Election Roundtable - The Meet the Candidates Edition
Sept 18, 2015 14:46:41 GMT
Minnesota, New York, and 1 more like this
Post by Swoosh on Sept 18, 2015 14:46:41 GMT
With the committee elections set to take place in just a few hours, the candidates took the time to hold an informal roundtable where they were presented with a few simple topics and allowed to talk on a variety of subjects pertaining to the committee and the league itself. Unlike most roundtables where answers are judged and scored to declare a winner, this roundtable is provided without any commentary, bias or judgment. What I’m hoping is that this will provide the league with a better sense of all the candidates and what they stand for as they prepare to make their vote today. So without further ado, here are your candidates:
1. Why do you think you are the best person to be elected to the committee?
Moscow - Quite frankly, I am not the best person to be elected based on how my end in Legends went. However, I'm extremely active and knowledgeable when it comes to FBPB3 and the running of leagues in general. Whether it be team leagues or player leagues, I've been successful in both participating and running leagues in my younger years. I am extremely easy to reach and have had success helping others in this league (ask Mike, who was Brazil in Legends and is now Auckland). Essentially, you'd be adding someone to the committee who is dedicated to seeing the league succeed and grow and has no problem helping people who truly want said help.
New Orleans - I'm the only current nominee (as far as I can tell) who has spent an extended amount of time on the committee in the past, and have been a major part of some of the league's biggest rules and regulations. To name a few: * First proposed the three strikes rule (to remove commissioner bias from firings while backing up the idea that participation and paying attention are minimum requirements to the league) * Helped develop the three-year draft classes in ABCA Global, as well as the Global concept as a whole. * Created rules and voting procedures for the ABCA Hall of Fame (though this was more active in Retro and Global, since we did not have enough retirements to warrant major classes in Legends.) * Created and migrated chat facilities from Skype to Slack. * Consulted on the new three-year random draft classes. Additionally, I ran participation points during my last time on the committee, and simmed the late playoffs for several seasons despite not being on the committee at all.
KK Cibona - I have run leagues for $10,000 payouts and free leagues. I've been known as a strong arbiter of disputes (lawyer), and have been able to negotiate some pretty difficult scenarios for thousands of dollars...It takes all kinds to effectively run a committee, and I believe that I bring a different background than many of the other candidates. I have been playing fantasy leagues since the pen and paper baseball days, and have almost always been in a leadership role within the league.
Vancouver - I have stated my case in bullet points previously but will provide some color here. I’m the only nominee who started from the inception of Legends that never retired, stepped down, quit or was fired. This speaks to my dedication to the league and seeing it be successful. I also believe that my activity level reflects my level of dedication as most people know I’m always on the either the message boards or messaging app and even write articles a fair amount. Additionally, I am very macro oriented so I think my big picture thinking will be beneficial to the committee and will provide a different view that will allow for changes that will be for the betterment of the league long-term. On a personal side, as most people know I have no problem speaking my mind, which I think will lead to constructive discussions regarding league matters. I am not closed minded in the least, so if my point is heard and there are good counter points, I’m amenable and selfless in the sense that I’m always thinking about what’s best for everyone even if it doesn’t jive with my original views.
Washington - I would bring a healthy balance to the current committee representation.
Beijing - I am very committed to the league and have been since season 2 of Legends when I joined. I'm on the boards or slack pretty much all day and can easily be reached for any questions GMs may have. I get along with everyone including Vancouver. Despite the back-and-forth you guys see in the general chat, he and I actually have friendly conversations but we just need to keep up appearances. As I mentioned in my nomination post, I am currently under the tutelage of New York in gaining a better understanding of the game as a whole so I can better help new GMs or GMs without the game. I already help many of them by talking through players during creation, discussing different strategy ideas, and dare I say providing... SCREENSHOTS (EGAD, where's slackbot when you need him?). I want the league to be a place where anyone can feel comfortable discussing anything, so long as its safe for work if on the boards or in #general on slack. I will always hear you out about suggestions you have for the league and will do my best to better it for everyone.
Mikawa - A few reasons. I have some experience being a committee member in a past league as well as took over as commissioner for awhile. I spend more time than I should thinking about the league and would love to play a more active part in shaping its character. Overall I'd probably be a more progressive voice pushing for changes that add more depth, intrigue, and fun to the league (Other ways to earn PP would be on the docket). Beyond this, ideally I could give a hand with the drafts as I've spent more hours than I should messing with the program and have a decent handle on how it works.
