S31 Universal Rules Summit Results

[nunccoepi]

Okay how did the position change proposal not pass? Our current system is awful and needs a facelift. If any of you ten that voted it down could explain why, I'd love to hear it.

I voted no solely because of the part which would have allowed users to use a free position switch throughout the first season after being drafted to an ISFL team. I think that’s very ripe for abuse and a bad enough idea to negate the benefits derived from the other parts of the rule proposal which I thought were really very good. 

If the same rule came up against next season but without extending the free switch period, I’d vote for it.

[Modern_Duke]

Most Outstanding Player
S1 - Angus Winchester (also won OPOTY)
S2 - Jayce Tuck (also won MVP)
S3 - Mike Boss (also won OPOTY)
S4 - Mike Boss (also won MVP)
S5 - Jordan Yates
S6 - Mike Boss (also won MVP)
S7 - Matt Akselsen (also won MVP)
S8 - Darren Smallwood (also won MVP)
S9 - Darren Smallwood (also won OPOTY)
S10 - Owen Taylor (also won OPOTY)

exciting

[Pat]

Okay how did the position change proposal not pass? Our current system is awful and needs a facelift. If any of you ten that voted it down could explain why, I'd love to hear it.

I voted no solely because of the part which would have allowed users to use a free position switch throughout the first season after being drafted to an ISFL team. I think that’s very ripe for abuse and a bad enough idea to negate the benefits derived from the other parts of the rule proposal which I thought were really very good. 

If the same rule came up against next season but without extending the free switch period, I’d vote for it.

Absolutely fair. Looks like we can work on some things as a group and get this moved forward.
Thanks for the reply!

[nunccoepi]

Okay how did the position change proposal not pass? Our current system is awful and needs a facelift. If any of you ten that voted it down could explain why, I'd love to hear it.

I voted no solely because of the part which would have allowed users to use a free position switch throughout the first season after being drafted to an ISFL team. I think that’s very ripe for abuse and a bad enough idea to negate the benefits derived from the other parts of the rule proposal which I thought were really very good. 

If the same rule came up against next season but without extending the free switch period, I’d vote for it.

Absolutely fair. Looks like we can work on some things as a group and get this moved forward.
Thanks for the reply!

No problem, I appreciate the helpful dialogue. I regret I wasn’t able to be very present this last  season in discussing these rules as they developed, so hopefully I can do that more this coming season.

That being said, extending the free switch period isn’t something even necessary to this rule. It can be severed and then discussed on its own. In fact, it’s been discussed in the past and those concerns raised. So I wasn’t a fan of it being packaged in this rule about something slightly different.

[nunccoepi]

Also I proposed the MOP rule, as I’m sure most know. I floated it in HO chat and no concerns were raised. I floated it in leadership chat and no one was seriously proposed. Chat was very brief and most didn’t seem to care one way or another about it. Some did say that pro bowl should be voted on by everyone, but I kind of saw that as a separate thing altogether. It wasn’t until after the rule was on the ballot that people decided to express concerns with it. And even then, the concerns were that it was unnecessary based on how like 30 people voted two years ago. I’m not super passionate about this rule, so I wasn’t very invested when I floated it to everyone, but the positive feedback I did receive seemed enough to give it a try. Seems odd to deny the general user-base a fun opportunity with zero downside other than that people who already vote think it would be frivolous. And that’s just in response to the kindest feedback I’ve seen behind closed doors. At best there’s a serious lack of respect for those who spend significant time and effort in running this league, the systems that allow everyone to have at least a semblance of freedom from abuse in this league, and the users who are at the mercy of those who have voted and connections.

[.Laser]

Okay how did the position change proposal not pass? Our current system is awful and needs a facelift. If any of you ten that voted it down could explain why, I'd love to hear it.

I voted no solely because of the part which would have allowed users to use a free position switch throughout the first season after being drafted to an ISFL team. I think that’s very ripe for abuse and a bad enough idea to negate the benefits derived from the other parts of the rule proposal which I thought were really very good. 

If the same rule came up against next season but without extending the free switch period, I’d vote for it.

