon panel of owners not involved can DISAPROVE a trade. Of course, I always investigate any questionable trade proposals, and provide input to the tradeing owners on why I won't approve the trade. Never has anyone ever wanted to go to a committee after I refused approval.(Any trade involving my own team must go to commitee.)

 

[B-Deep]

why would you only put 10 votes in not 12, to randomly draw, not 12?

I mean, it doesn't really matter, you could put 4 votes in as long as they are split half and half

for some reason this part of your process interests me

 

[GregR_2]

I am the commish, and I have a rule that states the following:

• All trades can be vetoed by the commissioner, (me), if deemed to be driven by collusion, and detrimental to the league. If there is an objection to ANY trade or trade veto, a majority vote of all owners NOT involved, will be needed to overturn any decision. If after a first vote, the vote is 50-50. I will take all the vote’s (10), put them in a hat, and draw out 5 votes, with the majority prevailing.

• All rule change’s, or scoring changes can be put to a vote, and a majority vote rules.(Same voting rules as above will be applied)

The part in bold is what this pertains to.

I put up a vote to add 1pt per reception this year and the vote tied at 6-6. Now the way the rule is written it follows the same rule as if there was a trade objection which would work out because there couldn't be a tie with taking 5 votes.

I forgot about this rule and had my daughter and her friend split the tie by flipping a coin, before I remembered this rule.

Should I let the coinflip stand, or maybe toss 10 votes in and draw out 5 and go from there?

I want to be fair here and am not sure how I should break this tie.

If you've drafted, stick with the scoring system you had at the time of the draft. If you haven't, then follow your rules and do the hat thing.As an aside, get rid of the hat thing for next year and just stick with your "majority vote wins" which means it takes more than a tie to win. If you ask me, if at least a majority doesn't favor a change, it shouldn't go in.

 

[my man otis]

I wouldn't implement a new rule without a majority vote.

Basically. 6-6 tie for a scoring change of that magnitude shouldn't go into effect.

 

[MrPack]

Ok, I agree with pretty much all of you. I am going to rewrite the rule to state that there must be a majority (7 votes) vote for a rule to pass, and the same for a trade veto. On the trade veto, I will only put it up to a vote if I think there is collusion. I have never vetoed a trade in the history of the league, and doubt I ever will. But it's in the rules just in case.

The rule was brought up by me, because I like the 1pt/rec. The coinflip came up a "Yes" vote, but I just felt like that wasn't right.

I am going to put 10 votes, 5 yes, 5 no, in a hat draw out 5 and go by that for this year.

Thanks for your input.

 

[SDJohnny]

Ok, I agree with pretty much all of you. I am going to rewrite the rule to state that there must be a majority (7 votes) vote for a rule to pass, and the same for a trade veto. On the trade veto, I will only put it up to a vote if I think there is collusion. I have never vetoed a trade in the history of the league, and doubt I ever will. But it's in the rules just in case.

The rule was brought up by me, because I like the 1pt/rec. The coinflip came up a "Yes" vote, but I just felt like that wasn't right.

I am going to put 10 votes, 5 yes, 5 no, in a hat draw out 5 and go by that for this year.

Thanks for your input.

I just don't understand the confusion. Your rules already state that a majority is needed, 7-5 at least. 6-6 means it didn't pass. Why would you need to flip a coin, the change didn't go through.

 

[Topes]

All rule change’s, or scoring changes can be put to a vote, and a majority vote rules.(Same voting rules as above will be applied)

Ok, I agree with pretty much all of you. I am going to rewrite the rule to state that there must be a majority (7 votes) vote for a rule to pass, and the same for a trade veto. On the trade veto, I will only put it up to a vote if I think there is collusion. I have never vetoed a trade in the history of the league, and doubt I ever will. But it's in the rules just in case.

The rule was brought up by me, because I like the 1pt/rec. The coinflip came up a "Yes" vote, but I just felt like that wasn't right.

I am going to put 10 votes, 5 yes, 5 no, in a hat draw out 5 and go by that for this year.

