Some owners have expressed that they would like to change the format of the passing of items to one where the individual owners will control this themselves. This shall be a forum to vote on said change. Please feel free to post your opinion if you wish to discuss this or attempt to sway people in one direction or another. You may also vote no, if you do not wish for the format to change, but this is not really necessary. What we are looking for here is whether or not a majority of owners desire the change. So, as soon as 9 owners express that they desire the change, it will in fact change: effective immedietly.
I personally do not support this change, because I feel that people will abuse this power to give their team an unfair advantage. As commissioner, I have always selected not who I thought would benefit or hurt the team, but simply who the weapon "would" go to in a sensical and logical fashion. I know Ryan always did it this way as well. With that being said, a majority vote will change this, and my vote is worth no more than any of yours.
NEW RULES: The new rules that would go along with this, are that you would have to choose 25 items that will continue to be passed on. This list will be due by next year's draft.
Also, there may be some sort of Commissioner veto power for the more powerful items. This failsafe is NOT a request being put in by myself but by other owners and watchers who find this necessary. Guidelines for this would be clearly laid out, and I assure you all that I have no desire to exercise this power more often than needed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
18 comments:
I support the new change. But I also fully support the Commissioner's veto rule. There does need to be a check & balance in place.
I would hope that the other owners in the league would respect the concept of the weapons and not abuse it. But I totally understand the Commissioner's concern.
Thanks Ryan.
I second Ryan's sentiments.
I like the idea of an owner being able to further tailor aspects of their team and decide on certain directions their team may go, but agree that we do need something in place to make sure that this isn't abused in anyway.
I highly doubt any owner would go to such lengths where the veto would need to be utilized, but think it's something we do need in the off-chance a situation arises.
I always liked the fact that they were assigned because they most often went to smaller value unique characters on your team that might not get the start if they didn't have this unique weapon or armor.
For example, on my team, AC Slater has an Iron Man suit. Pretty fucking sweet bonus for a guy who is only worth 4 points to play. Lets say this was in effect last year and I decided to toss it on Yoda before the Championship game against Nick. Or if I loaded up all my players with rings and lightsabers before the match. Would it have changed the outcome? Probably not cuz I sucked ass but I think, in Yoda's case, the watchers would have felt the need to write about him wearing an Iron Man suit and would have lost focus on his force powers and sweet lightsaber skillz.
I asked Ryan to swap the bonus item between two guys on my roster last year and he was happy to do so because they were both 6 point characters and we thought it would have made for better story telling if I played them this way. I feel that if you want something to go to another guy on your team, just bring it up and I am sure Josh will let you do it.
I do not see a way of letting this be free reign without it getting abused, probably by me as well.
I vote Nay. But will support the change if majority rules.
-Fizz
I vote no. As a beginner I think I would be disadvantaged by having to do this myself.
Griswold's Head Nut-buster
Thanks for voting everybody. Perhaps I screwed up by saying that it was cool to not vote. It would be really helpful if everybody could say something, just so we know if people just simply haven't read the post yet, or if their silence means a vote of no. I don't want to assume anything, based on somebody's silence.
I feel the owner of the team should have the ability to submit a suggestion as to who they'd like to possess the weapon, however should the commish feel it compromises competitive integrity, he has a veto power
Just to clarify Tru Blue, you are voting yes, correct??
Yes, i feel the owner should have a say, i was just bringing up what i feel is a compromise
As long as the weapon distribution makes sense and isnt abused, I dont see a problem. Veto should prevent abuse.
So, as I see it now the change has 4 votes down, and 5 to go. If anyone else has a different count, than let me know.
For the change with veto powers authorized.
5 for, with 7 we have not heard from.
Laya votes yes. 3 more votes needed.
Rob votes yes. I will forward his email to the Commissioner for verification.
yes
Nick and Adam vote yes. Proposal passed.
Hooray for Democracy!
Post a Comment