Piraeus - There are two reasons that are most important. 1) I am extremely passionate about bringing new ideas to life to continuously improve an already incredible sim league. 2) I will act as a voice for anyone who has an idea and wants a chance to see it through.
2. What do you believe the most important role of the committee is?
Moscow - The most important role in the committee or rather the role that I'd be best at is hearing from people and bringing that to the committee. Voting on changes and adaptations is a crucial part of the league's success and growth and you'd be adding a member who is willing to listen to the public and help decipher what is best for the league's longstanding greatness. I'm very progressive when it comes to unique ways to make this league better and with the number of ideas thrown out there, I'd help see to it that they are fairly heard.
New Orleans - The committee makes representative decisions that would not otherwise get made in a timely fashion with a 36-team vote. It is made up of a combination of respected GMs who have put their time in - this is important, as understanding league dynamics, the nature of the league's structure, and the history of past players, teams, GMs, and rules is necessary to make worthwhile decisions. It enforces the guiding principles of a league that would otherwise fall into chaos with 36 teams each fighting for their own cause.
KK Cibona - The role of the committee is to be an effective liaison between the individual teams and the "league". There needs to be a central system to handling disputes among members where all members are considered equals, and that is why the committee exists. Also, the worst feeling in the world as a league member is that your concerns will not be addressed by the league. That is an unhealthy environment that saps activity and starts unnecessary problems.
Vancouver - Ensuring the integrity of the league is upheld in order to foster a competitive, balanced atmosphere for all general managers.
Washington - To maintain and grow the league, and to make it as enjoyable and competitive as possible for every GM.
Beijing - I believe the most important role of the committee is to make adjustments to the rules when necessary to better the league as a whole, and then clearly and concisely explain the rule changes to everyone. One issue with this in the past has been the tendency by some to say "go read the post" or "we already explained this." I'll be the first to admit that the people who often say this aren't wrong, but there have been times where I have been confused and when I presented my concerns to the general chat, its met with further confusion and/or generally poor explanation. But ask one of the committee members for an explanation directly, and you can get an explanation that will fix any confusion because they are all good at what they do, its just a matter of not having everyone dog-pile questions on them all at once.
Mikawa - Making decisions on what's best for the league and making life less terrible for the commish (It's a ton of work keeping this league afloat). Also, Expansion.
Piraeus - The most important role of the committee is to execute the normal functions of the league in a predictable, fair, and consistent manner. To that end, the committee already does a top notch job with its core responsibilities. We are not electing new members to fix any major issue.
3. If you could, what is the one thing you would change about the league? And as a followup, if you are elected to the committee, what is the first change you would put to a committee vote?
Moscow - One of the biggest adjustments to the league is the off-season. After this long but necessary initial draft, the league is facing an off-season in a couple months that will seem quite drawn out between Coach FA being bigger than normal and the fact that we have just come through this long process. My first change I'd like to see implemented is a quicker off-season which means an adjustment in the off-season to the typical M/W/F sims. I'd like to see it go to 1 or 2 more sims a week when going through the off-season so the downtime and lack of activity doesn't wane like it has in the past.
New Orleans - Well, I hate Proboards, and would love to find a better forum solution (or ditch the forum concept altogether for anything outside of transactional history). This may not be a realistic endeavor, but we've started that shift with most of the league communicating via Slack. I also feel that major decisions are sometimes made without a clear path, and I'd like to codify those decisions. The first season we did contraction, we went through every single element and voted one way or the other. However, it felt like decisions in the creation draft were made, changed, and then ignored a few times - especially with the draft schedule. I'd like to be a part of future decisions to make these plans more concrete and stick to them.
KK Cibona - I would like to repeal the Ted Stepien rule. If someone wants to go all-in, they should be allowed to. I get that it could create problems in terms of turnover, but it seems that ABCA has had a solid owner base for awhile. I also think that the committee may need some transparency on league issues. This shouldn't be an "ivory tower" position where rulings come down from on high without letting people know some of the reasoning behind the decisions.
Vancouver - The change I would implement right away is to disable injuries during pre-season. The risk of injury is too high that most GMs bench there starting lineups, which ultimately makes the entire preseason a waste of time. The teams that do take the risk and play their starters see skewed results because they are playing against backups and IR players. Preseason should be used as a time to be able to test settings/lineups based on the team assembled over the off-season. I would definitely put the above mentioned item to a vote as we just completed a completion draft where ratings have changed and no one knows what’s going to happen. Having the ability to at least run your normal lineup with no risk of injury will make for an actually useful preseason.
