Media Constitutional Crisis Averted

[BRAB]

You misunderstand, anything I do in the role of Administrator is for protection of the ROLE, or for the good of the league, not for personal preservation or gain.
The admin role needs to be stable, but a significant majority can still evict the sitting admin if necessary. There are other safeguards enshrined in the Rules allowing for vetos and reversals of executive decisions.
The previous rule was unworkable. 51% vote could ask the admin to stand aside, with little regard for the destabilisation of the league
Under the current election system, as opposed to the previous system of executive appointment, the Admin has been elected by the majority to represent the entire league, and it is destabilising if the vocal minority are regularly threatening to unseat the sitting admin.
Everything I do in this role is with the best interests of the league at heart. I and other Committee members have put forth many ideas, some of which get up, some work and some dont, and some have voted down. Why do you think we do not have a publicly visible Committee?

If you believed in the good of the league, why didn't you consult the league before making the change?

The rule worked fine for Filth, Hate and Cloud. What makes you so special?

Seems transparently for personal preservation mate. That's been your MO for YEARS.

 

[pantskyle]

You misunderstand, anything I do in the role of Administrator is for protection of the ROLE, or for the good of the league, not for personal preservation or gain.
The admin role needs to be stable, but a significant majority can still evict the sitting admin if necessary. There are other safeguards enshrined in the Rules allowing for vetos and reversals of executive decisions.
The previous rule was unworkable. 51% vote could ask the admin to stand aside, with little regard for the destabilisation of the league
Under the current election system, as opposed to the previous system of executive appointment, the Admin has been elected by the majority to represent the entire league, and it is destabilising if the vocal minority are regularly threatening to unseat the sitting admin.
Everything I do in this role is with the best interests of the league at heart. I and other Committee members have put forth many ideas, some of which get up, some work and some dont, and some have voted down. Why do you think we do not have a publicly visible Committee?

That comes across as complete bullshit and I think you know it. The admin should be at the disposal of the committee, you have removed the rights of the club's to protect your own role. If you're doing the right job you should not have fear of having 50% of the club's against you.

You've taken away the power of the club's by force. It's not acceptable and doesn't help your cause at all and all the club's should be taking action to have that reversed. In fact I implore that you do the right thing and change that rule back to what it should be.

 

[Ant Bear]

But it's not a vocal minority, it would be a majority of the committee representatives?

One thing this farce showed was that a vocal minority CAN influence a number of less invested captains to vote for anything.

 

[BRAB]

I would have over-ruled the Committee if need be.

Odd choice to PM captains then if you were just going to overrule them anyway.

Would you step down if 9 captains voted to remove you for the good of the league as well?

 

[BRAB]

One thing this farce showed was that a vocal minority CAN influence a number of less invested captains to vote for anything.

This is literally ****ing Orwellian.

Any captain that doesn't agree with you is viewed as not having the capacity to have an independent vote.

What happens if these "less invested" captains vote to remove you? Will you overrule them again?

 

[The Filth Wizard]

The previous rule was unworkable. 51% vote could ask the admin to stand aside, with little regard for the destabilisation of the league

In fairness it's been a longstanding rule that's never destabilised the league before. What do you think is worse? Half of the committee being able to call for an admins head or an admin just needing to have three peers in the committee to steer them through doing whatever they want to do? I mean, do you think it was the right time to make such an immensely important rule change immediately after being the first admin voted in? I think the biggest issue is that it seems nobody even noticed you'd changed it until recently, at a time when some people are wondering what the alternatives are.

You say it was unworkable but it was fine for everybody that was admin beforehand. I mean, honestly, do you think six clubs (whole clubs, not individuals as the committee works for their clubs) are going to oust an admin for a flimsy reason? Now eight out of twelve clubs might think they have a real reason to change their admin and they can't.

Did you ever stop to think that maybe the "51%" thing was because it means the majority of the committee had lost faith in the admin? Why would a hypothetical admin want to run a league over half of its people want out?

 

[okeydoke7]

If my final act as Admin was to preserve the integrity of this rule, then it was worth it. As Mobbs and Ljp have said, it is the single most sacred rule in the history of the league, and I would have over-ruled the Committee if need be.

I love the rule and, once again, I agree that the right decision was made.

This debate isn’t about outcome, it’s about process.

My argument is that there shouldn’t have been a vote or an appeals process if the outcome was pre-determined. It’s corrupt. It’s also a waste of people’s time.

The admin position used to be (essentially) a dictatorship back when life was easy, but the league got so big and these posters needed a greater say in what was happening. In a way, I’m at fault for introducing a culture of consultation after Boncer’s dictatorship.

At least Boncer was honest about running the league with an iron fist. You’re trying to rule with iron while looking like velvet.

 

[okeydoke7]

Anarchy honestly is the answer. A player revolt against corruption. Uncontrollable chaos, unenforceable rules. Just for a couple of weeks. It would be a thing of beauty. It would go down in history.

I’m either serious, bored or both right now.

 

[BRAB]

Far Kern

Thoughts on Ant Bear openly stating he knows better than the committee?

 

[pantskyle]

Anarchy honestly is the answer. A player revolt against corruption. Uncontrollable chaos, unenforceable rules. Just for a couple of weeks. It would be a thing of beauty. It would go down in history.

I’m either serious, bored or both right now.

I'd settle for a working committee and an admin not working for his own best interests.

Less captain's causing stupid issues.
Simmers not being so damn precious.
Less Bombers.

 

[okeydoke7]

I'd settle for a working committee and an admin not working for his own best interests.

