Login

***bluesfan55*** · 08-21-2021, 09:25 AM

08-21-2021, 01:03 AMACapitalChicago Wrote:
08-21-2021, 01:02 AMRenoJacksonHS Wrote: I've seen enough Formula 1 to know HAM always gets favorable rulings

Okay but Seb is the best

justice for hungary

ty to @High Stick King @EvilAllBran and @Ragnar for the sigs

LordBirdman · 08-21-2021, 09:45 AM

08-21-2021, 09:12 AMSegi Wrote: The main reason this feels weird to me, is that technically HAM didn't break any rule. You don't have to sign your rookies and the rulebook is pretty clear about what happens if you don't. (Other teams can bid on them.)

Now if we're accepting verified contract agreements on discord as official signings, HAM gets punished here for doing absolutely nothing wrong.

But if we don't accept that and say that the contracts have to be posted by a certain deadline, the owners just, within a couple of hours, created a new solution to a situation that wasn't explicitly mentioned but still covered in the rule book before it arose.

Now I can somewhat see the argument of not wanting to force the players off the team, but let's be honest, they would've made way more money for the next season at least and absolutely still had the opportunity to return to HAM until the time they graduate from the SMJHL. So I don't really feel the players un question would've been off all that badly.

I agree with this. It seems that once it came time to apply the rule, ownership realized it was too punitive to the team and not in the best interest of the players. The rule itself should be changed as a result of this.

BarnabasCollins · 08-21-2021, 09:51 AM

[Image: image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fimages.media-all...0.jpg&q=85]

Hamilton Punishment cake

Ingredient Checklist
1 (18.25 ounce) package German chocolate cake mix
1 (18.25 ounce) package white cake mix
2 (3.5 ounce) packages instant vanilla pudding mix
1 (12 ounce) package vanilla sandwich cookies
3 drops green food coloring
1 (12 ounce) package tootsie rolls

Directions
Step 1
Prepare cake mixes and bake according to package directions (any size pan).

Step 2
Prepare pudding according to package directions and chill until ready to assemble.

Step 3
Crumble sandwich cookies in small batches in a food processor, scraping often. Set aside all but 1/4 cup. To the 1/4 cup add a few drops of green food coloring and mix.

Step 4
When cakes are cooled to room temperature, crumble them into a large bowl. Toss with 1/2 of the remaining cookie crumbs, and the chilled pudding. You probably won't need all of the pudding, you want the cake to be just moist, not soggy.

Step 5
Line kitty litter box with the kitty litter liner. Put cake mixture into box.

Step 6
Put half of the unwrapped tootsie rolls in a microwave safe dish and heat until softened. Shape the ends so that they are no longer blunt, and curve the tootsie rolls slightly. Bury tootsie rolls randomly in the cake and sprinkle with half of the remaining cookie crumbs. Sprinkle a small amount of the green colored cookie crumbs lightly over the top.

Step 7
Heat 3 or 4 of the tootsie rolls in the microwave until almost melted. Scrape them on top of the cake and sprinkle lightly with some of the green cookie crumbs. Heat the remaining tootsie rolls until pliable and shape as before. Spread all but one randomly over top of cake mixture. Sprinkle with any remaining cookie crumbs. Hang the remaining tootsie roll over side of litter box and sprinkle with a few green cookie crumbs. Serve with the pooper scooper for decisions just like this.

ImShiny · 08-21-2021, 10:23 AM

At this point recreating seemed like a dumb idea

**RomanesEuntDomus** · 08-21-2021, 10:39 AM

I think these two threads have made it clear that this ruling is universally disliked and seen as a very bad decision by basically the entire league. This goes way beyond past cases where it was just the involved parties or a vocal minority who complained about a verdict. Has this done anything to lead you guys to reconsider or do you still stand by the ruling?

@DrunkenTeddy
@Leafs4ever
@"luketd"

PremierBromanov · 08-21-2021, 11:03 AM

08-21-2021, 12:44 AMspooked Wrote: And as far as screenshots go we have no choice but to accept them as there is no way for us to prove/disprove anything barring someone themselves coming forward to say it is or isn't real.

You've got this backwards

if you have

Quote:no way for us to prove/disprove anything

then you have unreliable data. Garbage in, garbage out.

If you have unreliable data then you have

Quote:no choice

but to NOT accept them.

spooked · 08-21-2021, 11:08 AM

08-21-2021, 11:03 AMPremierBromanov Wrote:
08-21-2021, 12:44 AMspooked Wrote: And as far as screenshots go we have no choice but to accept them as there is no way for us to prove/disprove anything barring someone themselves coming forward to say it is or isn't real.

