KRFL - a football simulation league
Forums
KRFL :: Forums :: KRFL Forums :: 2020 League Business
Amendment Proposal: Increased Trade Proposal << Previous thread | Next thread >>
Go to page   <<        >>  
Moderators: noodles, MarkB
Author Post
Steelers
Fri Mar 27 2020, 12:47p.m.
Registered Member #100
Joined: Sat Jan 25 2020, 07:43p.m.

Posts: 60
there is no need to change the amendment process. Your first sentence is illogical. Voting on a package which has separate elements is different than voting on the separate elements separately. Your individual objection to the package does not deal with the problem of monopolies in the league , an issue which was discussed in previous posts.
Back to top
mark
Fri Mar 27 2020, 03:05p.m.
Registered Member #45
Joined: Wed May 05 2010, 11:29p.m.

Posts: 667
Personally I am starting to feel bullied by your presence (Jim)in this process. I’m now going to wait for voting and vote as I see fit. It’s starting to just not be worth the bother.
Signing off until voting time.👋
Back to top
noodles
Fri Mar 27 2020, 04:06p.m.
Webmaster

Registered Member #1
Joined: Mon Feb 18 2008, 02:12a.m.

Posts: 1185
I don't see how my sentence is illogical at all. I asked if it were the case that if the package amendment failed, were we going to have another round of votes to deal with the individual elements, something we have never done previously. It's a simple question. If the answer is yes, we would indeed need to adjust the amendment process to accommodate the change in procedure (Maybe someone else would also like to propose an Idea A backed up by an Idea B in case Idea A doesn't pass. You were clear that you expected a second vote: "As my amendment proposals state, the separate elements of the comprehensive package are to be voted on only if the comprehensive package is rejected."
Back to top
MarkB
Fri Mar 27 2020, 09:13p.m.
Mark Blume

Registered Member #81
Joined: Mon Oct 14 2013, 08:54a.m.

Posts: 1282
noodles wrote ...

Just a procedural question. Are we going to have an additional vote on the individual components of the comprehensive package should it fail to pass? If that is indeed the case, then going forward we need to change the amendment process to make it clear that multiple proposals can be made, each contingent upon the success or failure of the initial proposal, each requiring another vote.


----------------------

Sorry I have not responded until now. Work has been a mess this week because of vague government imposed stay at home orders.

I intent was call for a vote on BOTH the comprehensive package and each of the individual proposals during the one-time voting process. However, it would be made clear the the vote on the individual proposals would be irrelevant if the comprehensive package passed.

If anyone has an issue with that, please offer your suggestion.
Back to top
MarkB
Fri Mar 27 2020, 09:16p.m.
Mark Blume

Registered Member #81
Joined: Mon Oct 14 2013, 08:54a.m.

Posts: 1282
Tampa Bay feels the same way as Bay City about this proposal.
Back to top
noodles
Sat Mar 28 2020, 03:16a.m.
Webmaster

Registered Member #1
Joined: Mon Feb 18 2008, 02:12a.m.

Posts: 1185
Thanks for clarifying that, Mark. That wasn't at all evident in the discussion. The only problem I see is what if the package passes but one of the elements of the package fails on a separate vote. Which takes precedence? To be honest, I'm not really sure why the separate elements are even on the ballot given Jim's insistent argument that his finely tuned proposal requires all the elements working together in concert to achieve his desired result. If one or two legs of a three-legged tool are removed, we are left with something that nobody can sit their asses on.
Back to top
Steelers
Sat Mar 28 2020, 08:07a.m.
Registered Member #100
Joined: Sat Jan 25 2020, 07:43p.m.

Posts: 60
mark wrote ...

Personally I am starting to feel bullied by your presence (Jim)in this process. I’m now going to wait for voting and vote as I see fit. It’s starting to just not be worth the bother.
Signing off until voting time.👋


I have agreed with several of your ideas and opposed others.
I discuss ideas, never attack persons.




[ Edited Sat Mar 28 2020, 08:21a.m. ]
Back to top
Steelers
Sat Mar 28 2020, 08:13a.m.
Registered Member #100
Joined: Sat Jan 25 2020, 07:43p.m.

Posts: 60
noodles wrote ...

Thanks for clarifying that, Mark. That wasn't at all evident in the discussion. The only problem I see is what if the package passes but one of the elements of the package fails on a separate vote. Which takes precedence? To be honest, I'm not really sure why the separate elements are even on the ballot given Jim's insistent argument that his finely tuned proposal requires all the elements working together in concert to achieve his desired result. If one or two legs of a three-legged tool are removed, we are left with something that nobody can sit their asses on.


If the package passes, there will be no voting on the individual elements.

If the package fails, the various elements still provide some options for owners who either think the present rules provide incentives for tanking or monopolies. I hope the package passes because it provides both factions some relief.
Back to top
MarkB
Sat Mar 28 2020, 08:28a.m.
Mark Blume

Registered Member #81
Joined: Mon Oct 14 2013, 08:54a.m.

Posts: 1282
If the package passes, there will be no voting on the individual elements.


[/quote1585397926]
-------------------------

That statement is not true. We will vote ONCE and ONCE only on ALL proposals. As I have stated, the comprehensive package AND each individual proposal will be on the ballot and voted on at the SAME time, unless the proposal is withdrawn before the vote. The vote will list the comprehensive package first with the stipulation that if it passes, the votes on the individual proposals will be null and void. If the comprehensive package fails to pass, we will NOT conduct a second vote on the individual proposals at a later date. It is too much work for me to do so, we've never done it before, and we aren't going to start now.

[ Edited Sat Mar 28 2020, 08:29a.m. ]
Back to top
Steelers
Sat Mar 28 2020, 08:33a.m.
Registered Member #100
Joined: Sat Jan 25 2020, 07:43p.m.

Posts: 60
I did not mean to overstep.
You are using a process which produces the same results.
I am not trying to make you do too much work and did not mean to imply you had to vote at different times.
Thanks for clearing that up.
Back to top
Go to page   <<        >>   

Jump:     Back to top

Syndicate this thread: rss 0.92 Syndicate this thread: rss 2.0 Syndicate this thread: RDF
Powered by e107 Forum System