Less captain's causing stupid issues.
Simmers not being so damn precious.
Less Bombers.

Borrrriiinnnngggg.

Accurate but borrrriiinnngggg.

 

[pantskyle]

Borrrriiinnnngggg.

Accurate but borrrriiinnngggg.

And we can marry our own cousins.

 

[SM]

Ant bear is pathetically clinging to make believe power in a make believe league.

Sad.

 

[BRAB]

Ant Bear

Honestly thought you couldn't make a single thread that could tank your standing in the league as much as your "Angels of the Sweet FA" thread but you've managed to take the cake with this one.

 

[Barrybran]

I'd settle for a working committee and an admin not working for his own best interests.

Less captain's causing stupid issues.
Simmers not being so damn precious.
Less Bombers.

Look at the silver linings. People are engaged.

 

[Ant Bear]

I love the rule and, once again, I agree that the right decision was made.

This debate isn’t about outcome, it’s about process.

My argument is that there shouldn’t have been a vote or an appeals process if the outcome was pre-determined. It’s corrupt. It’s also a waste of people’s time.

Do you think that I do not understand this? It should have been a pre-determined outcome. It should never have even been appealed, it was a flagrant breach of the rules, but clubs have a right of appeal. The vote should have been 11-0.

It was a second-last resort. The last resort would have been over-ruling the Committee and walking away, and I would have been satisfied that my last act as Admin was to protect the fabric of the league.

 

[BRAB]

Do you think that I do not understand this? It should have been a pre-determined outcome. It should never have even been appealed, it was a flagrant breach of the rules, but clubs have a right of appeal. The vote should have been 11-0.

It was a second-last resort. The last resort would have been over-ruling the Committee and walking away, and I would have been satisfied that my last act as Admin was to protect the fabric of the league.

If you take this argument to the logical extreme you're arguing for a lack of a committee.

If your goal was to protect the fabric of the league, openly corrupting the role of the committee seems like a strange approach.

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

As a late comer but interested observer of recent debate I have a couple of simple questions about governance and how to move the issues forward without burning umpteen people in the process.
1 How and to whom is the current Admin held to account? How best would a clear accountability model work.
2 Would a Board - CEO model be preferable to the current arrangements which seem opaque at best?
3 Would such a Board be best structured to represent the diverse valid interests in the SFA that go beyond the particular interests of a committee with12 Club Captains/delegates?

If a Board model was adopted it would not be sensible for it to be solely of the Club's. Personally I'd go for three or four Club reps whod represent the interests of all Clubs.

In particular the people who spend time tweaking/fixing the Sim, the folk who run the Games of a Sunday and organise the stats after. I'd give those folk who actively serve the SFA as a whole, two or three seats on the Board.

The Admin would be a non voting member as would a rep if ex Admins

Separately surely if there are golden rules there should be no provision of appeals. And again if there are other rules that are unclear then FFS fix them.

 

[CakeEater]

Who is willing to be John Kerr here?

 

[Agent93]

it’s about process.

It's always been about process. It seems there's a strict adherence to certain written rules, and a laissez faire attitude to others. The 'league legends' would have you believe there's never been leniency on a rule, but the experience this season has shown otherwise. They'd also have you believe rules have never been changed. It's like the yanks with their second amendment; it's an amendment, you can change it!

Which brings me to the process of changing the rules; in the past admins have changed rules, noted it down, and everyone smiles and nods and says isn't that wonderful. So it's interesting this gets brought up:

Why do you think we do not have a publicly visible Committee?

Now, I'm having a shit day for memory but I think Filth or TIF will confirm that Ant Bear has form here with inserting a rule change by stealth in the pre-season.

 

[beez]

The big scandal is the ****ers who were going to vote to dismiss the penalty in the first place?
The bigger scandal is why are there people in the committee room who aren't captains?
The biggest scandal is why isn't the thread title - I, In My Great and Unmatched Wisdom?

 

[NaturalDisaster]

I'd settle for a working committee and an admin not working for his own best interests.

Less captain's causing stupid issues.
Simmers not being so damn precious.
Less Bombers.

I’ll note here that as much as I wish captains (Cough Barrybran) would stop acting like idiots with the team sheet, AB is grossly exaggerating the “Simmers revolt” thing.

 

[boncer34]

Do you think that I do not understand this? It should have been a pre-determined outcome. It should never have even been appealed, it was a flagrant breach of the rules, but clubs have a right of appeal. The vote should have been 11-0.

It was a second-last resort. The last resort would have been over-ruling the Committee and walking away, and I would have been satisfied that my last act as Admin was to protect the fabric of the league.

Walk away. We'll be better for it.

 

[boncer34]

I love the rule and, once again, I agree that the right decision was made.

This debate isn’t about outcome, it’s about process.

My argument is that there shouldn’t have been a vote or an appeals process if the outcome was pre-determined. It’s corrupt. It’s also a waste of people’s time.

The admin position used to be (essentially) a dictatorship back when life was easy, but the league got so big and these posters needed a greater say in what was happening. In a way, I’m at fault for introducing a culture of consultation after Boncer’s dictatorship.

At least Boncer was honest about running the league with an iron fist. You’re trying to rule with iron while looking like velvet.

Hey **** off I consulted people.

 

[boncer34]

If you believed in the good of the league, why didn't you consult the league before making the change?

The rule worked fine for Filth, Hate and Cloud. What makes you so special?

Seems transparently for personal preservation mate. That's been your MO for YEARS.

Uh slight correction.

The rule worked fine for me, Okey, Filth, Hate and Cloud.