Rule suggestions for future ATDs

[Dreakmur]

As fun as ATD is, and has interesting it is, the ATD drama has to be a top 3 dumb thing on this entire forum. It's like... trade board dumb.

I do agree that there is too much drama, but I also think people take things way too personally.

A good respectful discussion is not drama. A vehement disagreement about players is not drama. Disagreement over the strength of a team is not drama. Discussion about how voting should be held is not necessarily drama, though it has certainly devolved into that.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Anyone can easily avoid direct confrontation if that's not their cup of tea. I don't think I've ever seen someone being randomly attacked or sucked in a big fight against his will on this board. I also don't get why people are so sensitive to clashes lol This is like the WWF. Just grab your pop corn and laugh it out while two monkeys go at it.

 

[Dreakmur]

Anyone can easily avoid direct confrontation if that's not their cup of tea. I don't think I've ever seen someone being randomly attacked or sucked in a big fight against his will on this board. I also don't get why people are so sensitive to clashes lol This is like the WWF. Just grab your pop corn and laugh it out while two monkeys go at it.

I see a lot of unnecessary personal attacks.

As much as I think I’m generally pretty respectful, I know I’ve been guilty of taking a few pot-shots at fellow GMs. That isn’t helpful for the draft... even if I think they were pretty funny

 

[ResilientBeast]

Anyone can easily avoid direct confrontation if that's not their cup of tea. I don't think I've ever seen someone being randomly attacked or sucked in a big fight against his will on this board. I also don't get why people are so sensitive to clashes lol This is like the WWF. Just grab your pop corn and laugh it out while two monkeys go at it.

Really?

 

[BenchBrawl]

I see a lot of unnecessary personal attacks.

As much as I think I’m generally pretty respectful, I know I’ve been guilty of taking a few pot-shots at fellow GMs. That isn’t helpful for the draft... even if I think they were pretty funny

Unnecessary? The guy pops out of nowhere after quitting two drafts in a row and calls me out for "taking things too seriously". His intervention was shameless and betrayed a complete lack of self-awareness. I think it was very necessary.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Unnecessary? The guy pops out of nowhere after quitting two drafts in a row and calls me out for "taking things too seriously". His intervention was shameless and betrayed a complete lack of self-awareness. I think it was very necessary.

I don't think you're in the majority there

Was I annoyed initially when @ted2019 was inexplicably stepping out of the draft? Yes

But now knowing what he's going through I'm happy he realized that he needed time for himself.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I don't think you're in the majority there

Was I annoyed initially when @ted2019 was inexplicably stepping out of the draft? Yes

But now knowing what he's going through I'm happy he realized that he needed time for himself.

He did it twice. Regardless, if for some reason you must quit, fine, but then don't come back just to call people out.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Anyone can easily avoid direct confrontation if that's not their cup of tea. I don't think I've ever seen someone being randomly attacked or sucked in a big fight against his will on this board. I also don't get why people are so sensitive to clashes lol This is like the WWF. Just grab your pop corn and laugh it out while two monkeys go at it.

Also you said this already, you can't go claiming people can avoid confrontation. @Habsfan18 was just talking about what he's observed and you went after him

By that post he was looking for it, so I gave it to him.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Also you said this already, you can't go claiming people can avoid confrontation. @Habsfan18 was just talking about what he's observed and you went after him

Oh please, re-read the few posts in the correct order, where he tells me to get off my high horse and throw in a nice little comment on my exit speech, implying I should just f*** off.

He wasn't just talking about what he's observed too, he flat out told he voted based on likability, which triggered my intervention. Very deserved.

 

[Habsfan18]

The last thing I’ll say here:

I really didn’t appreciate my character being questioned by BB. That made things personal. I have already spoken my piece, brought forth concerns I have regarding the process, and while speaking under full transparency admitted to being part of a larger problem regarding voting. It was only one or twice, but I agree it’s a problem and I shouldn’t have voted emotionally. I clarified the type of scenario it was, and I have received support by quite a few members privately. I appreciate those who reached out.

I did love bring part of the ATD the past few years and had a great deal of fun particularly through the drafting process. Lots of very knowledgable people here who share my same passions.

That being said, I’m legitimately out. ATD-wise. For good. Just not the type of process I want to be involved in any longer. I do wish everyone well, truly. And you know where to reach me if you ever want to chat.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Oh please, re-read the few posts in the correct order, where he tells me to get off my high horse and throw in a nice little comment on my exit speech, implying I should just f*** off.