Washington - The first thing I would do on the committee is file a motion for Bamberg to be placed on probation until his behaviour towards other GMs improved. During the probationary period I would expect that he would not be included in any committee voting and would not be able shape the future of the league.
Beijing - With a full roster of active GMs not including San Fran, there isn't much I would change right now except for one thing. As Seer pointed out in his recent interview with Stephen Colbert, the admission process in this league is.... interesting. What someone posts in Off-topic has almost no indication of what kind of GM they could be aside from revealing the fact that they may be an asshole, but we already have Vancouver and Perth so what's one more? So how can we change this process?
I think Seer was on the right track with the sample DC, plan of action type option. But I'd like to expand on that. As a new application process, we have Waitlist GMs write an article in the media section titled "Username's Application for *enter team name*." In this article, understanding that they likely have only a vague understanding of the game from reading the boards, they develop a sample DC and game plan for the desired team and supply the method to their madness. A plan of action should also be included with which direction they would like to head, how they plan to do so, and why they want to do so. The last piece would be to have a question section at the end of the article where they can ask any questions they may have about the game that may not have answers on the boards (ex. which ratings affect which defensive settings?). These questions would be answered by the committee members with the greatest understanding of the question. This shows a willingness to learn about the game, and could help with the success of the mentorship program moving forward. For instance, if they have zero game experience and then zero questions about any aspect of the game, it could be considered a red flag that they don't want to ask for any help. This doesn't necessarily have to be the case every time but it should be noted. The committee would then review the article, answer questions, and move forward with a vote of admittance or rejection. Anyone would be able to comment on the candidate or what they think about the plan, methodology, etc.
Mikawa - Once again, expansion. What seems to be abuzz at the moment is preseason injuries and I wouldn't mind seeing this brought up to vote (Though it seems I'll miss out on getting this through for season1). It'd be nice if we were able to play our players and actually generate value for trades based on their performance as well as start to figure out a dc without consequence. As it stands now, if anyone plays well it's chalked up to 5th string competition. Given this, it just ends up being a wasted sim in most cases with nothing valuable to be gleaned from it.
Piraeus - I would create and own a comprehensive forum on Ultimate league history that detailed each of the franchises (+ new and contracted ones over time), team and league records, championship team rosters, the Hall of Fame, and other fun accolades that build up over time. That initiative would take some time as the league gains seasons under its belt. In the meantime, the first small, actionable vote I would put up would be to alter or simply remove the weight room PP camps. Strength was used I believe once, in the very beginning of Legends, and never again. Endurance has never been used. Why do we still have them?
4. With all the talk about cliques and old boys clubs from certain teams, what do you think about the current league dynamic and how do you fit in it personally?
Moscow - First of all, the cliques and old boys clubs aren't as serious as people think. This is coming from someone who falsely accused (regardless of seriousness level) people of stuff because of it. Some of the older members grow tired of each other much faster than you'd believe and certainly don't see eye to eye. There isn't a single person on the current board I don't greatly respect as a person and GM despite any differences. As far as the league as a whole, there are certainly many personalities and I've had no issue communicating or working with any of those either.
New Orleans - Anyone talking about cliques and old boys clubs is trolling and stirring shit, which is one of those things we get every once in a while from newer GMs. There's a group of us who have been in these leagues for a long time, and with that comes a familiarity. I think the league dynamic is really good, actually - we have a mix of people from the last league, former leagues, and new to this league. There's a wide range of people both as GMs and on the committee, with people from the original ABCA all the way to people who were brought on just with Legends. My fit in the current league dynamic, weirdly, is as a voice of reason. A lot of people say some stupid things on here - committee members included. I'm not afraid to challenge those things. I try not to take myself too seriously - I mean, after all, I DID add a fart joke generator. One major big note: I want to make it clear - there's a difference between "challenging dumb ideas/actions" and "being contrarian." There are people in this league who constantly stir shit and try to rile people up. That is their own thing - but that's not "challenging ideas." That's just "showing immaturity."
KK Cibona - I haven't been in ABCA that long, and I feel like I've gotten along well with most every team. Every league has teams that work closely with others...this isn't a new dynamic only happening here. As long as rules of fair play are followed, I don't see a major issue. If there is active collusion, then the league will have to step in and figure out what to do about it. I was recruited towards the end of Legends, and I have tried to be friendly with everyone in the league. There's no reason that I would change that now.
