Soup
New Member
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 401
Joined: January 2021
|
Post by Soup on Jan 27, 2021 10:52:31 GMT -5
the issue with rewarding the posting of multiple DCs is that people are going to expect being rewarded for posting multiple DCs in the future, which they should, and they have no reason to limit themselves to two. why not five DCs per GM? ten? if all it takes is posting one correct one and posting incorrect ones doesn't matter, it behooves any GM to post multiple DCs just to be sure that system would be completely unworkable, so we're not going to implement it Also, this is pretty disingenuous. This clearly isn't what happened. |
|
|
|
Post by skrouse on Jan 27, 2021 10:54:24 GMT -5
For Sim 1, you should only have one DC in the thread. Lesson learned, move on. Is there a rule that says you only post one DC for Sim 1? The rules say you need to post a new DC after your roster changes, which Soup did. His roster didn't change from a previously processed DC though, it was a new DC for sim 1 that had never been processed.
I could understand if we carried over the PS DCs into Sim 1 but that's not the case.
|
|
bankz
New Member
GM of the Year: 3001
Posts: 2,347
Likes: 490
Joined: January 2021
|
Post by bankz on Jan 27, 2021 10:55:19 GMT -5
Is there a rule that says you only post one DC for Sim 1? The rules say you need to post a new DC after your roster changes, which Soup did. His roster didn't change from a previously processed DC though, it was a new DC for sim 1 that had never been processed.
I could understand if we carried over the PS DCs into Sim 1 but that's not the case.
Pretty sure he made a big trade that resulted in roster change and thus the second DC posted |
|
Soup
New Member
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 401
Joined: January 2021
|
Post by Soup on Jan 27, 2021 10:59:04 GMT -5
Is there a rule that says you only post one DC for Sim 1? The rules say you need to post a new DC after your roster changes, which Soup did. His roster didn't change from a previously processed DC though, it was a new DC for sim 1 that had never been processed.
I could understand if we carried over the PS DCs into Sim 1 but that's not the case.
how am I supposed to know that? And where is that rule posted? I followed the only rule we have on the matter. |
|
|
|
Post by skrouse on Jan 27, 2021 11:07:34 GMT -5
His roster didn't change from a previously processed DC though, it was a new DC for sim 1 that had never been processed.
I could understand if we carried over the PS DCs into Sim 1 but that's not the case.
how am I supposed to know that? And where is that rule posted? I followed the only rule we have on the matter. from Rules, Depth Chart section
"...
Post and bold ONLY changes after day 1.
Players listed at...
C can play C or PF
PF can play PF or C
SF can play C PF or SF, or if under 6'9" SG
SG can play C, PF, SF, or SG
PG can play any position
Very Fast Pace and Always Trap require the relevant assistant coach. Preseason and sim 1 regular season DCs will be automatically adjusted and the GM will not be notified. GMs who later change their DC to an illegal option will be fined 1000 currency for each sim the change is in the software.
Any trade, transaction, or roster move that requires a depth chart change must be accompanied by a new post with a new DC.
Failure to do will result in a fine of 1000 currency."
Your change was before day 1
|
|
Soup
New Member
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 401
Joined: January 2021
|
Post by Soup on Jan 27, 2021 11:13:13 GMT -5
how am I supposed to know that? And where is that rule posted? I followed the only rule we have on the matter. from Rules, Depth Chart section
"...
Post and bold ONLY changes after day 1.
Players listed at...
C can play C or PF
PF can play PF or C
SF can play C PF or SF, or if under 6'9" SG
SG can play C, PF, SF, or SG
PG can play any position
Very Fast Pace and Always Trap require the relevant assistant coach. Preseason and sim 1 regular season DCs will be automatically adjusted and the GM will not be notified. GMs who later change their DC to an illegal option will be fined 1000 currency for each sim the change is in the software.
Any trade, transaction, or roster move that requires a depth chart change must be accompanied by a new post with a new DC.
Failure to do will result in a fine of 1000 currency."
Your change was before day 1
lol, what? |
|
Soup
New Member
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 401
Joined: January 2021
|
Post by Soup on Jan 27, 2021 11:15:35 GMT -5
how does posting what we're supposed to do after day 1 have anything to do with prior?
And going off your post, I did exactly what I was supposed to.
|
|
bankz
New Member
GM of the Year: 3001
Posts: 2,347
Likes: 490
Joined: January 2021
|
Post by bankz on Jan 27, 2021 11:20:31 GMT -5
This is so silly.
