(03-31-2020, 02:53 PM)TeyonSchavari Wrote:Hello everyone,

This punishment was formed using a similar case as precedent found HERE.

(03-31-2020, 06:53 PM)NamelessNate Wrote:So did the Colorado GMs file the tampering charges or is HO being the Judge Jury Witnesses and Exectutioner?

(03-31-2020, 05:02 PM)MrStennett Wrote:You guys really are something. What a shining moment for the NSFL. I suppose I could go root around the media section for all the hit pieces written about Jiggly and we could make that a thing, since we’re all about being petty right now. Remember, I was there when this all happened and it was relayed to us that Muford had talked to his GMs. In fact, I heard it twice from two different people who probably should know. You all want to be pissed at Jiggly, fine. I’m not thrilled about how the whole situation went down either, but this a damn farce if I’ve ever seen one before. I hope everyone here is paying attention to how stuff in this league goes down, because it’s apparently run on childish bullshit. Jiggly may not have had the heart to defend himself here, but I sure as hell will. Prepare for my incoming punishment thread because I’m probably not being nice or whatever that obviously useless post from the other day said.

Also look directly to reply on this thread by @TubbyTim69 for a fine example of why he shouldn’t be a GM anywhere. Seriously? Grow up dude.

(04-01-2020, 03:25 AM)roastfuego Wrote:I mean he did tamper. He spoke to an individual on another team without reaching out to that teams GM, which is against the rules and lead to the tampering claim.

(03-31-2020, 04:40 PM)manicmav36 Wrote:Jiggly was instructed directly that he needed to contact GMs before speaking with players, as always required and as shown in the screenshot from the article. He chose not to. So...

(04-02-2020, 03:11 PM)AdamS Wrote:So you mean at the beginning of the process. Maybe I'm reading this wrong.

Because what I'm seeing is that permission was already given. Conversations were already happening and then when your move didn't work and people just continued talking (literally within the same 40 hour period) you decided that the 2nd part (which again..was a continuation of the 1st with permission that had literally just been given already).

So maybe I'm seeing it wrong here and you didn't punish someone because you demanded a 2nd round of permissions for the same existing conversations in the same time frame.