Vancouver - I’m like Hawaii, all alone away from everyone else but still apart of the USA. I am friendly with mostly everyone and participate in banter/trash talking for pure enjoyment but I would say I’m definitely not involved with any clique/club. I personally don’t have any issue with the league dynamic, certain GMs have good rapport with one another and to each their own. Some are friends outside of this league and that’s great, all I care about is people caring and wanting to compete. I have gone out of my way to help certain GMs learn the game and understand value just for the sake of seeing them be more competitive.
Washington - I've provided enough input on this topic. All I will say is that I consider the fact that this has become the #1 issue of the election a direct success of my campaign. Whether you agree to disagree with the notion, it clearly warranted attention and discussion. Now that the the issue has been raised, I expect it to be resolved by its own momentum.
Beijing - I think the whole "Clique" narrative is driven by one person. And rather than try to be friendly and get to know people, he just wants to antagonize people. Otherwise I think the league as a whole is pretty tight knit actually. I feel comfortable talking to almost every GM about whatever topics not involving the league. Sure some GMs are closer than others but that's just a matter of them being in leagues together longer. Could some people be a little more friendly? Sure. Do I think the mentor system helped bridge the gap between veteran GMs and newbies somewhat at the end of Legends? Absolutely. You're always going to have some GMs that want to grind it out on their own and not ask for any help right off the bat. Nothing you can do about them except let them learn.
In terms of where I fit in, I'm about as smack dab in the middle as you can be. Like I said before, I can talk to any of these GMs in a friendly manner pretty much any time. At the end of Legends, I was lumped in as part of the "Clique" because I agreed with the older guys on some issues (even if my role would be the fat friend only there for comic relief). Fast forward to a couple weeks ago, I along with one other GM that I'm aware of were invited to join an "ABCA Gang" to "combat the Clique." Needless to say, I turned down the offer but it just goes to show that I get along with pretty much everyone.
Mikawa - Cliques are great; they inspire rivalries. This league is wonderful in that if you want to be taken seriously as a GM, you need to get results (Not just whine about it). When I started, I got torn apart for some of my trades, but over time, I made some of them work (The downside of this seems to be that no one wants my picks even when my roster is terrible).
Piraeus - I enjoy talking to just about everyone in the league, but recognize that some people can be put off by my temperament. I am working toward setting that aside, and focusing on winning and having fun doing it. ABCA league dynamics have been great. Except Craig. Craig sucked.
5. There are two open committee spots…other than yourself, who do you think is most deserving of being elected to the committee?
Moscow - I am really glad this question was asked because I'd like to ask voters to consider what this committee really needs. There are 2 spots and I think they should be viewed as completely separate races to be honest. The board needs two different people that fit a category of either behind the scenes type workers or those in the forefront of activity on both Slack and the message board. For the behind the scenes position I've heard talk of both jmoney and Corey being realistic candidates and either would be best suited. For the out front and opinionated group publicly I believe you've got to take a look at wmartin and Zuban. If you aren't familiar with who those people are by those names, you need to do more homework instead of voting for the more popular name. That being said, the most deserving is someone who hasn't had a shot and never once left Legends from creation draft to the folding. That person is wmartin!
New Orleans - I think Seer steers clear of ABCA bullshit and is as impartial a person as I've seen, so one of my votes goes to him without a doubt. I got to work with Mikawa (old Seattle) a bit in helping determine the rules of order for the creation draft, and I think he's got a good head on his shoulders as well. He gets my other vote.
KK Cibona - I think Pireaus would make an excellent committee member. He has extensive knowledge of the game and is very active in league matters. II think he is very good at generating activity and doing things for the benefit of the league. I endorse him fully for a spot.
Vancouver - That’s tough as there are no bad candidates but I would lean towards Mikawa. He knows the game just as good, if not better than most and very analytical which would be a nice value add to the committee.
Washington - While there are several solid options, Mikawa is the #1 choice for me. Like New York, his levelheadedness would be an asset to the committee. And unlike some committee members, he doesn't bring up his championship wins at every opportunity.
Beijing - Mikawa, hands down. He is without a doubt the most knowledgeable person about the game and he could provide a unique insight to the committee about certain aspects that could lead to positive changes in the league. He is also a super friendly guy and has been more active with everyone, from what I can tell, at the start of Ultimate than I've ever seen him. If you don't vote for him with one of your two votes, you've made a terrible mistake.
Mikawa - This is tough as there's more than one I'd consider however, I had the privilege of assisting with some of the creation draft planning and Corey was also in the mix. He does well in a committee role and has for longer than I've been around.
