|
|
Post by Daniel - Canucks on Feb 21, 2019 14:40:19 GMT -5
I can’t believe this is being overturned after Vancouver wins both polls. Vancouver followed all the waiver rules won the claim and then won BOTH polls to award him the player he acquired LEGALLY in the first place. Vancouver didn't win both polls. It is debatable whether Vancouver won EITHER poll. No vote in the 13 year history of this league has ever been majority wins. It has always been 2/3 majority vote wins, or 8/12 votes. The first poll needed a recount because of the assumption by some managers that Detroit had already switched its vote, when in fact that was not the case. Without singling any person or persons out, I will say that there was enough concern to justify the recount (with complete information) that is now validated by the current poll result. Why did you say to Jeff in the first poll that his "vote would be tallied accordingly" if you apparently can't even see which GM voted for who? |
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Feb 21, 2019 14:47:23 GMT -5
Vancouver didn't win both polls. It is debatable whether Vancouver won EITHER poll. No vote in the 13 year history of this league has ever been majority wins. It has always been 2/3 majority vote wins, or 8/12 votes. The first poll needed a recount because of the assumption by some managers that Detroit had already switched its vote, when in fact that was not the case. Without singling any person or persons out, I will say that there was enough concern to justify the recount (with complete information) that is now validated by the current poll result. Why did you say to Jeff in the first poll that his "vote would be tallied accordingly" if you apparently can't even see which GM voted for who? That was my reply to Jeff before you informed him that he could in fact switch his own vote. This was a feature that I was actually unaware of because it is relatively new to proboards and given the color scheme of our message board, is difficult to see if not specifically looking for the option. After Jeff was informed, I (and other managers) assumed he switched his vote and that it was reflected in the count and would not have to still be accounted for manually later on. This was why you were not immediately awarded Meier and why the poll results were ignored for the most part. The final numbers appeared to be pretty self-explanatory. |
|
|
|
Post by Daniel - Canucks on Feb 21, 2019 15:07:52 GMT -5
Why did you say to Jeff in the first poll that his "vote would be tallied accordingly" if you apparently can't even see which GM voted for who? That was my reply to Jeff before you informed him that he could in fact switch his own vote. This was a feature that I was actually unaware of because it is relatively new to proboards and given the color scheme of our message board, is difficult to see if not specifically looking for the option. After Jeff was informed, I (and other managers) assumed he switched his vote and that it was reflected in the count and would not have to still be accounted for manually later on. This was why you were not immediately awarded Meier and why the poll results were ignored for the most part. The final numbers appeared to be pretty self-explanatory. He did switch his vote though after I informed him, BEFORE the 2-week window when the poll closed. "I) Each poll will be open for a maximum of two weeks." Who's to say how long it should've taken him to edit his selection other than the fact that he had two weeks to do so. The same playing field as any other manager who wanted to edit their vote, WITHIN the two week time frame. |
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Feb 21, 2019 15:29:27 GMT -5
That was my reply to Jeff before you informed him that he could in fact switch his own vote. This was a feature that I was actually unaware of because it is relatively new to proboards and given the color scheme of our message board, is difficult to see if not specifically looking for the option. After Jeff was informed, I (and other managers) assumed he switched his vote and that it was reflected in the count and would not have to still be accounted for manually later on. This was why you were not immediately awarded Meier and why the poll results were ignored for the most part. The final numbers appeared to be pretty self-explanatory. He did switch his vote though after I informed him, BEFORE the 2-week window when the poll closed. "I) Each poll will be open for a maximum of two weeks." Who's to say how long it should've taken him to edit his selection other than the fact that he had two weeks to do so. The same playing field as any other manager who wanted to edit their vote, WITHIN the two week time frame. Typically if someone is going to change a vote it is done prior to all the votes being cast to prevent tampering, collusion, etc. The two week window is in place to ensure managers vote in a timely manner, not so managers can flip-flop votes. Perhaps the next iteration of the rule needs to formally include a "or until all votes have been cast" clause. And while Jeff is not wrong for doing what he did, it caused a lot of confusion, enough so that I thought a recount was necessary. This recount allowed you to still (presumably) secure Jeff's vote while allowing all other managers to anonymously place their votes where they see fit with complete information. |
|
|
|
Post by Daniel - Canucks on Feb 21, 2019 15:40:20 GMT -5
He did switch his vote though after I informed him, BEFORE the 2-week window when the poll closed. "I) Each poll will be open for a maximum of two weeks." Who's to say how long it should've taken him to edit his selection other than the fact that he had two weeks to do so. The same playing field as any other manager who wanted to edit their vote, WITHIN the two week time frame. Typically if someone is going to change a vote it is done prior to all the votes being cast to prevent tampering, collusion, etc. The two week window is in place to ensure managers vote in a timely manner, not so managers can flip-flop votes. Perhaps the next iteration of the rule needs to formally include a "or until all votes have been cast" clause. And while Jeff is not wrong for doing what he did, it caused a lot of confusion, enough so that I thought a recount was necessary. This recount allowed you to still (presumably) secure Jeff's vote while allowing all other managers to anonymously place their votes where they see fit with complete information. So in the end, myself speaking up with the suggestion that you could indeed edit your vote fucked me in the end. Next time I'll shut up and allow the Commissioner to make informative statements as such. |
|
So exciting.
You better make that pick or trade it! I'm excited to see if we can use up all the draft picks this year.