You decided your were judge, jury and executioner.

People can avoid confrontation if they keep out of your way.

And his comment is accurate, you made a big speech about how you were done with the ATD and wouldn't be posting anymore. Everything he said was factual.

Does it imply you should stop responding to him? Maybe, but he's calling out the hypocrisy of you making a big deal that you're done with this board and draft before coming back to attack someone for criticizing in a fair way what he views as structural problems.

 

[BenchBrawl]

You decided your were judge, jury and executioner.

People can avoid confrontation if they keep out of your way.

And his comment is accurate, you made a big speech about how you were done with the ATD and wouldn't be posting anymore. Everything he said was factual.

Does it imply you should stop responding to him? Maybe, but he's calling out the hypocrisy of you making a big deal that you're done with this board and draft before coming back to attack someone for criticizing in a fair way what he views as structural problems.

Sounds like someone I know, except that someone actually had moderating power and abused it repeatedly.

I see you're gonna be dishonest, since I responded to that remark, when I said I would complete the draft and the Top 200 Project, none of which are completed. I am done after that.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Sounds like someone I know, except that someone actually had moderating power and abused it repeatedly.

Sounds like someone who routinely broke the rules and got a longer rope than almost any other poster would've

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

The last thing I’ll say here:

I really didn’t appreciate my character being questioned by BB. That made things personal. I have already spoken my piece, brought forth concerns I have regarding the process, and while speaking under full transparency admitted to being part of a larger problem regarding voting. It was only one or twice, but I agree it’s a problem and I shouldn’t have voted emotionally. I clarified the type of scenario it was, and I have received support by quite a few members privately. I appreciate those who reached out.

I did love bring part of the ATD the past few years and had a great deal of fun particularly through the drafting process. Lots of very knowledgable people here who share my same passions.

That being said, I’m legitimately out. ATD-wise. For good. Just not the type of process I want to be involved in any longer. I do wish everyone well, truly. And you know where to reach me if you ever want to chat.

IMO, you made it kind of personal when you insinuated that everyone just votes for their favorite GMs right after voting results for the last round were released. Maybe that isn't what you meant, but it sure looked like it at the time.

It snowballed from there.

 

[The Macho King]

I do agree that there is too much drama, but I also think people take things way too personally.

A good respectful discussion is not drama. A vehement disagreement about players is not drama. Disagreement over the strength of a team is not drama. Discussion about how voting should be held is not necessarily drama, though it has certainly devolved into that.

I love the debates.

I hate the "you question my honor sir!" contentions that come up every year.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Sounds like someone who routinely broke the rules and got a longer rope than almost any other poster would've

I never contested that. But I'm also not in a position of power.

I got rope because despite all my weaknesses, I provided for the group. I was "taking things seriously", and the game apparently was better for it, for a time. That time is done, and that,s fine, but I'm at peace with my overall body of work in this section.

 

[Habsfan18]

IMO, you made it kind of personal when you insinuated that everyone just votes for their favorite GMs right after voting results for the last round were released. Maybe that isn't what you meant, but it sure looked like it.

It snowballed from there.

Just responding to this: My insinuation was that the post-regular season process was predictable and stale. And that yes, I think sometimes GM reputation plays a part in voting. Friends tend to vote for friends. It’s an issue that not only I brought up. Emotions were high, but I tried to make sure I wasn’t attacking anyone personally, except for my little dig at dreak not winning which was a joke and tongue in cheek. A little shot but he and I discussed it privately.

 

[BenchBrawl]

IMO, you made it kind of personal when you insinuated that everyone just votes for their favorite GMs right after voting results for the last round were released. Maybe that isn't what you meant, but it sure looked like it at the time.

It snowballed from there.

He didn't insinuate it, he flat out said anyone claiming they don't vote like that are lying.

 

[Habsfan18]

This was my exact post after the results were released:

@TheDevilMadeMe are you mixing me up with nabby? He made a comment straight away, and the discussion kicked off.

To switch it up and to make the playoff process less predictable, I’ve stated multiple times I think it would be interesting to have a panel of judges vote rather than the GM’s involved in the process.

Not sure what others would think. I’m pretty sure the last time I brought it up it got crapped on.

My issue is mainly how you can essentially predict the final 4 within seconds of seeing the regular season standings. And I mean, it’s not all that surprising since the top seeds are obviously the ones viewed as the strongest. But in this format it just makes it so obvious and predictable. Not even sure a panel would change much, but surely a change in the process can’t hurt? Either that or lower the amount of teams making the playoffs. At this point there should only be maybe 8 teams making it. Nobody else would stand a chance, let’s be honest.