Piraeus - He may not be the top of mind choice, but Tim (KK Cibona) is such a smart guy who I’ve had the privilege of knowing in other leagues. He is level-headed yet also deliberate when he needs to be. He takes initiative like with the Find-a-Pick list and is humble. He’d make an excellent committee member.
1. Why do you think you are the best person to be elected to the committee?
Moscow - Quite frankly, I am not the best person to be elected based on how my end in Legends went. However, I'm extremely active and knowledgeable when it comes to FBPB3 and the running of leagues in general. Whether it be team leagues or player leagues, I've been successful in both participating and running leagues in my younger years. I am extremely easy to reach and have had success helping others in this league (ask Mike, who was Brazil in Legends and is now Auckland). Essentially, you'd be adding someone to the committee who is dedicated to seeing the league succeed and grow and has no problem helping people who truly want said help.
New Orleans - I'm the only current nominee (as far as I can tell) who has spent an extended amount of time on the committee in the past, and have been a major part of some of the league's biggest rules and regulations. To name a few: * First proposed the three strikes rule (to remove commissioner bias from firings while backing up the idea that participation and paying attention are minimum requirements to the league) * Helped develop the three-year draft classes in ABCA Global, as well as the Global concept as a whole. * Created rules and voting procedures for the ABCA Hall of Fame (though this was more active in Retro and Global, since we did not have enough retirements to warrant major classes in Legends.) * Created and migrated chat facilities from Skype to Slack. * Consulted on the new three-year random draft classes. Additionally, I ran participation points during my last time on the committee, and simmed the late playoffs for several seasons despite not being on the committee at all.
KK Cibona - I have run leagues for $10,000 payouts and free leagues. I've been known as a strong arbiter of disputes (lawyer), and have been able to negotiate some pretty difficult scenarios for thousands of dollars...It takes all kinds to effectively run a committee, and I believe that I bring a different background than many of the other candidates. I have been playing fantasy leagues since the pen and paper baseball days, and have almost always been in a leadership role within the league.
Vancouver - I have stated my case in bullet points previously but will provide some color here. I’m the only nominee who started from the inception of Legends that never retired, stepped down, quit or was fired. This speaks to my dedication to the league and seeing it be successful. I also believe that my activity level reflects my level of dedication as most people know I’m always on the either the message boards or messaging app and even write articles a fair amount. Additionally, I am very macro oriented so I think my big picture thinking will be beneficial to the committee and will provide a different view that will allow for changes that will be for the betterment of the league long-term. On a personal side, as most people know I have no problem speaking my mind, which I think will lead to constructive discussions regarding league matters. I am not closed minded in the least, so if my point is heard and there are good counter points, I’m amenable and selfless in the sense that I’m always thinking about what’s best for everyone even if it doesn’t jive with my original views.
Washington - I would bring a healthy balance to the current committee representation.
Beijing - I am very committed to the league and have been since season 2 of Legends when I joined. I'm on the boards or slack pretty much all day and can easily be reached for any questions GMs may have. I get along with everyone including Vancouver. Despite the back-and-forth you guys see in the general chat, he and I actually have friendly conversations but we just need to keep up appearances. As I mentioned in my nomination post, I am currently under the tutelage of New York in gaining a better understanding of the game as a whole so I can better help new GMs or GMs without the game. I already help many of them by talking through players during creation, discussing different strategy ideas, and dare I say providing... SCREENSHOTS (EGAD, where's slackbot when you need him?). I want the league to be a place where anyone can feel comfortable discussing anything, so long as its safe for work if on the boards or in #general on slack. I will always hear you out about suggestions you have for the league and will do my best to better it for everyone.
Mikawa - A few reasons. I have some experience being a committee member in a past league as well as took over as commissioner for awhile. I spend more time than I should thinking about the league and would love to play a more active part in shaping its character. Overall I'd probably be a more progressive voice pushing for changes that add more depth, intrigue, and fun to the league (Other ways to earn PP would be on the docket). Beyond this, ideally I could give a hand with the drafts as I've spent more hours than I should messing with the program and have a decent handle on how it works.
Piraeus - There are two reasons that are most important. 1) I am extremely passionate about bringing new ideas to life to continuously improve an already incredible sim league. 2) I will act as a voice for anyone who has an idea and wants a chance to see it through.
