(05-28-2020, 12:36 PM)Daybe Wrote:If you think a 5M punishment is anything besides a slap on the wrist then you're wrong. You could've earned it back with a 2,000 article in double media. Or making 3 decent graphics. There's so many different ways to earn money in this league lol. And there's been plenty of times appellate team has reduced a ruling btw

Anyways, I can see both sides to your argument. Obviously i don't think it was as bad as the precedent, but i also think any less they reduce the fine the punishment just becomes whatever, almost encouraging people to tamper knowing the league won't come down on them hard. and serious intent or not it was tampering

(05-28-2020, 04:50 PM)JKortesi81 Wrote:Nothing is quite like being in Head Office.

Everyone joins up thinking that they're going to really help out the league they love more than most anything in this world, and they're fresh faced and excited.

They do a few simple projects or tasks, and the NSFL Universe smiles on them, the occasional "good work so and so!" and that fuels a larger desire to make bigger changes. Those bigger changes that every single person that's ever joined an HO in any sim league (or at least the three important ones, PBE, SHL, NSFL) have in their heads "I'm going to join, and i'm going to change this and it'll be my mark on the league!"

That bigger change either goes through and it's met with 50%+ of the public shitting on it, OR it doesn't even see the light of day and gets shut down sooner than anticipated. This creates quite the dulling of enthusiasm.

And then, the coup de grace, someone in the public does something stupid. They make a joke that's tampering to some people, they trade a draft pick they don't have, they post 47,023 lewd pictures in a discord, they don't update a player correctly, etc.

The HO makes a ruling, usually based off precedence, that naturally the person who fucked up doesn't like. They then go on a tirade about how they're the best, and its HO's fault that they fucked up and shouldn't be punished, or it wasn't their fault etc.

More of the public decides to champion this cause, and shit on the head office as a whole, as though its their fault someone else broke the rules.

Like Dwyer said, then comes the "HO SHOULDN'T USE PRECEDENCE" arguments, which i agree with. They shouldn't. They should have leeway as each individual case tends to be different each time.

But they can't, because the same shitty people in the public screamed the last time they tried that. "YOU ONLY GAVE SO AND SO *insert lesser punishment for a lesser instance here*!

The Head Office member that once was bright eyed and bushy tailed realizes that their interest in the league isn't what it used to be, and its mainly because of the "Damned if you do, Damned if you dont" reaction from the public.

The HO member either develops a "Go Fuck Yourself, Whatever" attitude towards the negativity and sticks around, or they just bail on HO.

Another bright eyed and bushy tailed Head Office member is hired.

Rinse, and repeat.



Being in head office is fun. You're shit on 90% of the time for things that you may not have even really agreed with in the first place. You're a constant target for vitriol from people who usually have no idea what they're talking about, but their opinion is the only one that's right. If you're not perfect, it'll end up badly for you. Even if you overcome the odds and stick it out, there will always be a small pocket of people who internally think you should be fired for past things, even if you did 1,000 awesome things for the league after the 1 bad thing. It's the worst.

It's like the old saying goes: "A man can build a thousand bridges in his life. But he sucks just one cock, he won't be known as a bridge builder, he'll just be known as a cocksucker".

Props to those that willingly have put themselves through that ringer and got us to this point where the NSFL is pretty great.

(05-28-2020, 04:53 PM)retrospace111 Wrote:bring back 1.5x media dude

(05-28-2020, 04:07 PM)WannabeFinn Wrote:Hi Dwyer

(05-28-2020, 05:21 PM)retrospace111 Wrote:lol precedent is much different from case to case. A case requires precedent when it is similar enough to another case. When two cases are very different then precedent needs to get thrown out the window. Let's make up an example. Let's say there is this player, who isn't a GM, but he is the heir to a  team, and will soon be Co-GM. He's an active war room member and is very active in this team's operations. Let's say this person engages in a contact with a soon to be free agent and tampers them and tries to convince them to come to his team. That's tampering. He had multiple contacts with the person and stayed engaged with them in a conversation. Now there is no precedent for this because this has never happened. So HO says ok 5 Mil fine and 2 seasons of GM ban. Ouch. This dude lost a lot of money and now cannot take up the Co-GM position he was about to take over. Fair ruling IMO, good job HO! Now, you have another guy, this really toxic dude who has not and is not involved with the war room of his team. This guy has no league job, and is not involved with any league operations. Now let's say he's doing some trash talking and then takes a shot at another team's impending free agent and comments on how this guy should come to his team because their team is way better. That's tampering, even if it was a joke. No one's arguing there. That dumbass should have kept his mouth shut. Everyone agrees. Now, HO has a decision. Is there a precedent here for an isolated contact from a random player like this vs the repeated contact from a war room member on a team. HO should determine that no, the two cases differed in severity, and while it may be a joke, it should still be punishable. HO will then say, we will reduce your fine by half compared to the precedent, meaning you are fined 2.5 million, and there is still a ban on GMing for 2 seasons. This is how it should go. Instead, HO will rule that the cases are similar, and then enact the full punishment for this toxic dude.

This is not how it should be, and there should be change. There are always going to be people who disagree with any decision made, and you can't please them all. That's why we have an appeals team, who in theory, should be using an unbiased perspective on the case. In the case that HO made an unfair ruling due to sheer stupidity or because of conflicts of interest, that's where the appellate team steps in and crosses the line. Instead we have a system where the appellate group rarely goes against HO for god knows why. Maybe it's because they don't want to face backlash. Who knows? Something needs to be changed.

(05-29-2020, 05:37 AM)TomHanks Wrote:Just for clarity’s sake, are you referring the the butter tampering case in your example? Because the first butter tampering case was a carbon copy of yours lmao
1. He wasn’t in the war room
2. He definitely wasn’t lined up to be co-GM
3. The player in question referenced potentially opting out
4. Butter made a comment that “Safety is kind of a need” in New Orleans, which lead to the punishment

Your argument is based on the two events being completely different. They weren’t. Talk to anyone who was around when that happened