(02-19-2024, 12:43 PM)I Love Feet! Wrote:Guy with the username I Love Feet! is really trying to bestow knowledge. Wake up sheeple, this fellow cannot be trusted!(02-19-2024, 12:14 PM)Ultimatedestroye Wrote: when does this break the record for the longest punishment thread?Are you kidding me? We haven't even topped the last controversial KCC GM punishment thread (shoutout @soevil for still being around today to shitpost in this thread)
But to answer your question, 80-something replies
EDIT: thread moving so fast, this was the reply that tied
You know what? I’m just going to say it. This place fucking sucks. I don’t give a shit if fucking HO or the 150 interns in here delete this message or if I get banned, but I want to get my message across, because it amazes me how many idiots in this chat have a poor taste in quality. This chat is like a fucking mental ward, and you all need to seek help. It’s always the same damn thing everyday, and nothing new ever comes out of anyone’s shriveled smooth brains. Where are all the dank graphics? Where is all of the good Thunderdome insanity? Where is all the copypasta humor? All I see is the same fucking power ranking posts and the same goddamn users making graphics and it’s honestly boring as fuck. I hear “index?” one more fucking time I'm gonna go on a mass killing spree. All of you are boring as fuck, if I’m being frank. I have pity for your parents, because I wouldn’t question how I would be able to nurture someone so milquetoast and ignorant for 18 years without putting a bullet through my head. You’re all lame as fuck. I feel stupider interacting with you all, and I wouldn’t want to spend another second in this toxic atmosphere. Hell, I’m actually glad this league exists. It keeps all the unfunny pricks away from the other leagues that appreciate quality in their sims. What the fuck do you people think you can simply replace Chika Fujiwara just like that and hope no fucker here notices? I hope you all get drafted and never come back. I’m done with you assholes. Piece out losers
02-19-2024, 01:19 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-19-2024, 01:19 PM by slate. Edited 1 time in total.)
(02-19-2024, 12:34 PM)TheRake Wrote:(02-19-2024, 12:31 PM)slate Wrote:Nope because the ISFL has idiosyncrasies that don't map 1 to 1 to real football, but we have two confounding issuing:(02-19-2024, 12:27 PM)TheRake Wrote: Most people get mad at the most logical conclusion. When college teams have ineligible players, they forfeit any wins, yes? I disagree strongly with #2 because it isn't a meaningful real life analogue. Just because we both use the term "ineligible" to describe two vastly different circumstances doesn't mean we should just copy-paste the punishment that the NCAA uses for a violation which has nothing to do with ours. (02-19-2024, 01:19 PM)slate Wrote:I agree whole heartedly, what the NCAA deals with is far, far more detrimental to the league than what happened in KCC.(02-19-2024, 12:34 PM)TheRake Wrote:(02-19-2024, 12:31 PM)slate Wrote:Nope because the ISFL has idiosyncrasies that don't map 1 to 1 to real football, but we have two confounding issuing:(02-19-2024, 12:27 PM)TheRake Wrote: Most people get mad at the most logical conclusion. When college teams have ineligible players, they forfeit any wins, yes?
"...TheRake may be the most controversial new player of the S41 class. Notorious not only for shamelessly tampering but also for confidently arguing his broadly incorrect NFL opinions, TheRake has managed to navigate the dangerous waters of controversy fairly well—which is no small feat!" - aeonsjenni
So I know DSFL and ISFL HO are two separate entities, but I just want to state that as someone who has been a GM for a while (despite my recent break) the idea that we would start being more liberal with stripping of draft choices as a punishment option is very alarming to me. I've always been a "rules as written" sort and don't have an issue with the KCC GMs facing some form of punishment because in the end they did mess up, and it had an impact on their game. That said I'll lend my voice to the others here that have been saying that this punishment was excessive. I'm also a little confused on the self-report aspect that a lot of people have latched on to, because from what I see it looks like Norfolk did reach out as well regarding a re-sim. If they did self-report, that should absolutely be taken into consideration but from what I've seen (could be wrong) it doesn't seem like it was just a self-report, and even then it doesn't change that they still included a player on the DC that was no longer with the team and a 31% increase in TPE over the replacement (as Ultimate pointed out). I think a re-sim of that game probably would have been the most fair solution (and should be used more liberally rather than stripping draft picks), but I also understand that this much later after the fact that ship may have sailed.
