Robash Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 Another good idea was HAGII (if there are enough Huddlers on waiting lists to do this). I feel 12 teams is the maximum that should be allowed in each HAG league. 1259194[/snapback] being a copycat commish myself getting 32 committed owners was a pain...grant it we were looking for homers it was still open to anyone. "HAG-Too!" is a great idea, but getting a another 48 committed owners into 4 different groups of 12 might be a bit much...god bless the person who trys to take that ordeal on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 Just curious......How many of you current HAG members have to move next year? 1258132[/snapback] Not next year, but I'm close. Currently in PrimeTime and I'll be 40 September 17th...just after the season starts so I made it. Add me to the waiting list now for the 40-somethings or I kick some old dude's ass down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bier Meister Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 finally read all of this.......... have to agree with one member's comments about vesting time into a league just to take a backseat to people who haven't...... doesn't seem right. i am not raising any uproar, just voicing an opinion. thanks commishes for dealing with all the bs (X4). i'll be looking for the final resolutions........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgemoe Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 And, lastly, I want to thank the commissioners for all their time and hard work putting HAG together and Sky for coming up with the HAG concept. 1259194[/snapback] Very good info here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeegiebo Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 In the commish forum, we have referred to this league as a republic as opposed to a democracy. 1258659[/snapback] Except in a Republic, the representatives are usually elected. The commishes have done a superb job for the HAG league(s) from all I have seen. I give you your props. Thing is, I really haven't seen any support for the preliminary-not-yet-finalized-until-it-is-posed-in-the-league-forums decision not to give existing HAG members priority for the bump-up to the new league, other than from the commishes. I understand not wanting to have a league(s)-wide vote, as there are so many involved and it would set bad precedent. But this is kind of a biggie. Would it be so bad to have a non-binding vote by league so the commishes could see whether there are just a few vocal opponents or whether most favor one resolution? It would just be a factor for you to consider in reaching a final determination - let you know if you're fulfillingyour constituents' wishes or being Nazis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NSab Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 (edited) To have constituents, they would have had to be voted in , in the first place. And since they have all this veto power as republic. They need to take the pulse of their leagues on most things, before voting on stuff. The commishes are good Managers, but do not speak for their members, they so far have been going on personal judgement. Edited January 11, 2006 by NSab Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 I understand not wanting to have a league(s)-wide vote, as there are so many involved and it would set bad precedent. But this is kind of a biggie. Would it be so bad to have a non-binding vote by league so the commishes could see whether there are just a few vocal opponents or whether most favor one resolution? It would just be a factor for you to consider in reaching a final determination - let you know if you're fulfillingyour constituents' wishes or being Nazis. 1259524[/snapback] Not to rehash this entire thing, but it was born of Skylive5 as part of his idea for the league. What he wanted to see was a big league that was easily open and available to huddlers and not the traditional Both league. While there has been much discussion, and some of it a little heated, in the commish forum we decided in the end to support Skylive5 and his view. There would be no HAG if it were not for him. In discussing the issue post backlash I made the point that it was a nice thing to have owners that wanted to be involved and take ownership of their leagues. In the original concepting, this wasn't really taken into account. We are people too, and adaptable at that. We will try to continue to post what we are thinking of doing for rules updates, and take feedback as necessary. Heck, when necessary we can backpedal faster than Hillary Clinton can dash for the center... It would be nice if people kept in mind that nothing is final until the HAG rules have been modified (and even then we can always rethink a decision). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiskey Pimp Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 Thing is, I really haven't seen any support for the preliminary-not-yet-finalized-until-it-is-posed-in-the-league-forums decision not to give existing HAG members priority for the bump-up to the new league, other than from the commishes. I understand not wanting to have a league(s)-wide vote, as there are so many involved and it would set bad precedent. But this is kind of a biggie. Would it be so bad to have a non-binding vote by league so the commishes could see whether there are just a few vocal opponents or whether most favor one resolution? It would just be a factor for you to consider in reaching a final determination - let you know if you're fulfillingyour constituents' wishes or being Nazis. 1259524[/snapback] Excellent points. The only people seeming to want to move current members to the bottom are the majority of the commishes. No regular members seem to support this. Why not allow league wide votes for decisions of this magnitude? A simple poll of move to the top or not with a deadline of say 1 week to vote should be simple enough to control. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 they so far have been going on persoanal judgement. 1259543[/snapback] This is not really true. So far every issue we have discussed has been born of a league member's suggestion. We read all the threads and take people's comments into account. This issue of advanceing and the thought process of why we went in the direction we did has been explained. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NSab Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 Nick, I understand there is debate over this between commishes. What I can't understand is the will of the many isn't good enough for the few. It seems very ludicrous to me. The people have spoken? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyr0802 Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 Who threw the gas back on the fire here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twiley Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 Who threw the gas back on the fire here? 1259560[/snapback] Not good, I farted...stand back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiskey Pimp Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 Nick, I understand there is debate over this between commishes. What I can't understand is the will of the many isn't good enough for the few. It seems very ludicrous to me. The people have spoken? 1259556[/snapback] This is what I find so hard to understand. I realize the final decision has not been made yet, but the masses seem pretty vocal about one way and the very select few are leaning towards the other and that select few will make the decision. There seem to be more people that will leave to form HAGII then are in the final decision process so it just seems very odd to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeegiebo Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 Not to rehash this entire thing, but it was born of Skylive5 as part of his idea for the league. What he wanted to see was a big league that was easily open and available to huddlers and not the traditional Both league. While there has been much discussion, and some of it a little heated, in the commish forum we decided in the end to support Skylive5 and his view. There would be no HAG if it were not for him. In discussing the issue post backlash I made the point that it was a nice thing to have owners that wanted to be involved and take ownership of their leagues. In the original concepting, this wasn't really taken into account. We are people too, and adaptable at that. We will try to continue to post what we are thinking of doing for rules updates, and take feedback as necessary. Heck, when necessary we can backpedal faster than Hillary Clinton can dash for the center... It would be nice if people kept in mind that nothing is final until the HAG rules have been modified (and even then we can always rethink a decision). 1259545[/snapback] Nazi. You didn't have to go through the league-formation story for me again - I understand. I was just arguing semantics. This is not a republic. It's a paternalistic oligarchy. Of Nazis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skylive5 Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 .... but the masses seem pretty vocal about one way .... 1259570[/snapback] There are no masses. There has never been any masses. There probably never will be any masses. There are two extremely vocal people and a couple of others that give their input. The majority of HAG members are waiting to see what is what and how it all plays out before stating their opinion. That is what I see. On another note... and not stated by you WP.. The comment (actually a couple) about nazi's.... take that comment and shove it. Smilie or no smilie. I am neither a pig, nor a nazi, nor a dictator... and I am tired of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 (edited) There has to be a solution and if I had a vote I would vote for allowing those moving up to have priority. Saying this beforehand (everyone would know who could move up) would make it clear what the probablities of joining would be. This may become like FUSION , "I will my Fusion league membership to _____". 1251367[/snapback] FIXED Edited January 11, 2006 by keggerz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyBalata Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 While there has been much discussion, and some of it a little heated, in the commish forum we decided in the end to support Skylive5 and his view. There would be no HAG if it were not for him. 1259545[/snapback] Personally, I can totally respect that. I originally got into this group when Sky tried to start the 45 and older league, because I wanted to be in a league with the guys he had gathered together already, Sky, RR, Aqua, among others. Then this whole Hag concept with the 4 leagues sprung from that and I didn't get to play in the league I originally signed up for. No regrets, no complaints about that...love the format and happy I am in it. All that said....the biggest problem I have with us trying to stick to Skys vision of that this league should be?......Is that Sky himself is not even sticking with his vision himself and leaving after one year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiskey Pimp Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 All that said....the biggest problem I have with us trying to stick to Skys vision of that this league should be?......Is that Sky himself is not even sticking with his vision himself and leaving after one year. 1259619[/snapback] Have been thinking that the whole time, but didn't want to be the one to bring it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 