WXV Trade Talk

[RaisyDaisy]

Yes Purps you do need to be on it. You do so much work around here, and the amount of time and effort you put in behind the scenes is more than enough to justify you actually getting the Admin vote in the committee

Definitely has to be 4 coaches in Worlds too, and I don't mind the idea of Purps picking the 4 either, but maybe coaches who are very keen to get onto the committee can even apply to him

I guess the negative would be that if Purps picks 4, and a few miss out they could be resentful or it could cause unnecessary tension, where as if all 18 teams votes then it is fair as everyone gets their say

[RaisyDaisy]

Just on this

Also i wouldn't mind chucking up the idea that trades are voted on a little earlier than weekly. Sometimes we were waiting 10-12 days before knowing the results of trades and it can hold up other talks

I meant that instead of votes going out every Sunday, maybe the committee could vote on them every 3 days or whenever.

Even if the committee is quicker than everyone else at the moment, its still 7 days + 1-2 days

Let's not beat around the bush - the committee is going to be coaches who are on here regularly, so a 48-72 hour turn around time wouldn't be a problem at all

Trades are gathered Sunday night and the committee releases the results by no later than Wednesday which wont be a problem

*Edit - Yeah doesn't have to be every Sunday either. Every 3-4 days or whatever would work fine too, to speed up turnaround times

[Nige]

I guess the negative would be that if Purps picks 4, and a few miss out they could be resentful or it could cause unnecessary tension, where as if all 18 teams votes then it is fair as everyone gets their say

I feel like there's only so much resent a coach can have towards the admin making the choice (and having resent towards him in itself is poor). We all respect Purps enough (I think and hope) to trust him to make the right choice.

[Holz]

Just on this

Also i wouldn't mind chucking up the idea that trades are voted on a little earlier than weekly. Sometimes we were waiting 10-12 days before knowing the results of trades and it can hold up other talks

I meant that instead of votes going out every Sunday, maybe the committee could vote on them every 3 days or whenever.

Even if the committee is quicker than everyone else at the moment, its still 7 days + 1-2 days

agree if you have active coaches you can get answers almost immediately. I basically auto pass most trades as there aren't many issues. If im unsure LF, Ringo, Ric, HP are always on to answer a quick PM.

[Ricochet]

Just on this

Also i wouldn't mind chucking up the idea that trades are voted on a little earlier than weekly. Sometimes we were waiting 10-12 days before knowing the results of trades and it can hold up other talks

I meant that instead of votes going out every Sunday, maybe the committee could vote on them every 3 days or whenever.

Even if the committee is quicker than everyone else at the moment, its still 7 days + 1-2 days

Let's not beat around the bush - the committee is going to be coaches who are on here regularly, so a 48-72 hour turn around time wouldn't be a problem at all

Trades are gathered Sunday night and the committee releases the results by no later than Wednesday which wont be a problem

Ha you missed it again. I'm saying that personally i didn't like waiting 7 days til the sunday plus another 1-2 days because it held up a lot of other talks.

If we have a committee we should be able to have results every 4-5 days imo (instead of 8-10)

[Holz]

Just on this

Also i wouldn't mind chucking up the idea that trades are voted on a little earlier than weekly. Sometimes we were waiting 10-12 days before knowing the results of trades and it can hold up other talks

I meant that instead of votes going out every Sunday, maybe the committee could vote on them every 3 days or whenever.

Even if the committee is quicker than everyone else at the moment, its still 7 days + 1-2 days

Let's not beat around the bush - the committee is going to be coaches who are on here regularly, so a 48-72 hour turn around time wouldn't be a problem at all

Trades are gathered Sunday night and the committee releases the results by no later than Wednesday which wont be a problem

Ha you missed it again. I'm saying that personally i didn't like waiting 7 days til the sunday plus another 1-2 days because it help up a lot of other talks.

If we have a committee we should be able to have results every 4-5 days imo (instead of 8-10)

you really could get it down to 1-2 days if you want to. I think my max is 3 days

[Ricochet]

Just on this

Also i wouldn't mind chucking up the idea that trades are voted on a little earlier than weekly. Sometimes we were waiting 10-12 days before knowing the results of trades and it can hold up other talks

I meant that instead of votes going out every Sunday, maybe the committee could vote on them every 3 days or whenever.

Even if the committee is quicker than everyone else at the moment, its still 7 days + 1-2 days

Let's not beat around the bush - the committee is going to be coaches who are on here regularly, so a 48-72 hour turn around time wouldn't be a problem at all

Trades are gathered Sunday night and the committee releases the results by no later than Wednesday which wont be a problem

Ha you missed it again. I'm saying that personally i didn't like waiting 7 days til the sunday plus another 1-2 days because it help up a lot of other talks.

