Board of Governors Updates

[Advantage 2,769]

14 minutes ago, MattyIce said:

Another concern sirs:

 

I was told that the time to claim training camp expires after a deadline.

 

I cannot claim the 10 tpe for tc because I will surpass the 249 cap.  I was planning on banking this easy tpe that's accessible to all.

 

For max earners this is not a big deal.

 

For us regular folk that stumble into this situation, I think it's a bogus rule that it expires.

 

Any insights or workarounds?

 

Cheers

And you are not open to going up to the VHL?

 

Cause generally thats what the 250 TPE cap is for.

[mattyIceman 1,033]

No I plan on playing a 3rd m season.  By seasons beginning I would be terribly ineffective, as I am not a max earner.  I'm here for fun and the community, the sentiment is I'm getting robbed/penalized of 10 easy tpe, about a weeks worth of earnings.

 

Has there been any other case of this in the past with precedent?

[Enorama 1,980]

16 minutes ago, MattyIce said:

No I plan on playing a 3rd m season.  By seasons beginning I would be terribly ineffective, as I am not a max earner.  I'm here for fun and the community, the sentiment is I'm getting robbed/penalized of 10 easy tpe, about a weeks worth of earnings.

 

Has there been any other case of this in the past with precedent?

 

Every year there's a few. There's a hard cap for a reason, can't make exceptions.

[mattyIceman 1,033]

Wasnt planning on surpassing 249, wanted to bank it towards next season.  I'll skip TC this season then

[Enorama 1,980]

Just now, MattyIce said:

Wasnt planning on surpassing 249, wanted to bank it towards next season.  I'll skip TC this season then

 

Can't bank before the deadline to limit people banking for many seasons and coming up at a 800 TPE rookie. Again, not the case for you, but the rules need to be black and white.

[Devise 4,475]

7 minutes ago, Enorama said:

 

Can't bank before the deadline to limit people banking for many seasons and coming up at a 800 TPE rookie. Again, not the case for you, but the rules need to be black and white.

 

Yeah, we could probably add a TC exception to that rule though. Still prevents people from banking earned pt TPE but allows everyone to always get that free 10 TPE every season.

[Mr_Hatter 1,603]

10 minutes ago, Devise said:

 

Yeah, we could probably add a TC exception to that rule though. Still prevents people from banking earned pt TPE but allows everyone to always get that free 10 TPE every season.

Just make tc deadline after the cutoff for vhlm. Easy

[mattyIceman 1,033]

Now that @McWolf picked me up in expansion, I may just go up.  Just awaiting a discord invite now

[Advantage 2,769]

1 hour ago, Mr_Hatter said:

Just make tc deadline after the cutoff for vhlm. Easy

I've always felt this was the way to go here.  May be worth bringing up.

[mattyIceman 1,033]

Well I'm glad I brought this up then

[Advantage 2,769]

ACTIVE DISCUSSION

 

Topic - Training Camp/VHLM Cut-Off Exception (Discussion started July 27)

 

The Issue: It was actually brought up earlier in this thread that there was some concerns that due to the 250 VHLM TPE Cut-Off, that players would be unable to claim Training Camp.  

The Idea: MattyIce brought forth the issue and the idea of potentially banking the TPE which obviously we don't want the ability to bank everything.  However, as Devise mentioned, an exception to allow the banking of Training Camp would probably be a fair compromise.

The Commentary: There has been no discussion as of yet.  

 

Topic - First-Gen Options (Discussion started July 21)

 

The Issue: Concern was regarding someone who doesn't really understand the league or give it a fair shot who then retires and creates another player later that will be ultimately their truly first serious player, whether or not they would be able to still get their first gen bonuses and such.

The Idea: The idea was to simply make an exception to these situations and maybe allow the first gen bonuses to be claimed if they have never claimed them before (IE: under 100 TPE players).  Essentially just re-define what a first-gen player is to make it fair to all those in the league.  For example: Advantage's first player was Chris Miller in S12.  He earned 0 TPE with this player.  In Season 17, when he created Michael Angelo, that would technically be a re-create rather than a true first-gen.  Therefore, the question would be whether or not that player would be treated like a first-gen for spending all of five minutes on the site with the S12 player.

The Commentary: This was pretty swiftly figured out as the league has already been looking at these things on a case-by-case basis.  One administrator had this to say: "the current definition of first gen includes people who are returning after 3 seasons without a player. But we’ve also generally allowed people to go the first gen route in that situation anyways."  Therefore it is the case of an unwritten rule and everyone seems to agree that perhaps we can put this more officially in the rulebook.  Until we get confirmation on that, this will remain an open discussion.

 

Topic - Donations on Behalf of Others (Discussion started July 19)

 

The Issue: There was some concern that the league could become more Pay-to-win, with GM's spending money on donations for their players.  

The Idea: The idea was to cap donations at lets say 20$ and allow people to donate for others if they wished to, outside of Donation Drives.

