New Simmer needed
-
Dodgers
- Site Admin
- Posts: 5783
- Joined: Fri May 30, 2003 1:00 am
- Location: Fort Lauderdale
- Name: Shawn Walsh
Bren, I've tried to explain this many a times already but apparently you didn't read any of the posts I made on the subject.
I felt there was no need for a discussion because the issue was straightforward. As I looked at it, there were very few arguments possible against switching the simmer and to me none of them were even close to valid reasons.
Here's how a discussion would have played out:
Shawn: starts discussion
Bren: I object because I'd be insulted
JP: Are you fucking kidding?
Bren: I also object because I could have been doing it all along so what difference does it make now that we switch? And whoever takes over the simming could cheat as well.
Brett: Okay I'm not going to vote for yes because it would insult Bren, but his other arguments do not make me object to this rule.
I didn't see you jumping in with your reasons for shooting down Aaron's idea in the 5 days in between him making it and the time I started the vote, if you had, I'm 100% sure I would have started a discussion instead of a vote. At least I jumped in with my support. The fact that you were moving does not really sway me either, since usually you tell us you're going away and we won't have boxes for several days, I had no idea at the point I started the vote.
The fact that the decision probably would have been different if we had discussed this actually makes me quiver, because no one else in the ExCo could sway a vote with just personal objections. We already did this for the Josh topic, I think we'd be setting a pretty bad precedent if we did it again.
I felt there was no need for a discussion because the issue was straightforward. As I looked at it, there were very few arguments possible against switching the simmer and to me none of them were even close to valid reasons.
Here's how a discussion would have played out:
Shawn: starts discussion
Bren: I object because I'd be insulted
JP: Are you fucking kidding?
Bren: I also object because I could have been doing it all along so what difference does it make now that we switch? And whoever takes over the simming could cheat as well.
Brett: Okay I'm not going to vote for yes because it would insult Bren, but his other arguments do not make me object to this rule.
I didn't see you jumping in with your reasons for shooting down Aaron's idea in the 5 days in between him making it and the time I started the vote, if you had, I'm 100% sure I would have started a discussion instead of a vote. At least I jumped in with my support. The fact that you were moving does not really sway me either, since usually you tell us you're going away and we won't have boxes for several days, I had no idea at the point I started the vote.
The fact that the decision probably would have been different if we had discussed this actually makes me quiver, because no one else in the ExCo could sway a vote with just personal objections. We already did this for the Josh topic, I think we'd be setting a pretty bad precedent if we did it again.
I also didn't see anyone other than you supporting the idea. I didn't jump into the discussion pre-vote because by the time I saw the thread, it had been several days since the thread started, the idea seemed to have no support at all from the league as a whole so i didn't see the need to turn it into an issue. From my perspective, the idea was clearly dead.
What seems straightforward and obvious to one person isn't straightforward to another. it seems pretty straightforward to me that this rule change is meaningless and useless for the reasons mentioned before. You disagree, fine. But the debate needs to be held within the ExCo before a vote is done.
What seems straightforward and obvious to one person isn't straightforward to another. it seems pretty straightforward to me that this rule change is meaningless and useless for the reasons mentioned before. You disagree, fine. But the debate needs to be held within the ExCo before a vote is done.
-
Padres
- Site Admin
- Posts: 4822
- Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 1:00 am
- Location: Wells, Maine
- Name: Jim Berger
What's done is done. Clearly minds are made up and we have reached the point where we agree to disagree. Though in this case I do not believe the outcome of this particular vote would have been any different, we can agree that the members of the ExCo have agreed that in the future "the debate needs to be held within the ExCo before a vote is done."RedSox wrote:But the debate needs to be held within the ExCo before a vote is done.
Can we move on now?