If we have a committee we should be able to have results every 4-5 days imo (instead of 8-10)

you really could get it down to 1-2 days if you want to. I think my max is 3 days

Yeh didn't want to put too much pressure on the committee :P

It's not really an issue in the first half of the trade period, just in the last 3-4 weeks it was

[RaisyDaisy]

Also, in the event that a trade is between two teams that's coaches are part of the committee, then the other 3 coaches in the committee would need to vote on that, with a 2-1 result required to pass

We might need to do some extra work around this scenario, because only having 3 coaches vote on your trade could be seen as an advantage. Perhaps we also get 2 extra coaches that would be "consultants" to the committee, and they are engaged in this scenario so that 5 votes for the trade are still registered

Purps + 4 coaches = Committee + 2 consultants for when committee teams trade together

[Holz]

Also, in the event that a trade is between two teams that's coaches are part of the committee, then the other 3 coaches in the committee would need to vote on that, with a 2-1 result required to pass

We might need to do some extra work around this scenario, because only having 3 coaches vote on your trade could be seen as an advantage. Perhaps we also get 2 extra coaches that would be "consultants" to the committee, and they are engaged in this scenario so that 5 votes for the trade are still registered

Purps + 4 coaches = Committee + 2 consultants for when committee teams trade together

everything is soo structured :P

mine is im abit unsure.

ask two people, yep its ok.

let it through

or im questioning it. ask one person nah its terrible. ok its time to negotiate.

[Ricochet]

3 is fine if the other 2 are involved. I was going to say 5 total was overkill

[RaisyDaisy]

3 is fine if the other 2 are involved. I was going to say 5 total was overkill

See that's where I'm unsure. It's quite an advantage if you only need to convince 3 of the 18 teams

I think for the evenness of the comp and teams that will no longer be getting their voice to vote, that we would have to have 5 votes at all times

And yes Holz, it has to be structured if it's going to work otherwise there is too many grey areas and misconception

[RaisyDaisy]

Whether it's 3 or 5 isn't really the issue. I just wanted to make sure we are looking at this from all angles and considering everyone and everything

If people are happy with 3 then sweet, but it's good to have alternatives and discussion to present options so that everyone can contribute

[Ringo]

Like the ideas so far, Just one further item that needs discussion. Do we need some sort of appeal if coaches do not agree with decision. we see the issues we already have with trades being rejected with only 5 votes against so say the trades committee votes 3/2 to reject is it final. do not know solution but just throwing it out there as very few of the 13 trades rejected had more than 5 votes against.
Maybe the solution could be appeal and then all coaches vote on the trade with the majority vote being final and if vote is tied at 9/9 then Admin using casting vote.

Purple definitely has to be one member of the trade committee though.

Do not think the committee needs to rule straight away though as there are circumstances eg Uni exams which may keep some off the site for a day or 2. Would suggest if we go this way that trades committee meet by PM each Wednesday and Sunday to review and rule on trades. This way there will also be no weekly deadlines only the end of trade period.
If any votes have to go to coaches to vote would suggest a 3day voting period only.

[Ricochet]

Do not think the committee needs to rule straight away though as there are circumstances eg Uni exams which may keep some off the site for a day or 2. Would suggest if we go this way that trades committee meet by PM each Wednesday and Sunday to review and rule on trades. This way there will also be no weekly deadlines only the end of trade period.
If any votes have to go to coaches to vote would suggest a 3day voting period only.

Yep like that

Like the ideas so far, Just one further item that needs discussion. Do we need some sort of appeal if coaches do not agree with decision. we see the issues we already have with trades being rejected with only 5 votes against so say the trades committee votes 3/2 to reject is it final. do not know solution but just throwing it out there as very few of the 13 trades rejected had more than 5 votes against.
Maybe the solution could be appeal and then all coaches vote on the trade with the majority vote being final and if vote is tied at 9/9 then Admin using casting vote.

I think that if we're putting faith in 3-5 respected coaches then there shouldn't be a need for an appeals process. We should just respect their decision and move on

3 is fine if the other 2 are involved. I was going to say 5 total was overkill

See that's where I'm unsure. It's quite an advantage if you only need to convince 3 of the 18 teams

I think for the evenness of the comp and teams that will no longer be getting their voice to vote, that we would have to have 5 votes at all times

And yes Holz, it has to be structured if it's going to work otherwise there is too many grey areas and misconception

Other comps work fine with 1-2 ruling, so 5 is plenty. And if 2 are involved and its only 3 ruling than that's fine also

[Nige]

Do not think the committee needs to rule straight away though as there are circumstances eg Uni exams which may keep some off the site for a day or 2. Would suggest if we go this way that trades committee meet by PM each Wednesday and Sunday to review and rule on trades. This way there will also be no weekly deadlines only the end of trade period.
If any votes have to go to coaches to vote would suggest a 3day voting period only.

Yep like that

Like the ideas so far, Just one further item that needs discussion. Do we need some sort of appeal if coaches do not agree with decision. we see the issues we already have with trades being rejected with only 5 votes against so say the trades committee votes 3/2 to reject is it final. do not know solution but just throwing it out there as very few of the 13 trades rejected had more than 5 votes against.
Maybe the solution could be appeal and then all coaches vote on the trade with the majority vote being final and if vote is tied at 9/9 then Admin using casting vote.

I think that if we're putting faith in 3-5 respected coaches then there shouldn't be a need for an appeals process. We should just respect their decision and move on

3 is fine if the other 2 are involved. I was going to say 5 total was overkill

See that's where I'm unsure. It's quite an advantage if you only need to convince 3 of the 18 teams

I think for the evenness of the comp and teams that will no longer be getting their voice to vote, that we would have to have 5 votes at all times

And yes Holz, it has to be structured if it's going to work otherwise there is too many grey areas and misconception

Other comps work fine with 1-2 ruling, so 5 is plenty. And if 2 are involved and its only 3 ruling than that's fine also