Eric made a mistake and that’s ok.
What’s not ok is dragging this on and digging in.
If soup broke a rule or missed a rule so be it. If he was spamming the DC thread just for a perfect DC fine. None of those fit the case. It’s a simple oversight on Eric’s part.
Eric make it right and just move on.
|
|
Soup
New Member
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 401
Joined: January 2021
|
Post by Soup on Jan 27, 2021 12:49:23 GMT -5
one last bump to remedy
|
|
|
|
Post by eric on Jan 27, 2021 12:49:27 GMT -5
For Sim 1, you should only have one DC in the thread. Lesson learned, move on. Is there a rule that says you only post one DC for Sim 1? The rules say you need to post a new DC after your roster changes, which Soup did. "For posting day 1 DCs... ...[lots of formatting rules]... If the DC is completely correct and on time, the GM gets 8000 currency. If the DC is on time with inaccuracies, the GM only gets 4000." The use of the definite article and the singular case denotes (not implies or suggests but denotes) there be one DC. |
|
|
|
Post by eric on Jan 27, 2021 12:49:53 GMT -5
the issue with rewarding the posting of multiple DCs is that people are going to expect being rewarded for posting multiple DCs in the future, which they should, and they have no reason to limit themselves to two. why not five DCs per GM? ten? if all it takes is posting one correct one and posting incorrect ones doesn't matter, it behooves any GM to post multiple DCs just to be sure that system would be completely unworkable, so we're not going to implement it Also, this is pretty disingenuous. This clearly isn't what happened. It's not disingenuous because the only difference is motivation, which since it's impossible to police would be as irrelevant in future cases as it is now. |
|
|
|
Post by Herby New Year! on Jan 27, 2021 12:56:51 GMT -5
Is there a rule that says you only post one DC for Sim 1? The rules say you need to post a new DC after your roster changes, which Soup did. "For posting day 1 DCs... ...[lots of formatting rules]... If the DC is completely correct and on time, the GM gets 8000 currency. If the DC is on time with inaccuracies, the GM only gets 4000." The use of the definite article and the singular case denotes (not implies or suggests but denotes) there be one DC. Day 1 DCs denotes multiple DCs. It could be multiple based on the multiple GMs, or multiple based on the rule Soup followed. It is ambiguous and we need to consider additional rules to determine its meaning. The use of the definite article denotes one DC is being judged for accuracy. There is a rule requiring GMs to post a NEW DC if they have changes to their roster or face a fine. Not delete their old DC and post a new DC . The most reasonable interpretation of the definite article and the requirement that GMs post NEW DCs is that you will judge THE most recent DC. This seems like a really stupid hill to die on considering Soup posted a correct DC based on his pre-trade roster, a correct DC based on his post-trade roster pursuant to YOUR rule that he post a new DC, and doesn't get the reward because ... I'm actually not sure why he's not getting the reward honestly. |
|
bankz
New Member
GM of the Year: 3001
Posts: 2,347
Likes: 490
Joined: January 2021
|
Post by bankz on Jan 27, 2021 13:20:18 GMT -5
This shit is insane.