2. What do you believe the most important role of the committee is?
Moscow - The most important role in the committee or rather the role that I'd be best at is hearing from people and bringing that to the committee. Voting on changes and adaptations is a crucial part of the league's success and growth and you'd be adding a member who is willing to listen to the public and help decipher what is best for the league's longstanding greatness. I'm very progressive when it comes to unique ways to make this league better and with the number of ideas thrown out there, I'd help see to it that they are fairly heard.
New Orleans - The committee makes representative decisions that would not otherwise get made in a timely fashion with a 36-team vote. It is made up of a combination of respected GMs who have put their time in - this is important, as understanding league dynamics, the nature of the league's structure, and the history of past players, teams, GMs, and rules is necessary to make worthwhile decisions. It enforces the guiding principles of a league that would otherwise fall into chaos with 36 teams each fighting for their own cause.
KK Cibona - The role of the committee is to be an effective liaison between the individual teams and the "league". There needs to be a central system to handling disputes among members where all members are considered equals, and that is why the committee exists. Also, the worst feeling in the world as a league member is that your concerns will not be addressed by the league. That is an unhealthy environment that saps activity and starts unnecessary problems.
Vancouver - Ensuring the integrity of the league is upheld in order to foster a competitive, balanced atmosphere for all general managers.
Washington - To maintain and grow the league, and to make it as enjoyable and competitive as possible for every GM.
Beijing - I believe the most important role of the committee is to make adjustments to the rules when necessary to better the league as a whole, and then clearly and concisely explain the rule changes to everyone. One issue with this in the past has been the tendency by some to say "go read the post" or "we already explained this." I'll be the first to admit that the people who often say this aren't wrong, but there have been times where I have been confused and when I presented my concerns to the general chat, its met with further confusion and/or generally poor explanation. But ask one of the committee members for an explanation directly, and you can get an explanation that will fix any confusion because they are all good at what they do, its just a matter of not having everyone dog-pile questions on them all at once.
Mikawa - Making decisions on what's best for the league and making life less terrible for the commish (It's a ton of work keeping this league afloat). Also, Expansion.
Piraeus - The most important role of the committee is to execute the normal functions of the league in a predictable, fair, and consistent manner. To that end, the committee already does a top notch job with its core responsibilities. We are not electing new members to fix any major issue.
3. If you could, what is the one thing you would change about the league? And as a followup, if you are elected to the committee, what is the first change you would put to a committee vote?
Moscow - One of the biggest adjustments to the league is the off-season. After this long but necessary initial draft, the league is facing an off-season in a couple months that will seem quite drawn out between Coach FA being bigger than normal and the fact that we have just come through this long process. My first change I'd like to see implemented is a quicker off-season which means an adjustment in the off-season to the typical M/W/F sims. I'd like to see it go to 1 or 2 more sims a week when going through the off-season so the downtime and lack of activity doesn't wane like it has in the past.
New Orleans - Well, I hate Proboards, and would love to find a better forum solution (or ditch the forum concept altogether for anything outside of transactional history). This may not be a realistic endeavor, but we've started that shift with most of the league communicating via Slack. I also feel that major decisions are sometimes made without a clear path, and I'd like to codify those decisions. The first season we did contraction, we went through every single element and voted one way or the other. However, it felt like decisions in the creation draft were made, changed, and then ignored a few times - especially with the draft schedule. I'd like to be a part of future decisions to make these plans more concrete and stick to them.
KK Cibona - I would like to repeal the Ted Stepien rule. If someone wants to go all-in, they should be allowed to. I get that it could create problems in terms of turnover, but it seems that ABCA has had a solid owner base for awhile. I also think that the committee may need some transparency on league issues. This shouldn't be an "ivory tower" position where rulings come down from on high without letting people know some of the reasoning behind the decisions.
Vancouver - The change I would implement right away is to disable injuries during pre-season. The risk of injury is too high that most GMs bench there starting lineups, which ultimately makes the entire preseason a waste of time. The teams that do take the risk and play their starters see skewed results because they are playing against backups and IR players. Preseason should be used as a time to be able to test settings/lineups based on the team assembled over the off-season. I would definitely put the above mentioned item to a vote as we just completed a completion draft where ratings have changed and no one knows what’s going to happen. Having the ability to at least run your normal lineup with no risk of injury will make for an actually useful preseason.
Washington - The first thing I would do on the committee is file a motion for Bamberg to be placed on probation until his behaviour towards other GMs improved. During the probationary period I would expect that he would not be included in any committee voting and would not be able shape the future of the league.