The Commentary: This was another pretty unanimous discussion with everyone wanting to stomp out donations for others, with the exception of Donation Drives (like we saw with both Diamond_ace and Advantage during the 2020 Donation Drive).  This would eliminate money becoming the main focus of selling players on coming to team's, make it much easier to track and not give an unfair advantage to those GM's who are willing to spend the money in order to improve their team.  Ultimately, we want to keep everyone on as even of a platform as possible, and allowing General Managers and others players to donate for others on their team, will be prohibited by the league going forward.  Expect some official announcement on this relatively soon.

 

Topic - VHLM Award Voting Moved to BOG (Discussion started July 17)

 

The Issue: The VHLM recently had its awards that shed light on the fact that there is no discussion, unlike the VHL Awards, prior to the voting process.  This was exemplified when Defenz Mann was left off Sullivan Trophy ballot despite being arguably the most well rounded active defenseman this season.

The Idea: The original idea of the poster was a proposition to move VHLM Voting into BOG to get the proper discussion that we see in the VHL Awards.  

The Commentary: While most seemed to disagree that voting should be moved to BOG mainly due to the lack of attention some place on the VHLM, there was a general agreement that some things needed to be changed.  

The idea someone else had was to use a separate forum for VHLM GMs to have open discussion prior to voting, just like the BOG does with VHL Awards.  This keeps everyone accountable and still accomplishes the main goal of the original idea presenter, which is to fix the holes in VHLM Voting that we have seen.

While i don't believe this is official yet there did seem to be no disagreeing from anyone so I would expect to see this put into action next off-season.

 

Topic - Sim Engine Tweaking (Discussion started July 14)

 

The Issue: The VHL is always looking to improve its sim engine so we have started to test in control groups for moving to 1.5 rather than looking at the loonier 2.0 version.

The Commentary: So far the tests have been pretty normal and with the upgrade to 1.5 it does tend to work better for line and strategy announcements which would be a big benefit for our league.

However, the majority want to wait and see how this season works out with the four new teams before drastically altering our sim engine.  Expect this to end up closed until closer to the offseason.

 

CLOSED DISCUSSION

 

Topic - Hall of Fame Voting Reform (Discussion started June 22, Closed July 26)

 

Since Last Update: There has been no more discussion on this topic and it appears that HOF Voting will stay the same for now.  Closed topic as there has been no discussion since June 26.

 

Topic - VHLM and Deadline Recreates (Discussion started June 16, Closed July 16)

 

Since Last Update: No further discussion since the last update as the VHLM GM Forum has been taking care of this since discussion ended.  As it has been over a month, this is a closed discussion.

 

@Members

Edited July 27, 2020 by Advantage

[Spartan 3,997]

2 minutes ago, Advantage said:

Topic - Donations on Behalf of Others (Discussion started July 19)

Ultimately, we want to keep everyone on as even of a platform as possible, and allowing General Managers and others players to donate for others on their team, will not be prohibited by the league any longer. 

typo?

[Siddhus 72]

3 minutes ago, Advantage said:

Topic - First-Gen Options (Discussion started July 21)

 

The Issue: Concern was regarding someone who doesn't really understand the league or give it a fair shot who then retires and creates another player later that will be ultimately their truly first serious player, whether or not they would be able to still get their first gen bonuses and such.

The Idea: The idea was to simply make an exception to these situations and maybe allow the first gen bonuses to be claimed if they have never claimed them before (IE: under 100 TPE players).  Essentially just re-define what a first-gen player is to make it fair to all those in the league.  For example: Advantage's first player was Chris Miller in S12.  He earned 0 TPE with this player.  In Season 17, when he created Michael Angelo, that would technically be a re-create rather than a true first-gen.  Therefore, the question would be whether or not that player would be treated like a first-gen for spending all of five minutes on the site with the S12 player.

The Commentary: This was pretty swiftly figured out as the league has already been looking at these things on a case-by-case basis.  One administrator had this to say: "the current definition of first gen includes people who are returning after 3 seasons without a player. But we’ve also generally allowed people to go the first gen route in that situation anyways."  Therefore it is the case of an unwritten rule and everyone seems to agree that perhaps we can put this more officially in the rulebook.  Until we get confirmation on that, this will remain an open discussion.

 think this was cause of me

[Advantage 2,769]

24 minutes ago, Spartan said:

typo?

Yes definitely a typo.  Was doing it on my phone so probably not the only one.  Should be corrected.

[ShawnGlade 1,002]

Can I make a suggestion? While I'm glad these discussions are transparent, I really don't enjoy the members tag. While some things are useful, a majority of these things don't apply to me or others, and some of them I honestly don't really care about. I'd like it more if these got their own section on the forums somewhere and ditched the members tag, and we were just allowed to view it on our own

[Advantage 2,769]

19 minutes ago, ShawnGlade said:

Can I make a suggestion? While I'm glad these discussions are transparent, I really don't enjoy the members tag. While some things are useful, a majority of these things don't apply to me or others, and some of them I honestly don't really care about. I'd like it more if these got their own section on the forums somewhere and ditched the members tag, and we were just allowed to view it on our own

I felt it was more a supported thing rather than one people get annoyed by since its one tag every 2-3 weeks.