You've got this backwards

if you have

Quote:no way for us to prove/disprove anything

then you have unreliable data. Garbage in, garbage out.

If you have unreliable data then you have

Quote:no choice

but to NOT accept them.

So we should not trust a GM at all? Strap in for a lot more punishment threads and firings for people being late on stuff or forgetting things I guess. I have no bone in how we do it personally, if the site wants HO to only use the site threads we can talk about it, but it won't help the league run better.

PremierBromanov · 08-21-2021, 11:12 AM

08-21-2021, 11:08 AMspooked Wrote:
08-21-2021, 11:03 AMPremierBromanov Wrote: You've got this backwards

if you have

then you have unreliable data. Garbage in, garbage out.

If you have unreliable data then you have

but to NOT accept them.

So we should not trust a GM at all?

we should trust that they can post a public thread wherein both parties agree to a contract that everyone can see. And no, you absolutely should not full-stop-trust the GMs. This is why we have rules and procedures. This is what law *IS*. This league isnt built on trust, it's built on law. The law is the bindings that keep us together.

The idea that "you have to accept this evidence because we cant prove it or disprove it" is baffling to me.

trella · 08-21-2021, 11:38 AM

Now that I’ve had more time to gather my thoughts on this, I will say this:

This is a gross misuse of Ownership power and a massive dump on every other other team and every GM or player that has been punished. We have all been told “those are the rules” or “the rules are black and white” when making an honest mistake and were aptly punished, most of the time, for less than this. We’ve all seem teams punished much worse than this for less.

I am not suggesting that Teddy, Leafs, or anyone has a bias towards Hamilton while stepping in. However, based on the events that happened, it is hard not to feel this way and I think everyone has a right to feel that way about this. Because what this looks like, regardless of intention, is Ownership overstepping their boundaries and shutting down HO without due process.

The point has been repeated that Ownership can step in and issue the final word on punishment. Yes, that is true, and like shown in Teddy’s OP, it has happened before. But does that mean it’s right? I say no. I do not believe that 2 people should have the power to overturn HO’s process, especially since HO is there to represent the league as a whole. What Ownership did here is basically tell the entire league that what we think doesn’t matter.

The rule was black and white. Thems the rules. We have all been told this, but that magically went out the window here. I do agree with letting Hamilton keep the players. They made an honest mistake. Anyone suggesting that Hallsy or Mills does not care about their players, are lazy, etc have no idea what they are talking about. We are all human and we all make mistakes. However, a mistake should not make them immune to the rulebook, just like the rest of us. We see many punishments handed out every season for double trading picks, 99% of the time those instances being honest mistakes. But these instances are still punished because that is what the rulebook says. Is the spirit of the rule to punish GM’s for every little mistake? No, of course not. The spirit of the rule is to prevent GMs from double trading a pick in order to have extra value in their stockpile and to stop massive problems with two teams having the same pick down the road. Yet double pick trading, even if obviously on accident, is still punished. Regardless of the “spirit of the rule”.

I am not suggesting that Teddy and Leafs be removed from their positions. Their countless hours of work in this league throughout the league have been invaluable. But Eggy and Tez need to go. There is no reason for a seat with this much power to be held by inactives who are completely out of touch with the league. If one site position is going to have the power to do this, shouldn’t we fill it with our best, most connected and active users?

I also think that Ownership stepping in like this should not be allowed. Owners should be able to give their thoughts, of course, or even vote on the punishments. But to be able to completely override the interests of HO and the interests of the league at large is unacceptable in my opinion. No one person or group of people should hold ultimate power.

Two solutions to this that come to mind are:

1. HO should ALWAYS be allowed to conduct their investigations and whole process when deciding on a punishment. Ownership needs to have clear and rigid boundaries as to when they can step in.

2. An appeals committee, something like that Infidel suggesting in SHL media earlier today. At the very least, his suggestion should be looked and and considered by site management, as it is clear to all of us that situations like this one are a problem.

Thats all i got.

Thanks to @karey and @JSS for the sigs!

Former USA Fed Head, Carolina Kraken Co-GM, Tampa Bay Barracuda GM

spooked · 08-21-2021, 11:57 AM

08-21-2021, 11:12 AMPremierBromanov Wrote:
08-21-2021, 11:08 AMspooked Wrote: So we should not trust a GM at all?

we should trust that they can post a public thread wherein both parties agree to a contract that everyone can see. And no, you absolutely should not full-stop-trust the GMs. This is why we have rules and procedures. This is what law *IS*. This league isnt built on trust, it's built on law. The law is the bindings that keep us together.

The idea that "you have to accept this evidence because we cant prove it or disprove it" is baffling to me.