Beijing - With a full roster of active GMs not including San Fran, there isn't much I would change right now except for one thing. As Seer pointed out in his recent interview with Stephen Colbert, the admission process in this league is.... interesting. What someone posts in Off-topic has almost no indication of what kind of GM they could be aside from revealing the fact that they may be an asshole, but we already have Vancouver and Perth so what's one more? So how can we change this process?
I think Seer was on the right track with the sample DC, plan of action type option. But I'd like to expand on that. As a new application process, we have Waitlist GMs write an article in the media section titled "Username's Application for *enter team name*." In this article, understanding that they likely have only a vague understanding of the game from reading the boards, they develop a sample DC and game plan for the desired team and supply the method to their madness. A plan of action should also be included with which direction they would like to head, how they plan to do so, and why they want to do so. The last piece would be to have a question section at the end of the article where they can ask any questions they may have about the game that may not have answers on the boards (ex. which ratings affect which defensive settings?). These questions would be answered by the committee members with the greatest understanding of the question. This shows a willingness to learn about the game, and could help with the success of the mentorship program moving forward. For instance, if they have zero game experience and then zero questions about any aspect of the game, it could be considered a red flag that they don't want to ask for any help. This doesn't necessarily have to be the case every time but it should be noted. The committee would then review the article, answer questions, and move forward with a vote of admittance or rejection. Anyone would be able to comment on the candidate or what they think about the plan, methodology, etc.
Mikawa - Once again, expansion. What seems to be abuzz at the moment is preseason injuries and I wouldn't mind seeing this brought up to vote (Though it seems I'll miss out on getting this through for season1). It'd be nice if we were able to play our players and actually generate value for trades based on their performance as well as start to figure out a dc without consequence. As it stands now, if anyone plays well it's chalked up to 5th string competition. Given this, it just ends up being a wasted sim in most cases with nothing valuable to be gleaned from it.
Piraeus - I would create and own a comprehensive forum on Ultimate league history that detailed each of the franchises (+ new and contracted ones over time), team and league records, championship team rosters, the Hall of Fame, and other fun accolades that build up over time. That initiative would take some time as the league gains seasons under its belt. In the meantime, the first small, actionable vote I would put up would be to alter or simply remove the weight room PP camps. Strength was used I believe once, in the very beginning of Legends, and never again. Endurance has never been used. Why do we still have them?
4. With all the talk about cliques and old boys clubs from certain teams, what do you think about the current league dynamic and how do you fit in it personally?
Moscow - First of all, the cliques and old boys clubs aren't as serious as people think. This is coming from someone who falsely accused (regardless of seriousness level) people of stuff because of it. Some of the older members grow tired of each other much faster than you'd believe and certainly don't see eye to eye. There isn't a single person on the current board I don't greatly respect as a person and GM despite any differences. As far as the league as a whole, there are certainly many personalities and I've had no issue communicating or working with any of those either.
New Orleans - Anyone talking about cliques and old boys clubs is trolling and stirring shit, which is one of those things we get every once in a while from newer GMs. There's a group of us who have been in these leagues for a long time, and with that comes a familiarity. I think the league dynamic is really good, actually - we have a mix of people from the last league, former leagues, and new to this league. There's a wide range of people both as GMs and on the committee, with people from the original ABCA all the way to people who were brought on just with Legends. My fit in the current league dynamic, weirdly, is as a voice of reason. A lot of people say some stupid things on here - committee members included. I'm not afraid to challenge those things. I try not to take myself too seriously - I mean, after all, I DID add a fart joke generator. One major big note: I want to make it clear - there's a difference between "challenging dumb ideas/actions" and "being contrarian." There are people in this league who constantly stir shit and try to rile people up. That is their own thing - but that's not "challenging ideas." That's just "showing immaturity."
KK Cibona - I haven't been in ABCA that long, and I feel like I've gotten along well with most every team. Every league has teams that work closely with others...this isn't a new dynamic only happening here. As long as rules of fair play are followed, I don't see a major issue. If there is active collusion, then the league will have to step in and figure out what to do about it. I was recruited towards the end of Legends, and I have tried to be friendly with everyone in the league. There's no reason that I would change that now.
Vancouver - I’m like Hawaii, all alone away from everyone else but still apart of the USA. I am friendly with mostly everyone and participate in banter/trash talking for pure enjoyment but I would say I’m definitely not involved with any clique/club. I personally don’t have any issue with the league dynamic, certain GMs have good rapport with one another and to each their own. Some are friends outside of this league and that’s great, all I care about is people caring and wanting to compete. I have gone out of my way to help certain GMs learn the game and understand value just for the sake of seeing them be more competitive.