The free switch period was not extended in my proposal. It states that free switches may be made until the last update of the season after their DSFL Draft. This means that any free switch must be done prior to the ISFL Draft, the same as the current rule.

[nunccoepi]

Okay how did the position change proposal not pass? Our current system is awful and needs a facelift. If any of you ten that voted it down could explain why, I'd love to hear it.

I voted no solely because of the part which would have allowed users to use a free position switch throughout the first season after being drafted to an ISFL team. I think that’s very ripe for abuse and a bad enough idea to negate the benefits derived from the other parts of the rule proposal which I thought were really very good. 

If the same rule came up against next season but without extending the free switch period, I’d vote for it.

The free switch period was not extended in my proposal. It states that free switches may be made until the last update of the season after their DSFL Draft. This means that any free switch must be done prior to the ISFL Draft, the same as the current rule.

Then my apologies are in order. I must have misread it. I read and re-read it over several times to be sure and still made the mistake. Obviously I need to read it more carefully, but I believe I would vote for it in its current form.

[AdamS]

In other news, I dind't think rules were supposed to be implemented immediately when we're already four weeks into a season unless they were emergency rules proposals.

That rule was never supposed to be limited to being viewed or used as an "emergency" usage.

This bugs me a lot as it's author.

[Swanty]

Here's Laser's position change proposal for reference:

The purpose of this proposed change is to both simplify the position change process for all users, new and old, and to make the position change process easier on both updaters and auditors as a result. Over the seasons the position switch process has been one of the most complained about things in regards to player updates, so this proposal aims to help remedy that complaint while also adhering to a more realistic standard in terms of switching between positions in the NFL and also allowing player agency to do as they choose in terms of swapping positions.

The current rule is as follows:

Code:

D. Position Changes
1. One (1) time per career a player may choose to switch positions. If a player chooses to switch to a new position, they must have their highest level GM post in their respective GM area that the player is officially switching positions. If a player chooses to switch positions they or the team (from the team's salary cap) must pay $4,000,000 to make the switch. The player and team can also split the fee in some way.  If a player changes positions, they will be allowed to move 50% of their total applied TPE to new attributes. No attribute may go over the maximum value allowed with the new build, even if it was above it before the position switch. When processing a position switch, the player must provide both builds on their update post.

2. One (1) time per career a player may choose to switch archetypes. If a player chooses to switch to a new archetype, they must post their update thread that the player is officially changing archetypes. If a player chooses to switch archetypes they or the team (from the team's salary cap) must pay $3,000,000 to make the switch. The player and team can also split the fee in some way. If a player changes archetypes they will be allowed to move 50% of their applied TPE to new attributes. No attribute may go over the maximum value allowed with the new archetype, even if it was above it before the archetype switch. Players must change their height and weight to that of their new archetype.

3. Rookies in their first season of the DSFL may choose to switch positions or archetypes free of charge. In order to use their free switch, they must do so prior to the final end of season update. This does not count as their one career position switch. They may reallocate 100% of their TPE in this switch. Otherwise, they follow all applicable rules for the switch they are using.

4. Switches to QB are allowed, but for QB you can only move 25% of your applied TPE and you must also forfeit your archetype switch. It still costs $4,000,000, and cannot be done if the archetype switch was previously used. DSFL Rookies would still be able to switch normally; this is only for ISFL players.

5. Users who choose to make an OL may switch to another position without monetary cost one time in their career (in addition to free DSFL switch). Additionally, the user may move 75% of the total applied TPE as opposed to the traditional 50% (except for switches to QB in which the player may still only move 25%) This still counts as the user's one position switch in their career.

6. Users who choose to position switch from Kicker may move 75% of the total applied TPE as opposed to the traditional 50% (except for switches to QB in which the player may still only move 25%) This still counts as the user's one position switch in their career, and they must still pay the 4m position switch fee.

7. When a player position switches the ISFL and DSFL GMs that own the players rights must be tagged in the switch. After 48 hours the position switch is finalized. (This rule does not affect DSFL players in that year's draft class since they do not have ISFL GMs yet).

8. DSFL GMs may not suggest or encourage any send-down player under contract with an ISFL team to position switch without first obtaining permission from the send-down player's ISFL GM. Any violations of this rule are to punished at the discretion of the Head Office.

