i was <s>elected</s> selected to lead. not to read.

"I don't understand why GMs are being included in these decisions. I feel like some of the issues that cropped up that ended up going to HO to be discussed were people in leadership positions whose teams would be directly affected by the outcome of HO decisions. I do know that some felt transparency had been an issue, but I feel like that could be fixed with the DC redesigns you'd suggested.

Also, where does juniors fit into this? Are we still keeping juniors separate with a separate commissioner, or is juniors now falling under this umbrella as well? I don't really care as long as there's a line of responsibility somewhere."

-- Like I said this was just a rough draft. I got some good feedback, and I'll make a part two shortly. I'll actually do a different system without GM's. The original idea was that we already had "elected" people with a high role, but as it's been pointed out that view is too one-sided. Yes, it sound hypocritical, but the eventual goal is for most decisisions to be based on the council, and not just me. Also I want to let the SMJHL handle most minor-league related scenarios. Obviously we'll collaborate if it directly involves both parties.





"One thing that had been talked about was punishment sizes--when there were simultaneous tampering and multi issues, those two were brought up as the punishments seeming off-balance. Perhaps that's an area that could be looked at on revisiting?"

"Also, specifically, under juniors rosters, the minimum SMJHL player limit is 17 (I'm assuming 3 lines of skaters and 2 goalies) but on the consolidated rulebook it says 18. I think 17 is correct but would like to confirm?"

-- Yeah, stacking penalties and corrections will be looked into greatly.



"LOVING the reorganization of threads already. One request I have: could we potentially move the player development way up, maybe even all the way up to fall under create a player? I feel like it would be easier to direct rookies from the create-a-player section directly down to the next section when they're confused about what to do with their player after creation."

-- I would rather not move it above SHL Games and Community, but I could swap develompent for player central.



"Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I feel like this isn't a big issue in seniors, because in the beginning of the season you're tweaking lines and looking to improve your overall team record, and towards the end of the season you've got teams who are on the playoff bubble. Not against it per se, I just think it's nice but not as essential as some of the other stuff on the list.."

-- There isn't a problem with it right now. It was just another subtle idea to make the season more interesting. It'll be a small experiment. If nobody cares we can drop it next season.



"A little out of the box, but maybe we could arrange some cross-platform advertising with the puckstothenet comic website? I don't know how wide their audience is, but might be a way to bring some new blood in in exchange for throwing them a little coffee money. http://www.puckstothe.net/"

-- At work right now, and I don't know much about it, but if you think it can help go for it or contact <a href='index.php?showuser=1290' rel='nofollow' alt='profile link' class='user-tagged mgroup-10'>vbottas17</a> in recruitment.



"^Not on the PT team anymore, partially for this reason. It's tough to keep coming up with creative ideas without specific community input--this is EXACTLY why we opened a suggestion box, to which one person (thank you, Crutch! has submitted fresh and creative ideas. I like that there's something every week with schedules and expectations. It's fine if you want to introduce a breath of fresh air to PTs, but for the love of god, suggest something specific. (Would be fine with the SF deadline extended over the weekend, though.)"

-- I know it's tough. There's some room for overlap doing same task different seasons if the content is different enough. We'll do the best we can, and encourage more ideas.



"We essentially already addressed this when we created the rubric--it's on a 0-3 scale. Grading like that allows for partial credit to people who are just a bit shy of wordcount or missed a logo but appeared to give half a shit. You'll get a 3 unless you fuck up and miss a requirement; you'll get a 2 for missing multiple requirements, and 1s or 0s almost never happen. The rubric is pinned in the PT thread for those who have questions; the arbitration team only had 2 cases over an entire season. Grading is fine IMHO."

-- Jjaybs and i discussed this, and yeah a Yes/No system wouldn't be the best. There should be some level of grading, but maybe a little more simplified (Great/OK/Meh) kind of thing.



We opened PGSs to be league-wide for this reason. One thing I'd like to see is to have the cap raised to 40 overall but combined with the PGS cap--you can supplement your cap with your choice of PTs, milestones, or PGSs. This would also be easier on us as updaters--not having to track two separate caps.

-- PGS's are one thing I worry may be a little outdated to begin with. It's a good way to get TPE, but in terms of content it doesn't really provide much for the league and feels more like homework than content.



"Awesome in theory, poor in practice. We didn't get a ballot until very late bc Buster got busy, but voting happened within the week as soon as we did. I'd propose that, instead of the head being responsible for creating the ballot and the committee voting, the task could feasibly be split up into each AC member being responsible for one 'section' of the ballot. Then if someone's inactive, the head can come fill in for their ballot section and replace them for the following season. Thoughts?"

-- I mean the point of the head is to essential whip everybody's votes. I know buster's been busy, and we can work together next season to get it done. I don't think it's a lot to ask that the discussions start shortly after the last game and be ready by the end of the playoffs.



"I've made way more friends on the Discord than I ever did on the site. I think having the glut of 'official' X discussion threads makes the general forum discussion thread obsolete and discourages cross-team random chatting."

-- I'm not saying remove discord from SHL. Chats are essential, and I'm glad it almost unifies us from the chatzy days. I'm just saying if there's something fun or interesting that could be shared, i encourage you to try to do it on the forums so that more people can see.




"This is something I feel like I've been shouting into the wind about for a long time, but.....we have almost NO procedural guides for jobs, especially for the heads of jobs. Improving a job starts with having a codified process and task checklists, and in a lot of places we don't have that but should. Updaters is actually one of the few places we both have a guide for players and for updaters themselves."

-- As I bring life back to some of these jobs that have been kinda dry recently, I tell the lead the responsibilites. There's no set procedure the league has as long as it's done properly. so like recruitment, i say hey we need people, we have these resources, do what you think is best to recruit, and let me know any concerns/ideas.



[scale topic] - i'll look when i get home.



[Baller's topic]

-- That's definitely an important issue to discuss. My idea is not to limit what GM's do with their lines, but at the same time we want to push some level of realism. What level that should be is up to debate, and one that the future HO group may decide. I don't think I feel comfortable deciding that decision myself for this season, and will be decided upon before S33.