I thought the casino change discussion was next level. It’s been topped
|
|
jhb
New Member
Posts: 1,349
Likes: 396
Joined: January 2021
|
Post by jhb on Jan 27, 2021 13:41:00 GMT -5
If the rules didn't explicitly state that there should only be one DC in the case of a change needing to be made before the first sim I think this should be filed under a learning experience, pay the man, and update the rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by eric on Jan 27, 2021 13:48:47 GMT -5
"For posting day 1 DCs... ...[lots of formatting rules]... If the DC is completely correct and on time, the GM gets 8000 currency. If the DC is on time with inaccuracies, the GM only gets 4000." The use of the definite article and the singular case denotes (not implies or suggests but denotes) there be one DC. Day 1 DCs denotes multiple DCs. It could be multiple based on the multiple GMs, or multiple based on the rule Soup followed. It is ambiguous and we need to consider additional rules to determine its meaning. The use of the definite article denotes one DC is being judged for accuracy. There is a rule requiring GMs to post a NEW DC if they have changes to their roster or face a fine. Not delete their old DC and post a new DC . The most reasonable interpretation of the definite article and the requirement that GMs post NEW DCs is that you will judge THE most recent DC. This seems like a really stupid hill to die on considering Soup posted a correct DC based on his pre-trade roster, a correct DC based on his post-trade roster pursuant to YOUR rule that he post a new DC, and doesn't get the reward because ... I'm actually not sure why he's not getting the reward honestly. If someone were to say "If the President is late, the meeting will not start," the interpretation that that meant multiple Presidents were coming to the meeting would not only be unreasonable but simply incorrect. The correct language would be "If the Presidents are late" or "If any of the Presidents are late", a plural case used to denote the plural, or "If a President is late", an indefinite article to denote the existence of multiple. I agree that this is a really stupid hill to die on, but you are free to do so. |
|
|
|
Post by Herby New Year! on Jan 27, 2021 14:02:15 GMT -5
Day 1 DCs denotes multiple DCs. It could be multiple based on the multiple GMs, or multiple based on the rule Soup followed. It is ambiguous and we need to consider additional rules to determine its meaning. The use of the definite article denotes one DC is being judged for accuracy. There is a rule requiring GMs to post a NEW DC if they have changes to their roster or face a fine. Not delete their old DC and post a new DC . The most reasonable interpretation of the definite article and the requirement that GMs post NEW DCs is that you will judge THE most recent DC. This seems like a really stupid hill to die on considering Soup posted a correct DC based on his pre-trade roster, a correct DC based on his post-trade roster pursuant to YOUR rule that he post a new DC, and doesn't get the reward because ... I'm actually not sure why he's not getting the reward honestly. If someone were to say "If the President is late, the meeting will not start," the interpretation that that meant multiple Presidents were coming to the meeting would not only be unreasonable but simply incorrect. The correct language would be "If the Presidents are late" or "If any of the Presidents are late", a plural case used to denote the plural, or "If a President is late", an indefinite article to denote the existence of multiple. I agree that this is a really stupid hill to die on, but you are free to do so. I appreciate the out-of-context example of a definite article. Not because it is helpful, it is not, but because it demonstrates you want to move away from the context of these rules read in connection with each other. Glad we agree that this is a stupid hill to die on. |
|
|
|
Post by 20s on Jan 27, 2021 14:03:48 GMT -5
eric can you please address this rule: Any trade, transaction, or roster move that requires a depth chart change must be accompanied by a new post with a new DC.
Failure to do will result in a fine of 1000 currency.Do we need to do this, yes or no?
|
|
|
|
Post by Herby New Year! on Jan 27, 2021 14:13:01 GMT -5
If someone were to say "If the President is late, the meeting will not start," the interpretation that that meant multiple Presidents were coming to the meeting would not only be unreasonable but simply incorrect. The correct language would be "If the Presidents are late" or "If any of the Presidents are late", a plural case used to denote the plural, or "If a President is late", an indefinite article to denote the existence of multiple. I agree that this is a really stupid hill to die on, but you are free to do so. I appreciate the out-of-context example of a definite article. Not because it is helpful, it is not, but because it demonstrates you want to move away from the context of these rules read in connection with each other. Glad we agree that this is a stupid hill to die on. Actually I think we can fit the square peg into the round hole by adding a second rule that "If there is a change in the cabinet, a new President must be selected." If the old President showed up to the meeting, but the new president didn't, would the meeting start? |
|
|
|
Post by eric on Jan 27, 2021 14:32:58 GMT -5
eric can you please address this rule: Any trade, transaction, or roster move that requires a depth chart change must be accompanied by a new post with a new DC.