Personally, I can totally respect that. I originally got into this group when Sky tried to start the 45 and older league, because I wanted to be in a league with the guys he had gathered together already, Sky, RR, Aqua, among others. Then this whole Hag concept with the 4 leagues sprung from that and I didn't get to play in the league I originally signed up for. No regrets, no complaints about that...love the format and happy I am in it.All that said....the biggest problem I have with us trying to stick to Skys vision of that this league should be?......Is that Sky himself is not even sticking with his vision himself and leaving after one year. 1259619[/snapback] He's leaving to allow someone else to play. If that's not an affirmation of his original concept, I don't know what is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skylive5 Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 Is that Sky himself is not even sticking with his vision himself and leaving after one year. 1259619[/snapback] Have been thinking that the whole time, but didn't want to be the one to bring it up. 1259636[/snapback] I addressed this at the beginning of the formation.... there were a lot more than 12 people wanting in the over 50's..... so I determined then that I would not return and told everyone in HOT that I wouldn't be. I am leaving to make room for others. THAT was the vision..... that others would get to play in a non-permenant league. What I didn't expect...was the total ownership that Huddler's feel about the leagues they are in. One must, at some time or other, face the fact that the vision is askew and correct it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyBalata Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 I addressed this at the beginning of the formation.... there were a lot more than 12 people wanting in the over 50's..... so I determined then that I would not return and told everyone in HOT that I wouldn't be. I am leaving to make room for others. THAT was the vision..... that others would get to play in a non-permenant league. What I didn't expect...was the total ownership that Huddler's feel about the leagues they are in. One must, at some time or other, face the fact that the vision is askew and correct it. 1259649[/snapback] Works for me Sky...I knew you were in for only the one year, but never knew the reason for it. Amazing though...you tried for how many years to get an over 50 league going and couldn't get enough peope and finally lower your standard to 45 and older...and then all of the sudden there are too many that are over 50. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 (edited) I am leaving to make room for others. THAT was the vision..... that others would get to play in a non-permenant league. What I didn't expect...was the total ownership that Huddler's feel about the leagues they are in. One must, at some time or other, face the fact that the vision is askew and correct it. 1259649[/snapback] I never understood that from any of the communications when the league was set up. Typically isn't it a good thing for owners to take ownership of their leagues ... otherwise you get owners who are apathetic and don't care. Don't we all hate those owners who mail it in? If you feel vested in a league aren't you less inclined to simply mail it in? Lastly you busted my balls because I'm "stomping my feeting and taking my ball home because I didn't get my way" ... but I as I stated in my retirement post that I will be retiring to allow new blood into Generation Lost (as seems to be the desire for these leagues) ... aren't I doing the same thing you are? Edited January 11, 2006 by Grits and Shins Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skylive5 Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 Works for me Sky...I knew you were in for only the one year, but never knew the reason for it. Amazing though...you tried for how many years to get an over 50 league going and couldn't get enough peope and finally lower your standard to 45 and older...and then all of the sudden there are too many that are over 50. 1259680[/snapback] LOL You could have coloured me surprised for sure. All of a sudden they came out of the woodwork. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeegiebo Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 There are no masses. There has never been any masses. There probably never will be any masses. There are two extremely vocal people and a couple of others that give their input. The majority of HAG members are waiting to see what is what and how it all plays out before stating their opinion. That is what I see. On another note... and not stated by you WP.. The comment (actually a couple) about nazi's.... take that comment and shove it. Smilie or no smilie. I am neither a pig, nor a nazi, nor a dictator... and I am tired of it. 1259606[/snapback] I wasn't tryng to start or continue any fights here. But I do have a response: As for the masses, I don't think anyone knows what they think about how this should be handled. That's all I suggested - having everyone express an opinion so the commishes can consider them and make a final decision knowing what the majority view is. As for the Nazi comments (all mine, I believe), I was in absolutely no way serious about it, and used it precisely because it is entirely overused and almost never apt. Pretty sure everone understood that and took it for what it was. Sorry that you're tired of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puddy Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 I will be retiring to allow new blood into Generation Lost (as seems to be the desire for these leagues) ... aren't I doing the same thing you are? 1259686[/snapback] You are truly an altruistic fellow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.