2022 Event 2 Schedule 80 Mil NO DH

My only goal here was trying to prevent newbies from getting a penalty and then getting disinterested in the tour. Most of the violators were first time players.

Reversal is worse and not necessary IMO. I think your point here is a good one--and the reason I don't question decisions because I am viewing from my own self interest. And on the one hand, it is refreshing to see decisions made by a human vs by an algorithm or rule when there is nuance to consider.

Like I said, I don't question the decision.

Like a lot of things, this person could have ingratiated himself to his league mates by being honest there first. That was my main point. Sometimes it is just about managing emotional intel...

It takes me a good part of a whole DAY to sit down and go through 16 leagues and try to get the chart of stadiums used updated, so with trying to herd everyone into leagues, I usually wait until they are ALL loaded.

This deserves emphasis, for the big picture.Thanks Moose

EMails went out on mostly Thursday evening after I got everyone's Event 2 stadium plugged into the spreadsheet. The violators were Jumper 92, Falcon1962, astros70 (all first time Barnstormers), stevea47 and MIKEARCHAMBAULT (who hasn't even responded to my email as of yet) Should they have notified everyone in the leagues that a change was being made ? Probably but they are NEW and I think their only thought was avoiding the penalty I threatened them with.

I have stated in an earlier post that I am going to send an email to the league once such a change has been made in the interest of avoiding a penalty. So notifications WILL GO OUT going forward.

As I said, I will reverse the changes if everyone feels that strongly about it.

I remember when changing stadiums to avoid a penalty was a fairly common thing except we had to get SOM involved. With the invites system, it's a lot easier to do. I still don't think anyone makes any changes to their team because another player went from a 3 neutral to a 2 moderate pitching.

At least in my case, it is a done deal. I don't advocate for a switch back. And I reached out to the individual as well to clear the air I hope.
Thanks as always Moose

Like I said earlier, I'm not protesting any park change that's already happened, I'm only asking about the policy itself going forward. The team in my league went from Comiskey to Griffith, clearly that is not a significant change and doesn't really matter. But what if someone switched from righty to lefty after seeing they were in a righty-heavy league? Clearly that would be unfair and should not be allowed.

It's a worthy goal to want newbies to maintain interest in the tournament. But last year the only people who incurred penalties were so far out of the running that the penalties didn't need to actually be assessed because they had no impact on who made the semis. So I guess my preference would be to just let people incur the penalties and don't bother even telling them. If they don't know they've been penalized they won't lose any interest. Then at the end of the year assess any penalties that would actually have an effect on the semifinals. If players are good enough to make the semis then they're good enough to read the rules first.

Or, get with Strat and ask them to code something on their end, like a popup message if someone clicks Ready to Draft with a stadium that would incur a penalty. Or sticky a notice at the top of the screen where you choose a park for any Barnstormers league, with a link to the stadium groupings. Like I said, I understand the goal and think it's a worthy one, but I don't see how the solution can be to let people change parks after they've already seen their opponents' parks and rosters.

As far as Frankie's comments, I really don't think your opinion of another player should change based on any of this. They were offered a mulligan by the commissioner and took it, they did nothing wrong in my estimation.

I can agree with most of that Max--all of it is reasonable.

But we each also can view how to perceive someone's actions for a league we each pay to play in.

I offered the caveat for my comment that it was just the way I roll. The other 10 people may not care and that is OK with me. I won't be decrying anyone's apathy.

Doesn't matter to me if I am the only one who feels that way; still doesn't change my perception.

My only goal here was trying to prevent newbies from getting a penalty and then getting disinterested in the tour. Most of the violators were first time players. Obviously not reading and or not caring about the rules. At least one of them came in and read all of this and emailed me (Jumper92) and said "Take my team away if this is such a problem for everyone... I don't need this right now." and said he wont be playing in any more events. Doesn't sound like he is trying to game the game, sounds like he just made an ignorant pick. And in none of the violations did anyone go from a lefty or righty to something else. One went from a 3 to a 2 and one went a similar one grouping move.

It takes me a good part of a whole DAY to sit down and go through 16 leagues and try to get the chart of stadiums used updated, so with trying to herd everyone into leagues, I usually wait until they are ALL loaded.

I didn't expect THIS MUCH FLACK over what I considered minor moves. Heck all of last year I recorded violations in my spreadsheet but never had SOM actually post the minus points, because in every case - the player was too far down the list for it to matter. Almost all of the time, those that "violate" aren't top tier players.

Anyway, if it really means that much, I will reverse the changes made, but I really think that people are going WAY overboard here.

in my league team went from 7-7 10-10 to 7-7 8-8. I think we have to trust mooses judgement. It is obvious that the stadium switch is a non factor and only done to avoid the penalty for newbies and not to gain an advantage

I don't think anyone is advocating for a rollback of stadium changes already made.

Opponent ballparks is one factor to be considered in building one's team. Allowing a change after the draft is opening the door to abuse, whether the abuse actually happens or not.

Going forward, please do not allow stadium changes after the draft. I would be 100% OK with changing the rules to make whether to simply issue a warning or to assess a penalty at the discretion of the commissioner. If it's not going to make a difference in who makes the playoffs anyway, who cares about the penalty. But stadium changes just should not be allowed, ever.

I can also "review" each stadium change requested and make sure they are "close" to what they had. If someone wants to change to something drastically different than what they had, I can issue a NO and maybe even offer a suggestion.

Like I said, this really surprised me that in EVENT 2 - that 5 players messed this up. You got 6 other "types" to choose from but you hit upon the 1 in 7 ? How about the guy who used THE SAME stadium as Event 1 ? THAT NEWBIE is gonna be devastated that he cant use the stadium he has been in hundreds of times down the street from him. This rule is the hardest thing for new players to "get".

And the only reason the "other tournaments" don't use this format is because it's too hard to manage.

25 points (wins) can make or break a players chances of making the semi's - even though this year we are headed to top "92" !!

So in summary, I propose reviewing each change and making a judgement call on them, notifying everyone in the league that the change was REVIEWED and made, and allowing a change to be made ONCE PER YEAR per player. And I will get SOM to POST the penalty rather than sitting on them.

Are we all good on the "rules going forward" meeting with everyone's acceptance ?

MM

Are we all good on the "rules going forward" meeting with everyone's acceptance ?

MM

I'd much rather have you leave the stadium alone and instead decide whether to warn or penalize offenders.