Thanks for your input.

All rule change’s, or scoring changes can be put to a vote, and a majority vote rules.(Same voting rules as above will be applied)

Regardless of what you do now, you need to fix this ASAP. Majority and Same voting rules as above are contradictory. Also, it's changes and needn't be followed by a comma.

 

[bentley]

Ok, I agree with pretty much all of you. I am going to rewrite the rule to state that there must be a majority (7 votes) vote for a rule to pass, and the same for a trade veto. On the trade veto, I will only put it up to a vote if I think there is collusion. I have never vetoed a trade in the history of the league, and doubt I ever will. But it's in the rules just in case.

The rule was brought up by me, because I like the 1pt/rec. The coinflip came up a "Yes" vote, but I just felt like that wasn't right.

I am going to put 10 votes, 5 yes, 5 no, in a hat draw out 5 and go by that for this year.

Thanks for your input.

I just don't understand the confusion. Your rules already state that a majority is needed, 7-5 at least. 6-6 means it didn't pass. Why would you need to flip a coin, the change didn't go through.

You're missing the bullet above. The bolded bullet says that ties shall be broken as in the scenario laid out in the first bullet. In the first bullet, he says he's going to put 10 votes in a hat and draw five.

 

[Godsbrother]

Not to hijack - but I have a situation that is very similar -Two weeks ago, my commishoner sent uot notice that after 15 years of Monday morning papers and a pencil - it was time to go online. Fair enough, couldn't agree more. He played in a CBS league a few years ago, is comfortable with their interface, and therefor wants to be there. Fair enough, but there's a catch. CBS cannot handle many of the unique scoring options our league utilizes - even though I suggest myfantasyleague (among other options) I am told that the commish has already put 7 hours into customizing the scoring and we're going with CBS. Hmmmm. I write an email saying that I'd like a league vote. Too late. We're on CBS. Now I'm fuming a little, but I'm willing to go with the flow.Now, 4 days ago (less than 2 weeks before our draft) we get an email that the Commish wants to institute a new draft order. 12 teams draft normally in round one, then the first 5 teams get moved to the back of the line.RD 1: 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11-12RD 2: 6-7-8-9-10-11-12-1-2-3-4-5RD 3: 11-12-1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10etc.You always move left to right - which means that not do you NOT want to be team 5 or 10 - you also draft behind the same couple teams all night. Commish tried to get this change in a couple years ago, and was voted down.I immediately send in my franchises' vote. 2 days later we get an email that, in brief, says that on the suggestion of another owner - he is going to take chrge. He is the Commish. It is his league and we will have the new draft. Now I am on the verge of wanting to walk away from the whole thing - but it is very hard to after 15 years. We put ourselves in a big hole by never writing out a league constitution -But, what would you do? Thank you in advance.

I would tell the commish that you always enjoyed the league and that you would like to participate again but if he doesn't put this up for a vote, I am done. That is BS.

 

[BigRed]

I will not put every trade objection up for a vote. Not a chance.

Then either you suck as a commish or your league sucks because people object to nearly every trade proposal. Or both. GDB leagues that give the commish dictator type ability.

 

[GregR_2]

Not to hijack - but I have a situation that is very similar -Two weeks ago, my commishoner sent uot notice that after 15 years of Monday morning papers and a pencil - it was time to go online. Fair enough, couldn't agree more. He played in a CBS league a few years ago, is comfortable with their interface, and therefor wants to be there. Fair enough, but there's a catch. CBS cannot handle many of the unique scoring options our league utilizes - even though I suggest myfantasyleague (among other options) I am told that the commish has already put 7 hours into customizing the scoring and we're going with CBS. Hmmmm. I write an email saying that I'd like a league vote. Too late. We're on CBS. Now I'm fuming a little, but I'm willing to go with the flow.Now, 4 days ago (less than 2 weeks before our draft) we get an email that the Commish wants to institute a new draft order. 12 teams draft normally in round one, then the first 5 teams get moved to the back of the line.RD 1: 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11-12RD 2: 6-7-8-9-10-11-12-1-2-3-4-5RD 3: 11-12-1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10etc.You always move left to right - which means that not do you NOT want to be team 5 or 10 - you also draft behind the same couple teams all night. Commish tried to get this change in a couple years ago, and was voted down.I immediately send in my franchises' vote. 2 days later we get an email that, in brief, says that on the suggestion of another owner - he is going to take chrge. He is the Commish. It is his league and we will have the new draft. Now I am on the verge of wanting to walk away from the whole thing - but it is very hard to after 15 years. We put ourselves in a big hole by never writing out a league constitution -But, what would you do? Thank you in advance.

