(10-06-2020, 04:59 PM)Oles Wrote: Yeah don't agree with GMs/HO having any sort of PT pass. PT pass was originally intended as an extra thing to get certain jobs more interest, especially those that were either A) doing a lot of work that would cause it to be hard to keep up with a player (like simmer where you have to spend many hours doing work in the file and sim) or B) jobs that do extremely crucial work that were not getting a lot of applicants, such as Updater.

The optics of HO/GMs voting on whether to give themselves a pay raise is incredibly funny, because it looks like y'all are patting yourself on the back for a good job. These passes were never meant to be handed out willy nilly, instead a commodity for only the worst of league work. Now any HO or GM member gets free UW even if they may not be doing the work required. 0 safeguards have been put in place to prevent HO/GM members from just coasting and getting a free ultimus week, and this vote shows they will probably vote on PT pass in the future and get it. Might as well give every job PT pass at this point.

(10-06-2020, 05:10 PM)Opera_Phantom Wrote: I agree with Oles. Give every job full PT pass + UW.

No bias.

(10-06-2020, 06:11 PM)Baron1898 Wrote:

(10-06-2020, 05:10 PM)Opera_Phantom Wrote: I agree with Oles. Give every job full PT pass + UW.

No bias.

Yeah no bias on this front but that’d be really nice

Also Rule 1 not passing is a travesty. Awards committee already had to work around it once and everyone was fine with it not being there. I sincerely hope this gets passed next offseason, the 60% limit is more than enough.

Also also, the clear and obvious GM/HO split on Rule 6 is hilarious.

(10-06-2020, 03:03 PM)Billybolo53 Wrote:

Quote:The S25 ISFL Rules Summit has recently come to a close.  GMs, Head Office members and Department Heads were encouraged to submit proposed changes to the rulebook and league procedure. With 21 voting members (14 teams, 5 HO members, 1 league owner, and 1 simmer), 15 votes were needed for a proposal to pass.

Below is the full list of proposed rule changes and the final voting results for each.

1. Eliminate Rule 4 Section 3 of the Awards Section as it too strictly limits player flexibility. Rule 4 Section 2 (the 60% rule) has shown to be more than enough of a clear limiter without Section 3 on top of it.

14 For - 7 Against
Rule Does NOT Pass

Who voted against this? This was literally passed as an emergency vote for last seasons awards. The way the current rule is worded most people playing out of position, even in one formation, will be ineligible for awards.

Eliminate Rule 4 Section 3 of the Awards Section as it to strictly limits player flexibility. Rule 4 Section 2 (the 60% rule) has shown to be more than enough of a clear limiter without Section 3 on top of it

4. Positional eligibility for award- A player is only eligible for awards at a position that they actually played during the season, not necessarily their listed position. A Player's position in terms of eligibility for awards will be decided by the following:
      1. The FL position will be considered the "Flex Position," and is a position unique to itself.
      2. A player must be listed as the starter at a specific position on the depth chart at least 60% (3/5) of the season.
      3. A player must NOT play outside their listed position during any time throughout the season, UNLESS they play in the FL position OR the FB
            position (not the designation).

The bold is what we wanted to eliminate. 60% rule is more than enough, we don't need to check depth charts every week.

(10-06-2020, 03:03 PM)Billybolo53 Wrote:

Quote:The S25 ISFL Rules Summit has recently come to a close.  GMs, Head Office members and Department Heads were encouraged to submit proposed changes to the rulebook and league procedure. With 21 voting members (14 teams, 5 HO members, 1 league owner, and 1 simmer), 15 votes were needed for a proposal to pass.

Below is the full list of proposed rule changes and the final voting results for each.

1. Eliminate Rule 4 Section 3 of the Awards Section as it too strictly limits player flexibility. Rule 4 Section 2 (the 60% rule) has shown to be more than enough of a clear limiter without Section 3 on top of it.

14 For - 7 Against
Rule Does NOT Pass

Who voted against this? This was literally passed as an emergency vote for last seasons awards. The way the current rule is worded most people playing out of position, even in one formation, will be ineligible for awards.

Eliminate Rule 4 Section 3 of the Awards Section as it to strictly limits player flexibility. Rule 4 Section 2 (the 60% rule) has shown to be more than enough of a clear limiter without Section 3 on top of it

4. Positional eligibility for award- A player is only eligible for awards at a position that they actually played during the season, not necessarily their listed position. A Player's position in terms of eligibility for awards will be decided by the following:
      1. The FL position will be considered the "Flex Position," and is a position unique to itself.
      2. A player must be listed as the starter at a specific position on the depth chart at least 60% (3/5) of the season.
      3. A player must NOT play outside their listed position during any time throughout the season, UNLESS they play in the FL position OR the FB
            position (not the designation).

The bold is what we wanted to eliminate. 60% rule is more than enough, we don't need to check depth charts every week.

(10-06-2020, 02:51 PM)infinitempg Wrote:

(10-06-2020, 02:45 PM)mithrandir Wrote: Lots of incredibly close decisions. As a GM, I just want to say it is ridiculous that GMs get an UW pass but HO does not get a full PT pass.

But the optics of HO giving themselves PT passes is really bad lol