(04-25-2022, 08:51 PM)infinitempg Wrote:(04-25-2022, 08:49 PM)Maglubiyet Wrote:(04-25-2022, 08:47 PM)infinitempg Wrote:Yeah, I don't think it's on you infinite. You should be able to trust the information received, but I do appreciate the reply.(04-25-2022, 08:46 PM)Maglubiyet Wrote: With the posting of the DSFL ballot, I'm back again to air my grievances with the rules being broken! But first, let's see if any action was taken after I posted about the various IA players appearing on the ISFL ballot. Aaand... looks like ballot stayed the same, and ineligible players won CBotY and Defensive Breakout. My condolences to those who should have won and those who weren't nominated. Onto DSFL--you know the drill!
Regular season ended on April 11th, so anyone that had not posted as of March 28th should be ineligible to win an award.
Furthermore, we have the rider in the DSFL that you must post 3 Activity Checks to be eligible.
- DutchFF last posted March 19th yet was nominated for MVP, DPotY, DRotY, LBotY, and Defensive Performance.
- Mobile is banned yet was nominated for DTotY.
- Slippy is banned yet was nominated for SotY.
I have only heard feedback on this issue from people I am otherwise close with in the league, so I feel like I'm talking into a void at this point as there has still been no official reply from anyone associated with awards. Why have this rule if it's just going to be ignored? We have banned players on the ballot?
I'm technically associated with awards so I guess you can count this as a response? I wouldn't personally lol
I'm too lazy to remove them from the ballot. So I will pass the buck on to awards committee. (Sorry guys)
For what it's worth, managing the awards committee is a very stressful job and one I do not envy - they have less than a week to pile through all the players and get that list to me to ballot up and provide to GMs. So while they really should be checking for this (and I think an automated tool would help them out), I don't really blame them too hard for missing it.
I don't think the committee should be expected to manually check every player's activity status (although ideally they would, I get that it isn't really feasible) but when a helpful member of the community takes it upon themselves to check for them, there's really no excuse for them staying on the ballot. We slavishly stick to, like, pretty much every other rule in the book. Why is this one overlooked (I believe pretty regularly, but could be wrong)?