2016 WXV Awards and 2016 Rules Discussion

[iZander]

Rule 7 (Cap Concessions): Not decided yet

soo, do team pendles and Toronto have a disadvantage here because of the redraft? or?

Yes, they would be. But if the consensus wants it, we gotta start sometime  :-\

Wouldnt it be fairer to put it up in 2 years or something if it were to go through?

[meow meow]

Fairness and that rule can't coexist.

[iZander]

Fairness and that rule can't coexist.

it would be alot fairer in 2 years though

[Nige]

What a time to be alive.

[meow meow]

If we're trying to make the comp more even we can't bring in a rule that could allow some teams to have a cap of 30000 while some could have 40000 before concessions.

All it means is that every team (expect the 4 new clubs) will be way under the cap, making it useless.

[ossie85]

If we're trying to make the comp more even we can't bring in a rule that could allow some teams to have a cap of 30000 while some could have 40000 before concessions.

All it means is that every team (expect the 4 new clubs) will be way under the cap, making it useless.

he's right

[Nige]

If we're trying to make the comp more even we can't bring in a rule that could allow some teams to have a cap of 30000 while some could have 40000 before concessions.

All it means is that every team (expect the 4 new clubs) will be way under the cap, making it useless.

he's right

[Purple 77]

If we're trying to make the comp more even we can't bring in a rule that could allow some teams to have a cap of 30000 while some could have 40000 before concessions.

All it means is that every team (expect the 4 new clubs) will be way under the cap, making it useless.

he's right

Totally agree, but we'll see what consensus wants I suppose

[Boomz]

If we're trying to make the comp more even we can't bring in a rule that could allow some teams to have a cap of 30000 while some could have 40000 before concessions.

All it means is that every team (expect the 4 new clubs) will be way under the cap, making it useless.

he's right

^ Agreed

[DazBurg]

Been flat out
However I will get a chance later today or tomorrow to talk with HP and get our votes in

[Ringo]

If we're trying to make the comp more even we can't bring in a rule that could allow some teams to have a cap of 30000 while some could have 40000 before concessions.

All it means is that every team (expect the 4 new clubs) will be way under the cap, making it useless.

he's right

^ Agreed

[RaisyDaisy]

If we're trying to make the comp more even we can't bring in a rule that could allow some teams to have a cap of 30000 while some could have 40000 before concessions.

All it means is that every team (expect the 4 new clubs) will be way under the cap, making it useless.

Which is why we voted no

[Torpedo10]

If we're trying to make the comp more even we can't bring in a rule that could allow some teams to have a cap of 30000 while some could have 40000 before concessions.

All it means is that every team (expect the 4 new clubs) will be way under the cap, making it useless.

Which is why we voted no

As did I.

I wonder where these Yes voters are from?

[ossie85]

Final results! (one vote left to come - Cape Town - but all results decided)

Results we know so far

Rule 1 (Cap Change):

8 votes for Points Cap

9 votes for $ Cap

If Cape Town vote for the Points Cap, it would be 9-9. Since the Admin voted to change, I'm calling this a win to the $ Cap

Result: Change to $ Cap (I'll have the numbers to each team on Monday)

Rule 2 (How we count the Points Cap)

6 votes stay the same

2 votes for option B (highest from last two years)

9 votes for Meow's method.

Result: Doesn't matter, as the $ Cap won, but if it was a points cap, we'd have changed to meow's method

Rule 3 (Flood/Attack):

9 votes stay as is

5 votes to remove entirely

3 votes to change to new method

Result: Stays the same

Rule 4 (Tag):

13 votes to stay the same (no tag)

4 votes for the other methods

Result: Tag being rejected again, big time


Rule 5 (Ruck OOP):

12 votes stay as is

5 votes the other method

Result: Ruck OOP stays as is


Rule 6 (Form Confidence):

6 votes for

11 votes against

Result: Proposal rejected, stay as is


Rule 7 (Cap Concessions):

8 votes yes

9 votes against

If Cape Town vote yes, it is a 9-9 tie. As before, since the Admin voted against it, I'm saying it is rejected

Result: Rejected, stays as is

Rule 8 (Delisting for picks):

4 votes for

13 against

Result: Rejected, Stays as is

[Holz]

how come 8 vote auto rejects a trade (and 3 can cause it to fail)

but 8 votes to keep things as it is and it fails?



also question on the cap.

so who is worth more under the system, someone who has played 1 game and scored 90

or someone who has played 22 games over the last 3 years avergaing 75.

does everyone else totally get the new cap as i dont.

would love some numbers on Sam Menegola, Rupert Wills, Zachary Williams, Stephen Hill, Jack Grimes