The only things we can prove are things done on the site. Anything else we have to trust and we can look into it if it seems suspect or we have reason to, but ultimately the HO group must use trust a lot as well. It is not one way or the other, it is both. The issues seems to come up when the understanding between which is being used when is a problem, but in some cases there are no issues with how the rule is being applied (it matches the intent of the rule ie. trade deadline) and others where there is an issue with the rule (outcome did not match the intent ie. putting prospects wanted by the team into bidding over what is essentially a clerical error). If we always pick one way the site would have no flexibility towards GMs ever, which I am fine with, but I would expect us to run out of GMs at some point considering it is already slim pickings at times.

In this example I am floored they didn't use the tendering process just in case, but clearly the rate GMs double trade picks despite the law saying they can't shows they do not follow the law with enough care, so we clearly need to reevaluate how this process works to match our intent.

***Ragnar*** · 08-21-2021, 12:03 PM

The ownership group trusted that I was formally warned for gnomedabbing and they suspended me.

Turns out I wasn't.

Sigs by Me, Merica, High Stick King, Rum_Ham, Jess, vulfzilla, enigmatic, and Carpy

❤!! RIP to the big homies 701 and Mac !!❤

PremierBromanov · 08-21-2021, 12:19 PM

08-21-2021, 11:57 AMspooked Wrote:
08-21-2021, 11:12 AMPremierBromanov Wrote: we should trust that they can post a public thread wherein both parties agree to a contract that everyone can see. And no, you absolutely should not full-stop-trust the GMs. This is why we have rules and procedures. This is what law *IS*. This league isnt built on trust, it's built on law. The law is the bindings that keep us together.

The idea that "you have to accept this evidence because we cant prove it or disprove it" is baffling to me.
The only things we can prove are things done on the site. Anything else we have to trust

no we dont. This isn't how law works lol.

> Your honor, we have no evidence of wrongdoing, but you'll just have to trust us about this one

Things we can't prove aren't evidence. They are hearsay.

***Ragnar*** · 08-21-2021, 12:21 PM

08-21-2021, 12:19 PMPremierBromanov Wrote:
08-21-2021, 11:57 AMspooked Wrote: The only things we can prove are things done on the site. Anything else we have to trust

no we dont. This isn't how law works lol.

> Your honor, we have no evidence of wrongdoing, but you'll just have to trust us about this one

Things we can't prove aren't evidence. They are hearsay.

Ima have to agree with this one.

"Present your evidence"

"trust us Smile

"

"guilty. i sentence the defendant to life in prison."

Sigs by Me, Merica, High Stick King, Rum_Ham, Jess, vulfzilla, enigmatic, and Carpy

❤!! RIP to the big homies 701 and Mac !!❤

spooked · 08-21-2021, 12:24 PM

08-21-2021, 12:19 PMPremierBromanov Wrote:
08-21-2021, 11:57 AMspooked Wrote: The only things we can prove are things done on the site. Anything else we have to trust

no we dont. This isn't how law works lol.

> Your honor, we have no evidence of wrongdoing, but you'll just have to trust us about this one

Things we can't prove aren't evidence. They are hearsay.

You have now made tampering legal, what do we do now? That is what you are suggesting we do as people only have those kinds of talks outside of the official channels for obvious reasons, which we literally have no way to verify. Like we can take people at their word, and talk to others and take them as witness, but that's about the best we can do most of the time if we are not going to just fire every gm for being late on their budget or something.

PremierBromanov · 08-21-2021, 12:39 PM

08-21-2021, 12:24 PMspooked Wrote:
08-21-2021, 12:19 PMPremierBromanov Wrote: no we dont. This isn't how law works lol.

> Your honor, we have no evidence of wrongdoing, but you'll just have to trust us about this one

Things we can't prove aren't evidence. They are hearsay.

You have now made tampering legal, what do we do now? That is what you are suggesting we do as people only have those kinds of talks outside of the official channels for obvious reasons, which we literally have no way to verify. Like we can take people at their word, and talk to others and take them as witness, but that's about the best we can do most of the time if we are not going to just fire every gm for being late on their budget or something.

we're not talking about something that is necessarily subject to interpretation (which is why HO exists) -- things like harassment, tampering, and otherwise communicative behavior -- we're talking about pen and paper contracts. Either you have one or you don't. Handshake agreements aren't a thing here, as normally to prove one (in a business law setting) you'd have to prove that both parties had moved forward as if one existed and had upheld the contract (until one party didn't, causing conflict and the court of law is introduced). But we can't prove parties were moving forward because by definition the moment the deadline passed, the players in question are unable to move forward because they are subject to bidding. No contract was tendered officially, no contract was posted officially, nor rejected or accepted. It ceased to be and intent is irrelevant.

Navigation

Extra Menu

About us