I have the utmost respect for DSFL HO and I know they're wanting to do what they feel is best for the league. I also understand the lack of response to this thread because 1)there needs to be a unified front on their end before responding to something like this and 2)if they came out and posted anything other than an explanation for why this punishment is justified they'd get dogpiled on even harder than they are now, so they're stuck between a rock and a hard place. Ultimately I believe this punishment was excessive, and hope for a speedy ruling by the appeals team reducing it to a more appropriate level. (02-19-2024, 01:02 PM)UptownCord Wrote:Oh wait. The common theme in this thread is...all these people are the newbies lol. No wonder this thread is so laughable.(02-19-2024, 10:11 AM)DarknessRising Wrote:(02-19-2024, 10:00 AM)RussDrivesTheBus Wrote: Just for a little bit of clarity, Re-Sims are determined by HO, not the Sim Team. HO determined a re-sim was not appropriate here. The decision was appealed and the appeals team upheld that decision. Also, at this point, we would have to re-sim 3 weeks (we can't just re-do the one game/week in question). I am in no way providing an opinion on whether I think a re-sim was appropriate here or not. I'm only trying to point out why one was not done and that, at this point, it's really not feasible. And likely would upset some rookies bc all stats would be changed, which I'm not a fan of. Learn the sim league ways boys before it hits you in the face. (02-19-2024, 01:42 PM)zaynzk Wrote:wtf Zayn this is the one I always post(02-19-2024, 01:02 PM)UptownCord Wrote:Oh wait. The common theme in this thread is...all these people are the newbies lol. No wonder this thread is so laughable.(02-19-2024, 10:11 AM)DarknessRising Wrote:(02-19-2024, 10:00 AM)RussDrivesTheBus Wrote: Just for a little bit of clarity, Re-Sims are determined by HO, not the Sim Team. HO determined a re-sim was not appropriate here. The decision was appealed and the appeals team upheld that decision. Also, at this point, we would have to re-sim 3 weeks (we can't just re-do the one game/week in question). I am in no way providing an opinion on whether I think a re-sim was appropriate here or not. I'm only trying to point out why one was not done and that, at this point, it's really not feasible. And likely would upset some rookies bc all stats would be changed, which I'm not a fan of. Transgender lesbian, S15 veteran, and media extraordinaire. Fascists and bigots are welcome to fuck off.
— — — — — — For Your Reading Consideration: Before the Butchers | The Jungle The Giving Tree | Volume II | Volume III A Winter of Discontent | Volume II The Rockiest Road | II | III | IV | V | VI | VII | Finale Two Essays on Unfree Agency: On Agents | On Contracts Eclipse of the Honey Moon | Volume II Gemini Media Awards: S39 | S40 | S41 | S42 | S43 | S44 | S45 | S46 | S47 All Winners — — — (02-19-2024, 01:26 PM)SwankyPants31 Wrote: So I know DSFL and ISFL HO are two separate entities, but I just want to state that as someone who has been a GM for a while (despite my recent break) the idea that we would start being more liberal with stripping of draft choices as a punishment option is very alarming to me. I've always been a "rules as written" sort and don't have an issue with the KCC GMs facing some form of punishment because in the end they did mess up, and it had an impact on their game. That said I'll lend my voice to the others here that have been saying that this punishment was excessive. I'm also a little confused on the self-report aspect that a lot of people have latched on to, because from what I see it looks like Norfolk did reach out as well regarding a re-sim. If they did self-report, that should absolutely be taken into consideration but from what I've seen (could be wrong) it doesn't seem like it was just a self-report, and even then it doesn't change that they still included a player on the DC that was no longer with the team and a 31% increase in TPE over the replacement (as Ultimate pointed out). I think a re-sim of that game probably would have been the most fair solution (and should be used more liberally rather than stripping draft picks), but I also understand that this much later after the fact that ship may have sailed.Just to clarify a few points. KCC self reported when they noticed the error and that was before the stream had aired. KCC also notified NOR of the error. After the stream, NOR (understandably) requested a re-sim which was denied by DSFL HO. And then I believe NOR requested an appeal of the re-sim, which was again denied. I'm not 100% sure if the appeal of the re-sim was brought up after the following two games that week or before it. All in all, this doesn't change the error in the DC and really should have been a re-sim when it was initially requested and we could've avoided this whole debacle. |
|