 

Ultimately if that's what people want its fine but I know some have approached with the opposite opinion because they wouldn't see it otherwise.  

 

 

Edited July 27, 2020 by Advantage

[FrostBeard 1,975]

7 minutes ago, Advantage said:

I felt it was more a supported thing rather than one people get annoyed by since its one tag every 2-3 weeks.

 

Ultimately if that's what people want its fine but I know some have approached with the opposite opinion because they wouldn't see it otherwise.  

 

 

Yeah, for these, I think Members tag is quite fine

 

 

[NotAVHLM-GM 1,858]

Members tag is fine for this

[DollarAndADream 3,356]

30 minutes ago, ShawnGlade said:

Can I make a suggestion? While I'm glad these discussions are transparent, I really don't enjoy the members tag. While some things are useful, a majority of these things don't apply to me or others, and some of them I honestly don't really care about. I'd like it more if these got their own section on the forums somewhere and ditched the members tag, and we were just allowed to view it on our own

What exactly is the issue with a members tag? I get tagged in a lot of stuff since I'm BoG and PT Staff, and I've never really had an issue with it. If I'm tagged in something and I don't care about it, I just move on to the next thing.

 

Regarding this BoG Updates thing, it's something a lot of members asked for. If you don't care about it then just don't click into the notification.

 

Not trying to be a dick or whatever, I'm just curious.

[DarkSpyro 754]

Dude gets left off the ballot and the league issues changes, too bad this didn’t happen in S69 when someone else was in a similar situation and got left off the ballot for an inactive. Don’t let the salt fool you though, I’m more so just glad that something is finally happening so that even more people don’t get screwed out of potential awards or straight up considerations. 

[Advantage 2,769]

1 hour ago, DarkSpyro said:

Dude gets left off the ballot and the league issues changes, too bad this didn’t happen in S69 when someone else was in a similar situation and got left off the ballot for an inactive. Don’t let the salt fool you though, I’m more so just glad that something is finally happening so that even more people don’t get screwed out of potential awards or straight up considerations. 

To be fair, I partially probably noticed cause I was in VHLM this season and was up for the award but didn't feel I should win.

 

Thats sorta the unfortunate thing when you have a BOG mostly unaffiliated with VHLM is things do get missed.  

 

I wasnt even aware that no discussion was happening until a VHLM GM made me aware of it.

 

Mike actually raised zero stink for it.  It was mainly me and a few others that spearheaded that one.

Edited July 27, 2020 by Advantage

[Plate 285]

5 hours ago, Advantage said:

Topic - VHLM Award Voting Moved to BOG (Discussion started July 17)

 

Why not move the VHLM voting to the VHLM comissioners + VSN editor in chief (Sonnet, Diamond Ace and Frostbead)?  You could just have a separate award for best player as chosen by VHLM GMs (If it doesn't exist already, but I think it does). 

 

It sounds like the issue is that the VHLM doesn't get as much attention as it should. Considering the fact that it's the best tool the VHL has at retaining new members and training them for the VHL. 

 

Also, there should be an award in the VHLM for the most outstanding VHLM first-gen player (member). Though, that's more of a topic for the suggestion thread. 

[Advantage 2,769]

23 minutes ago, Plate said:

 

Why not move the VHLM voting to the VHLM comissioners + VSN editor in chief (Sonnet, Diamond Ace and Frostbead)?  You could just have a separate award for best player as chosen by VHLM GMs (If it doesn't exist already, but I think it does). 

 

It sounds like the issue is that the VHLM doesn't get as much attention as it should. Considering the fact that it's the best tool the VHL has at retaining new members and training them for the VHL. 

 

Also, there should be an award in the VHLM for the most outstanding VHLM first-gen player (member). Though, that's more of a topic for the suggestion thread. 

I mean the issue was GMs were just getting ballots and not having any discussion.

 

I dont think that solves the issues.

[ShawnGlade 1,002]

7 hours ago, Advantage said:

I felt it was more a supported thing rather than one people get annoyed by since its one tag every 2-3 weeks.

 

Ultimately if that's what people want its fine but I know some have approached with the opposite opinion because they wouldn't see it otherwise.  

 

 

 

7 hours ago, DollarAndADream said:

What exactly is the issue with a members tag? I get tagged in a lot of stuff since I'm BoG and PT Staff, and I've never really had an issue with it. If I'm tagged in something and I don't care about it, I just move on to the next thing.

 

Regarding this BoG Updates thing, it's something a lot of members asked for. If you don't care about it then just don't click into the notification.

 

Not trying to be a dick or whatever, I'm just curious.

 

Guess I'm in the minority then. But I just get annoyed when I get pings for things i dont necessarily look at

[Jubis 1,282]

21 hours ago, DollarAndADream said:

What exactly is the issue with a members tag? I get tagged in a lot of stuff since I'm BoG and PT Staff, and I've never really had an issue with it. If I'm tagged in something and I don't care about it, I just move on to the next thing.

 

Regarding this BoG Updates thing, it's something a lot of members asked for. If you don't care about it then just don't click into the notification.

 

Not trying to be a dick or whatever, I'm just curious.

I agree with this 100%