Thudd Kassel Contract Issue

[slothfacekilla]

I'm gonna say this one more time since I don't think you're getting it

Not all parties were notified of the problem. Nor was any public comment made. If I were in DD's position I'd be mad too. Why wasn't I told at the time that there was a problem?

The validity of the decision is irrelevant (as I've already said, I understand and possibly agree with the logic), however if we accept this action can be taken now, it can be taken again in other not necessarily equivalent situations.

This is the last I'm going to say on the matter. Literally nothing that has come up here has countered either of those points, and it looks like there is nothing that will.

Don't tag me again or quote me unless you have counter arguments to either of these points.

I can't follow directions

[Sermokala]

I'm gonna say this one more time since I don't think you're getting it

Not all parties were notified of the problem. Nor was any public comment made. If I were in DD's position I'd be mad too. Why wasn't I told at the time that there was a problem?

The validity of the decision is irrelevant (as I've already said, I understand and possibly agree with the logic), however if we accept this action can be taken now, it can be taken again in other not necessarily equivalent situations.

This is the last I'm going to say on the matter. Literally nothing that has come up here has countered either of those points, and it looks like there is nothing that will.

Don't tag me again or quote me unless you have counter arguments to either of these points.

Well if you didn't tell me specificaly not to quote you then theres no problem with me quoteing you and tagging you 37thchamber

[br0_0ker]

unless there is a clear error in the approval of the transaction (for example, when carmel gibson was approved with incorrect TPE totals) -- which does not exist in this case, given the debatable interpretation of the rule as written -- the transaction should not be altered. fix the rule and apply it moving forward.

that the ruling was made within a couple of days is irrelevant, as in the absence of an announcement to the contrary, the transaction was accepted, and therefore the rule should only be applied as written.

Are you suggesting HO personally approve every contract then? Since there is a separate process for approvals and HO rules decisions, it seems that them discussing the matter THE SAME DAY or at the very latest THE NEXT DAY would say to the contrary that they were giving "tacit approval" as you put it. Seems more like the approver should have flagged it than an issue with HO changing things.

at worst, we are accepting that HO may, at their discretion, alter the rulebook on the fly and retroactively apply the changes.

If a rule is identified to be broken or skirted within 48 hours, and a decision is made then yea, HO should be able to amend the rules and fix the infraction. I don't know that we need to have instant HO rulings considering this is a free league, based on a forum, and we all have real life going on outside this too. So it's not possible to always IMMEDIATELY fix a problem when they arise.

[br0_0ker]

Not all parties were notified of the problem.

Who's responsibility is it for a team to notify a player that the contract that those 2 parties agreed to is invalid? I think Philly GMs bear some responsibility in this, and they were aware of this by the looks of things.

Why wasn't I told at the time that there was a problem?

Maybe we should ask Philly GMs why they don't notify their players when a ruling is made.

[Oles]

oles would have punished that fucker

100% would’ve punished that fucker