Week 1: Thunder @ Sharks

[The Mule]

In the first case, both GMs agreed that the game should be re-simmed.

In the second case, I objected to the re-sim and no one addressed my objections.

[captobvious]

Negative. In the first re-sim, the Sharks were satisfied to keep the game. It was your objection which led to the re-sim. The policy was that both teams would have to agree to let the game stand. One team's objection would be sufficient to re-sim, and you objected. The second time around, you were satisfied to let the game stand, but the Sharks objected. It would have been inconsistent to do other than re-sim it again.

As Fox has eloquently pointed out, it would be likewise inconsistent to make the game stand if you still object. That's why I'm trying to persuade you to withhold your objection and allow the game to stand. If you really want a re-sim, then we need to give you one. I've weighed in on why I don't think it's a good idea.

But before you weigh in with your objection, then we also need a response from watchthis on whether Manning's update made it into the game at all. If it did not, then you have no grounds for an objection, and the game will stand. So let's get the facts in first, and then we'll discuss the ramifications, if any.

[The Mule]

Do you have an answer for my objections to the Sharks complaints? I believe you deleted them, so I will restate them here.

There are no rules that establish deadlines for player updates before a game is simmed. Many players are updated immediately before a game is simulated and those updates are included. The fact that diop initiated an invalid simulation of the game in question does not establish an arbitrary deadline for player updates. Therefore, why should the Thunder kicker updates not have been included in the re-sim of the game?

[captobvious]

I have no position on that. It's another one where the arguments on both sides have merit. The counter-argument is that the game was only being re-simmed because of a technical issue (Diop having simmed on the wrong game version), and that a re-sim should involve all the same attributes as were in effect for the first.

[axxman77]

Not to mention...I should get bonus stat keeping points for updating these stats 3 TIMES!!!

[watchthis]

themule said:

What's this?

admin said:

+1 Speed, Stat Keeping

Bearfan updated his player after the initial simming of the game. Re-sim!

I'm not stupid as sh**, I didn't update that, only the things before Sharks. As a matter of fact, I didn't update a single shark player, only Thunder. I did sharks before the first original sim of the game when they were simming it, because I thouhgt I was going to do it.

[KJ [Thunda Pride!]]

Game should stand in my honest opinion.

[captobvious]

With watchthis' eloquent testimony, this case is closed.

[The Mule]

themule said:

There are no rules that establish deadlines for player updates before a game is simmed. Many players are updated immediately before a game is simulated and those updates are included. The fact that diop initiated an invalid simulation of the game in question does not establish an arbitrary deadline for player updates. Therefore, why should the Thunder kicker updates not have been included in the re-sim of the game?

I would still like an answer to this question from the commissioner.

[Da Bearfan]

If the original game is played, then someone updates, then a resim occurs, the updates will not be included. Watch said that he was going to sim the game originally, but then diop did it. Should watch have done the game instead of diop, the kicker upgrade wouldn't have even been purchased at the start of the game.