Really should start your own thread. But to answer anyway, I'd suggest to him that if he wants his own league where he is THE COMMISH, that he should start one where everyone knows that fact going in, and not try to take over a league that has had equal say.If he continued, I'd contact the rest of the league about continuing on together without the commish. So don't necessarily leave the league, just get the league to tell the commish no, we're going on without you if that's how you're going to be. It isn't like he can force the owners to stay in HIS league.

 

[bentley]

I will not put every trade objection up for a vote. Not a chance.

Then either you suck as a commish or your league sucks because people object to nearly every trade proposal. Or both. GDB leagues that give the commish dictator type ability.

I've played in leagues with league votes and ones with commissioner control, and the ones with league votes seem to have a lot more gamesmanship around trades. League votes threaten trades where there's no collusion, there's just someone that's being a #######. It's not the business of the league to ensure that all trades are even.

 

[BigRed]

I've played in leagues with league votes and ones with commissioner control, and the ones with league votes seem to have a lot more gamesmanship around trades. League votes threaten trades where there's no collusion, there's just someone that's being a #######. It's not the business of the league to ensure that all trades are even.

If ONE person is being a "########" it won't matter because one person can't stop a trade. That's the point. Unless you're in a league loded with ######s, even semi-reasonable trades will not be stopped or an issue. And why be in a league loded with ######s?

 

[bentley]

I've played in leagues with league votes and ones with commissioner control, and the ones with league votes seem to have a lot more gamesmanship around trades. League votes threaten trades where there's no collusion, there's just someone that's being a #######. It's not the business of the league to ensure that all trades are even.

If ONE person is being a "########" it won't matter because one person can't stop a trade. That's the point. Unless you're in a league loded with ######s, even semi-reasonable trades will not be stopped or an issue. And why be in a league loded with ######s?

Sorry if I was unclear in my ###'s. I've found that when one owner in a trade is being taken advantage of, those in direct competition with the other owner will vote against a trade. That's where I have a problem. The other owners are voting to save their own butts and not because there's anything inherently evil about the deal. It much simpler for the commissioner to have veto authority, or to have 1 - 2 owners to consult with if there's a question as opposed to having the whole stupid league go through the trade review process.

 

[jestertj]

Go by the rules, but whoever suggested the rule should not vote. So if it is a 12 team league, that leaves 11 people to vote.

Wouldn't this pretty much guarantee a no vote considering the person who made the suggestion would be voting yes?

 

[MrPack]

I've played in leagues with league votes and ones with commissioner control, and the ones with league votes seem to have a lot more gamesmanship around trades. League votes threaten trades where there's no collusion, there's just someone that's being a #######. It's not the business of the league to ensure that all trades are even.

If ONE person is being a "########" it won't matter because one person can't stop a trade. That's the point. Unless you're in a league loded with ######s, even semi-reasonable trades will not be stopped or an issue. And why be in a league loded with ######s?

Sorry if I was unclear in my ###'s. I've found that when one owner in a trade is being taken advantage of, those in direct competition with the other owner will vote against a trade. That's where I have a problem. The other owners are voting to save their own butts and not because there's anything inherently evil about the deal. It much simpler for the commissioner to have veto authority, or to have 1 - 2 owners to consult with if there's a question as opposed to having the whole stupid league go through the trade review process.

