 |
 |
Rules Proposal 23.5: The Two Marketplaces Rule |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ricky
Headbanger
3322 posts
|
|
|
 |
Posted - 1/13/2019 7:21:54 AM |
 |
 |
Rules Proposal 23.5: The Two Marketplaces Rule
|
|
|
|
I know that the season just ended but I still have football on the brain, and so I'm going to roll out a rules thread about three months earlier than normal.
"There are two trading marketplaces in Ragnarok:
* Winnerheim Marketplace
* Loserheim Marketplace
Everyone starts the season trading in the Winnerheim Marketplace. Once a team is eliminated from making the Ragnarok Playoffs, their Winnerheim trading license is revoked and they are granted a license to trade in the Loserheim Marketplace." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head of Scouting
Gjallarhorn player
529 posts
 |
Fu: 99.57 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 1/17/2019 9:45:15 PM |
|
|
What about Marketplace fluctuations?
|
|
|
|
Under this proposal, teams that are out early probably because they have a lack of blue chip talent on their roster are forbidden from trading with all teams in order to try to get a franchise worthy prospect for the future? I'll share an example. In another league which drafted two weeks before the start of the season I kept Le'veon Bell as my franchise I like the Maulers kept him on my roster all season as the playoff chase came closer and the trading deadline neared I put out a notice to all teams that if their team didn't have a franchise worthy player he was available best offer wins I accepted a second tier WR but better than my #3. I felt this was a win win. The team that won the bid was long out of the playoffs for just that reason, he didn't have a blue chip guy. Now he has a competitive start for next season.
I know where you are going with this rule, but with this set of owners, the veto rule, is this rule really necessary? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 1/21/2019 8:58:02 PM |
|
|
Here's a suggestion that I've made in the past.
|
|
|
|
| Just make all trades involving only one team in playoff contention be automatically up for league review (the teams involved are not allowed to vote). Owners are free to vote yes or no for any reason - it's not a question of shenanigans. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head of Scouting
Gjallarhorn player
529 posts
|
Fu: 99.57 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 1/22/2019 11:06:37 PM |
|
|
That is an interesting idea
|
|
|
|
Here are my questions.
How long do the other 10 teams have to vote, is 24 hours enough?
What happens when the trade happens on Saturday night?
Do all trade have to be completed between the end of MNF and Wednesday evening?
What happens if only 3 out of 10 team vote, do we at least need a quorum?
Does this start at the beginning of the year or just as playoffs near?
I do like this idea but the logistics may be an issue. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head of Scouting
Gjallarhorn player
529 posts
|
Fu: 99.57 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/9/2019 11:08:40 PM |
|
|
I like Stu's proposal
|
|
|
|
| This doesn't have to be as complex as I stated earlier. Most teams are still relevant through week 11, so it's a small window to where this actually applies. If two teams in this situation do agree on the parameters of a trade they must make the trade after MNF and before Tuesday noon. If most trades are like mine they take a few days of negotiations before settling on the final product. This will allow enough time for at least three teams to vote. If by Kickoff of Thursday not enough owners vote or it outright fails said trade is void. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head of Scouting
Gjallarhorn player
529 posts
|
Fu: 99.57 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/10/2019 6:27:05 PM |
|
|
I like Stu's proposal
|
|
|
|
| This doesn't have to be as complex as I stated earlier. Most teams are still relevant through week 11, so it's a small window to where this actually applies. If two teams in this situation do agree on the parameters of a trade they must make the trade after MNF and before Tuesday noon. If most trades are like mine they take a few days of negotiations before settling on the final product. This will allow enough time for at least three teams to vote. If by first Kickoff on Thursday either not enough owners vote, or it outright fails, the trade is void. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/11/2019 4:43:14 PM |
|
|
Two Marketplace Rule
|
|
|
|
I agree with the simplicity of Stu's post as well. It shouldn't be complicated and it's probably a once, maybe twice in a season occurance - if at all. At that time of the season, activity on the site is full force, so we're all checking in a lot more frequently. I like the league having to advocate and be accountable on this, too. From end of MNF game (11:30 -12:00 that night) to what? Noon on Tuesday seems a tight window if your workday gets jammed up. But 18 hours (6 pm) or 24 hours (midnight)? I think it should be a tight window. But the trade should be made public immediately at the beginning fo that window, and a ballot box window is automatically created (for this scenario only). Everyone Votes, Nobody votes? League has spoken. I think the matter is: How many of us (minimum) make a quorum?
And then...everyone still needs to vote on the initial proposal, if it were to even pass.
FOOTBALL! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/11/2019 9:30:39 PM |
|
|
If simplicity is what we are after, Winnerheim and Loserheim is simplest
|
|
|
|
| Can't make trades with Winmerheim after entering Loserheim. That's super simple. And a little mean. So, it's perfect. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/11/2019 9:41:45 PM |
|
|
That works too.
|
|
|
|
Where’s the like button here...?
Kidding. Can it be Heatmieser and Coldmieser? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 7/31/2019 1:07:13 PM |
|
|
sorry for the bombardment--question about 23.5 (2 Marketplaces)
|
|
|
|
Did this rule pass? Or are we getting to it? I've been ungodly busy and so I may have missed if this came to resolution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 7/31/2019 5:36:12 PM |
|
|
Loserheim did not pass
|
|
|
|
| It was a wee too controversial. |
|
|
|
|
|