Washington - I've provided enough input on this topic. All I will say is that I consider the fact that this has become the #1 issue of the election a direct success of my campaign. Whether you agree to disagree with the notion, it clearly warranted attention and discussion. Now that the the issue has been raised, I expect it to be resolved by its own momentum.
Beijing - I think the whole "Clique" narrative is driven by one person. And rather than try to be friendly and get to know people, he just wants to antagonize people. Otherwise I think the league as a whole is pretty tight knit actually. I feel comfortable talking to almost every GM about whatever topics not involving the league. Sure some GMs are closer than others but that's just a matter of them being in leagues together longer. Could some people be a little more friendly? Sure. Do I think the mentor system helped bridge the gap between veteran GMs and newbies somewhat at the end of Legends? Absolutely. You're always going to have some GMs that want to grind it out on their own and not ask for any help right off the bat. Nothing you can do about them except let them learn.
In terms of where I fit in, I'm about as smack dab in the middle as you can be. Like I said before, I can talk to any of these GMs in a friendly manner pretty much any time. At the end of Legends, I was lumped in as part of the "Clique" because I agreed with the older guys on some issues (even if my role would be the fat friend only there for comic relief). Fast forward to a couple weeks ago, I along with one other GM that I'm aware of were invited to join an "ABCA Gang" to "combat the Clique." Needless to say, I turned down the offer but it just goes to show that I get along with pretty much everyone.
Mikawa - Cliques are great; they inspire rivalries. This league is wonderful in that if you want to be taken seriously as a GM, you need to get results (Not just whine about it). When I started, I got torn apart for some of my trades, but over time, I made some of them work (The downside of this seems to be that no one wants my picks even when my roster is terrible).
Piraeus - I enjoy talking to just about everyone in the league, but recognize that some people can be put off by my temperament. I am working toward setting that aside, and focusing on winning and having fun doing it. ABCA league dynamics have been great. Except Craig. Craig sucked.
5. There are two open committee spots…other than yourself, who do you think is most deserving of being elected to the committee?
Moscow - I am really glad this question was asked because I'd like to ask voters to consider what this committee really needs. There are 2 spots and I think they should be viewed as completely separate races to be honest. The board needs two different people that fit a category of either behind the scenes type workers or those in the forefront of activity on both Slack and the message board. For the behind the scenes position I've heard talk of both jmoney and Corey being realistic candidates and either would be best suited. For the out front and opinionated group publicly I believe you've got to take a look at wmartin and Zuban. If you aren't familiar with who those people are by those names, you need to do more homework instead of voting for the more popular name. That being said, the most deserving is someone who hasn't had a shot and never once left Legends from creation draft to the folding. That person is wmartin!
New Orleans - I think Seer steers clear of ABCA bullshit and is as impartial a person as I've seen, so one of my votes goes to him without a doubt. I got to work with Mikawa (old Seattle) a bit in helping determine the rules of order for the creation draft, and I think he's got a good head on his shoulders as well. He gets my other vote.
KK Cibona - I think Pireaus would make an excellent committee member. He has extensive knowledge of the game and is very active in league matters. II think he is very good at generating activity and doing things for the benefit of the league. I endorse him fully for a spot.
Vancouver - That’s tough as there are no bad candidates but I would lean towards Mikawa. He knows the game just as good, if not better than most and very analytical which would be a nice value add to the committee.
Washington - While there are several solid options, Mikawa is the #1 choice for me. Like New York, his levelheadedness would be an asset to the committee. And unlike some committee members, he doesn't bring up his championship wins at every opportunity.
Beijing - Mikawa, hands down. He is without a doubt the most knowledgeable person about the game and he could provide a unique insight to the committee about certain aspects that could lead to positive changes in the league. He is also a super friendly guy and has been more active with everyone, from what I can tell, at the start of Ultimate than I've ever seen him. If you don't vote for him with one of your two votes, you've made a terrible mistake.
Mikawa - This is tough as there's more than one I'd consider however, I had the privilege of assisting with some of the creation draft planning and Corey was also in the mix. He does well in a committee role and has for longer than I've been around.
Piraeus - He may not be the top of mind choice, but Tim (KK Cibona) is such a smart guy who I’ve had the privilege of knowing in other leagues. He is level-headed yet also deliberate when he needs to be. He takes initiative like with the Find-a-Pick list and is humble. He’d make an excellent committee member.