I propose the rule be changed to the following. (code not used so that strikethrough can represent removal of sections and italics can indicate addition of sections)

D. Position Changes
3. 1. Rookies in their first season of the DSFL may choose to switch positions or archetypes free of charge from the point of creation up to last update of their first season after the DSFL draft. In order to use their free switch, they must do so prior to the final end of season update. This does not count as their one career position switch. They may reallocate 100% of their TPE in this switch with no penalty. Otherwise, they follow all applicable rules for the switch they are using.

1. 2. One (1) time per career a player may choose to switch positions. If a player chooses to switch to a new position, they must have their highest level GM one of their ISFL GM's post in their respective GM area that the player is officially switching positions. If a player chooses to switch positions, they or the team (from the team's salary cap) must pay $4,000,000 the proper listed amount to make the switch. The player and team can also split the fee in some way.  If a player changes positions, they will move reallocate 50% 100% of their total applied earned (minus the appropriate position switch penalty) TPE to new attributes or traits, regardless of if the TPE was already applied to an applicable attribute or trait. No attribute may go over the maximum value allowed with the new build, even if it was above it before the position switch. When processing a position switch, the player must provide both builds on their update post. Position switches may only take place during the offseason.

3. All position switches may move and reapply 100% of earned TPE minus a percentage based on the list below. The 'penalty' percentage will be rounded in the player's favor and will be denoted on the roster page as a secondary bank. Following one full season, the secondary bank will unlock and the player may apply that TPE however they see fit. In the case of a Tier 4 swap, 15% of the amount earned at the time of the switch will be placed in a secondary bank that will unlock after one season. The remaining 10% will be placed in a tertiary bank that will unlock after the second season. Swaps to QB will follow this format as well. A user may not switch to QB if they have already changed archetypes in their career.



2. 4. One (1) time per career a player may choose to switch archetypes. If a player chooses to switch to a new archetype, they must post in their update thread that the player is officially changing archetypes. If a player chooses to switch archetypes, they or the team (from the team's salary cap) must pay $3,000,000 $4,000,000 to make the switch. The player and team can also split the fee in some way. If a player changes archetypes they will be allowed to move 50% 100% of their applied earned TPE to new attributes. No attribute may go over the maximum value allowed with the new archetype, even if it was above it that point before the archetype switch. Players must change their height and weight to that of their new archetype.

4. Switches to QB are allowed, but for QB you can only move 25% of your applied TPE and you must also forfeit your archetype switch. It still costs $4,000,000, and cannot be done if the archetype switch was previously used. DSFL Rookies would still be able to switch normally; this is only for ISFL players.

5. Users who choose to make an OL may switch to another position without monetary cost one time in their career (in addition to free DSFL switch). Additionally, the user may move 75% of the total applied TPE as opposed to the traditional 50% (except for switches to QB in which the player may still only move 25%) This still counts as the user's one position switch in their career.

6. Users who choose to position switch from Kicker may move 75% of the total applied TPE as opposed to the traditional 50% (except for switches to QB in which the player may still only move 25%) This still counts as the user's one position switch in their career, and they must still pay the 4m position switch fee.

7. 4. When a player position switches the ISFL and DSFL GMs that own the players rights must be tagged in the switch. After 48 hours the position switch is finalized. (This rule does not affect DSFL players in that year's draft class since they do not have ISFL GMs yet).

8. 5. DSFL GMs may not suggest or encourage any send-down player under contract with an ISFL team to position switch without first obtaining permission from the send-down player's ISFL GM. Any violations of this rule are to punished at the discretion of the Head Office.


I believe I listed all possible combinations of positions in sec D.3, but will add to the list if I realize that I have forgotten any.

I am putting this out there as a feeler of sorts to gauge interest and take feeback, as well as to screen any possible mistakes or oversights, so that I can continue to refine it as much as possible up to the deadline.

[goodfortunecoffee]

As a bumbling low-level Updater who has to double-check and input position changes from time-to-time, and who also has little say ultimately in these matters, I agree that position changes should be revamped, but it should turn into a much much simpler process. That colorful chart scares me.