Ben (Rays GM)
General Manager
Commissioner Emeritus
Ben
Posts: 6,470
|
Post by Ben (Rays GM) on Jan 25, 2017 14:40:30 GMT -5
There was some discussion about reducing the required number of vetoes. Currently the veto rule reads as follows:
At this time, the options are reducing the number of vetoes to 6 or 5.
Scoring this poll (I'm only posting this now for posterity, you do not need to read the rest of this post at this time):
If the total number of votes for options A (5 votes) and B (6 votes) exceed the votes for option C (8 votes), we will reduce the number (even if option C has more votes than A or B do on their own). For us to keep the total at 8 votes, C needs to have a majority. However, in that case, all votes for C will count toward option B. In other words:
A: 8 votes B: 7 votes C: 10 votes
In this scenario, 15 people voted to reduce while 10 voted to keep it as is. Therefore, we will reduce the total, even though C had the plurality of votes. However, since it's fair to assume all 10 of the votes for C would have chosen B over A, B ends up the winning vote (ironic, but even though it had the lowest total, it's safe to consider it the best compromise).
A scenario in which A would win might look as follows:
A: 15 votes B: 6 votes C: 4 votes
Similarly, a scenario in which C would win might look as follows:
A: 5 votes B: 4 votes C: 16 votes
|
|
Ben (Rays GM)
General Manager
Commissioner Emeritus
Ben
Posts: 6,470
|
Post by Ben (Rays GM) on Jan 25, 2017 14:45:14 GMT -5
Obviously, if vetoes do get reduced it won't apply to any current trades (or any trades posted between now and the closing of the poll)
|
|
Ben (Rays GM)
General Manager
Commissioner Emeritus
Ben
Posts: 6,470
|
Post by Ben (Rays GM) on Jan 28, 2017 17:17:22 GMT -5
With 17 votes in favor of reducing against 0 votes in favor of keeping it as is, we will definitely be reducing the number of vetoes.
Given the lead that 6 votes has over 5, we're going to reduce to 6 vetoes. This is effective immediately for all trades posted after this time.
|
|