Failure to do will result in a fine of 1000 currency.Do we need to do this, yes or no? GMs need to do abide by everything the rules state, including this |
|
|
|
Post by eric on Jan 27, 2021 14:36:10 GMT -5
I appreciate the out-of-context example of a definite article. Not because it is helpful, it is not, but because it demonstrates you want to move away from the context of these rules read in connection with each other. Glad we agree that this is a stupid hill to die on. Actually I think we can fit the square peg into the round hole by adding a second rule that "If there is a change in the cabinet, a new President must be selected." If the old President showed up to the meeting, but the new president didn't, would the meeting start? If we add rules that contradict previous rules, we can generate many new legal scenarios. Or we can just read the rules as written, and when (as in this scenario) they are coherent and unambiguous, abide by them. |
|
|
|
Post by Herby New Year! on Jan 27, 2021 14:41:30 GMT -5
Actually I think we can fit the square peg into the round hole by adding a second rule that "If there is a change in the cabinet, a new President must be selected." If the old President showed up to the meeting, but the new president didn't, would the meeting start? If we add rules that contradict previous rules, we can generate many new legal scenarios. Or we can just read the rules as written, and when (as in this scenario) they are coherent and unambiguous, abide by them. I do not agree with your premise that the rules being discussed are coherent or unambiguous. You have pride of authorship that is clouding your judgment. |
|
|
|
Post by Herby New Year! on Jan 27, 2021 14:47:17 GMT -5
for future reference for everyone, if a GM posts multiple DCs that work, i'm entering whichever one i see first, not out of spite but because it's the one i see. to avoid the wrong one being entered, delete all but one DC before deadline FFS you clarified the "unambiguous and coherent" rules in this very thread. Shesh. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2021 14:48:15 GMT -5
eric please just be a little bit flexible or youre gonna lose multiple good gms here
|
|
|
|
Post by Herby New Year! on Jan 27, 2021 14:51:18 GMT -5
eric please just be a little bit flexible or youre gonna lose multiple good gms here For the record, I came to peace with the worst aspects of eric (see, e.g., this thread) because of the good (see, e.g., almost everything else he does). I'm not quitting over this - but I don't want to see other GMs leave because I do think eric is a great commish and they will enjoy the league. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2021 15:00:23 GMT -5
eric please just be a little bit flexible or youre gonna lose multiple good gms here For the record, I came to peace with the worst aspects of eric (see, e.g., this thread) because of the good (see, e.g., almost everything else he does). I'm not quitting over this - but I don't want to see other GMs leave because I do think eric is a great commish and they will enjoy the league. i agree but i hope youre braced for the "but if i am flexible here then someone will threaten to quit whenever they disagree with a rule or its interpretation" post |
|
|
|
Post by Odin on Jan 27, 2021 15:02:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Herby New Year! on Jan 27, 2021 15:13:30 GMT -5
For the record, I came to peace with the worst aspects of eric (see, e.g., this thread) because of the good (see, e.g., almost everything else he does). I'm not quitting over this - but I don't want to see other GMs leave because I do think eric is a great commish and they will enjoy the league. i agree but i hope youre braced for the "but if i am flexible here then someone will threaten to quit whenever they disagree with a rule or its interpretation" post Eric is not following his rules and is post facto clarifying them so that they make sense. Soup followed the rules in the most reasonable way possible. This is very different from a GM just not agreeing with a rule. Soup went out of his way to follow the rules to a T and eric is burying his head in the sand because he made a mistake and doesn't want to change a ruling he made before it was pointed out that the rules were not clear. There is a difference between changing your ruling because GMs don't like it and changing your ruling because the ruling was wrong. A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. |
|
|
|
Post by eric on Jan 27, 2021 16:13:44 GMT -5
For the record, I came to peace with the worst aspects of eric (see, e.g., this thread) because of the good (see, e.g., almost everything else he does). I'm not quitting over this - but I don't want to see other GMs leave because I do think eric is a great commish and they will enjoy the league. i agree but i hope youre braced for the "but if i am flexible here then someone will threaten to quit whenever they disagree with a rule or its interpretation" post to be clear, the reason i don't consider 'people will quit' in making decisions is not just because it opens every ruling to that (although that alone would be enough), but because it inevitably will lead to an unresolvable contradiction: GM A says they'll quit if i don't let GM A send bids late GM B says they'll quit if i DO let GM A send bids late (or whatever two GMs end up arguing about) |
|
Soup
New Member
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 401
Joined: January 2021
|
Post by Soup on Jan 27, 2021 16:17:09 GMT -5
i agree but i hope youre braced for the "but if i am flexible here then someone will threaten to quit whenever they disagree with a rule or its interpretation" post to be clear, the reason i don't consider 'people will quit' in making decisions is not just because it opens every ruling to that (although that alone would be enough), but because it inevitably will lead to an unresolvable contradiction: GM A says they'll quit if i don't let GM A send bids late GM B says they'll quit if i DO let GM A send bids late (or whatever two GMs end up arguing about) That's not the same thing. There's no rule interpretation in bids are due at x time. |
|
|
|
Post by eric on Jan 28, 2021 13:32:26 GMT -5
skrouse please reduce Odin's reward by 4k for having james blackmon jr. as backup pg, he is not eligible odin your pg2 is now derrick low
|
|