Exactly. leagues that vote on all trades are poorly run leagues. Talk about being vote happy.No chance I'd ever be in one of those types of leagues, ever.

 

[el centro]

I wouldn't implement a new rule without a majority vote.

I agree here. I always put things to a vote in the league, and only implement change if I have a majority vote. If it's a tie, it's no different than if it didn't pass.However, since you already have rules in-place... you need to reverse the "coin-flip" and observer your current policy. If not, what good was it to have the rules in the first place.ec

 

[MrPack]

I wouldn't implement a new rule without a majority vote.

I agree here. I always put things to a vote in the league, and only implement change if I have a majority vote. If it's a tie, it's no different than if it didn't pass.However, since you already have rules in-place... you need to reverse the "coin-flip" and observer your current policy. If not, what good was it to have the rules in the first place.

ec

I agree. I'm catching so much flack from 2 guys that just won't give up on this. They hated it 2 years ago, when it was voted down, now there's a tie, and they are pissed it's going to a tiebreaker, even though we have rules in place and have had them in place for the past 6yrs.

Anyway, I have taken enough abuse and resigned tonight, effective at the end of the year. It's just not worth the BS anymore.

 

[Drop]

If you haven't drafted teams, just follow your rules and pick out of a hat. If you already have rosters set, don't make scoring system changes unless 100 percent of the league agrees.

 

[Chaz McNulty]

I wouldn't implement a new rule without a majority vote.

I agree here. I always put things to a vote in the league, and only implement change if I have a majority vote. If it's a tie, it's no different than if it didn't pass.However, since you already have rules in-place... you need to reverse the "coin-flip" and observer your current policy. If not, what good was it to have the rules in the first place.

ec

I agree. I'm catching so much flack from 2 guys that just won't give up on this. They hated it 2 years ago, when it was voted down, now there's a tie, and they are pissed it's going to a tiebreaker, even though we have rules in place and have had them in place for the past 6yrs.

Anyway, I have taken enough abuse and resigned tonight, effective at the end of the year. It's just not worth the BS anymore.

You really need a majority (without a tie). What are you going to do if this rule passes by the luck of the tiebreaker, and then two days later one of the disgruntled owners suggests that a rule be passed that doesn't give points for receptions. You would have another 6-6 vote and go to the tiebreaker system.

 

[videoguy505]

Follow your rules. You make everyone else do it.

But, since it's your rule proposal, make the hat draw public. Either in person with some of the owners, or, use the Irony.com dice server and explain to the league how it's going to work--5 rolls of a 10 sided die above 5 are "yes", 5 rolls below 5 are "no", something like that.

 

[Nemesis]

I'm catching so much flack from 2 guys that just won't give up on this. They hated it 2 years ago, when it was voted down, now there's a tie, and they are pissed it's going to a tiebreaker, even though we have rules in place and have had them in place for the past 6yrs.

Anyway, I have taken enough abuse and resigned tonight, effective at the end of the year. It's just not worth the BS anymore.

Update?What was the league response to your "resignation" announcement?

Are you still planning on playing in this league next yr as a regular owner?

And what reasons did those that are against the PPR give for voting against the proposal?

Did you suggest .5 ppr?

Inquiring minds want to know..........

 

[Bluestaples]

I agree. I'm catching so much flack from 2 guys that just won't give up on this. They hated it 2 years ago, when it was voted down, now there's a tie, and they are pissed it's going to a tiebreaker, even though we have rules in place and have had them in place for the past 6yrs.Anyway, I have taken enough abuse and resigned tonight, effective at the end of the year. It's just not worth the BS anymore.

That's why you need to define "majority vote" as 2/3s of the league as oppossed to 50.1% ... if there is only a one vote difference, you still have nearly half the league that may absolutley hate the change - those 2 guys giving you flack have every right to do so. I don't think it is worth resigning over though - just change the votinng rules to something that makes more sense.

 

[ImTheScientist]

Don't even worry about their vote. If your league is good enough they will want to stay, and if a few leave you should have people waiting to get in. Do what you want to do as far as the direction of the league goes.