 

[BenchBrawl]

In the name of full transparency, I’ll admit I have voted for people I like over people I don’t like in the past in certain situations IF it also kinda makes sense from a hockey standpoint. But if sometimes I feel like it’s close enough, there have been times in the past I’ll vote for the guy who isn’t a prick. In full transparency, I didn’t have your team making it this far.

But that’s another issue I have mentioned in the past. We are all pretty much guilty of voting a certain way based on feelings sometimes. And it shouldn’t be that way. I thought maybe an outside panel could help eliminate that.

If anyone here claims they haven’t voted for or against an individual even once...they’re lying.

This is the post that sparked my intervention.

I told myself... who is that guy for speaking on my behalf? Or calling me a liar?

 

[Habsfan18]

I think overall, structural changes need to be made to the voting process. My apologies for claiming everyone has voted emotionally in the past. But I think it’s a much bigger problem than some of you are letting on.

 

[Habsfan18]

This is the post that sparked my intervention.

I told myself... who is that guy for speaking on my behalf? Or calling me a liar?

Emotions were high, and in the process of trying to make my point I may have gotten carried away.

I still maintain it’s more common than many realize.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

The issue is hockey is a random ass sport, but there's no way to introduce randomness I to this process. If you're drafting Roy you are probably wanting to steal a series, but there really isn't a way to show that.

I was thinking when I'm a voter, I may do weighted die rolls or something to come up with results.

I wrote a long post about this a few years ago, but I can't find it (and don't have time to re-write the whole thing, at least not before April 30th).

The issue is upsets seem to happen far less in the ATD than they do in real life. My suggestion was to introduce some randomness into the process. Maybe give each team a 50/50 chance for showing up, and then allocate the rest based on voting. In other words, if 7 out of 10 people picked a GM's team, we'd give them a 60% chance of winning (averaging the 50/50 odds and 7/10), and their opponent gets a 40% chance. The outcome can then be simulated - ie flipping a loaded die for 4-7 games.

The obvious objection is this introduces too much chaos into the draft. Strong teams will sometimes be upset in the first round due to bad luck. My response is that's what happens in real life. Of course the losing GM would be frustrated, but it might give people more reason to participate in the playoffs. Now, if someone gets a tough matchup, why bother participating if they're sure everyone is going to vote for their opponent (whether its due to name recognition or the objective strength of their team)? This way, there's an incentive to participate because every time has a chance of making it to the next round, even if they're a heavy underdog. At the same time, skill is still rewarded. A strong GM's team would still be the favourite in every series - just not as decisive as it would otherwise be.

When I proposed this a few years ago, most people hated the idea - and I understand why. But I'll throw it out there again as one possible way to shake things up.

 

[ResilientBeast]

I never contested that. But I'm also not in a position of power.

I got rope because despite all my weaknesses, I provided for the group. I was "taking things seriously", and the game apparently was better for it, for a time. That time is done, and that,s fine, but I'm at peace with my overall body of work in this section.

I'm hardly in a position of power. All I've attempted to do it treat everyone by the same standard and keep things civil.

I've had enough people privately shit on the job I've done as the moderator of this board, during your last episode thanks.

Trust me I feel very powerful

 

[ImporterExporter]

I'm feeling a bit better today (just got my swabs done for covid/flu and should get results within an hour).

Just to touch on what's been discussed so far:

I think that we all should be open to suggestions on how to improve the overall experience of the ATD. That doesn't seem to something people are objecting to. I'll get caught up with the full score of the back and forth's throughout the day.

I do think we need to take a second and step back regarding the questioning of people's ability to stay neutral in voting. Am I 100% certain no one has ever voted against me just because of the way I handled myself, or rubbed someone(s) the wrong way? Not at all. I've made an ass out of myself and the honest reality is that could rub someone the wrong way when it comes to submitting votes.

However...

I think one of the biggest realizations for me going back 2 years now, besides not taking things personally, even when discussions get heated, is that even the folks who generally go far can be trusted to vote in an unbiased manner.

Some of these folks (TDMM, Dreak, BB, etc, etc) are quite knowledgeable and have won the ATD in previous seasons, and in a few cases, multiple times.

There really is no reason for people to continue to just stack the deck when they've already won the ATD. With that being said, being completely honest, and you saw some newer folks like ProfessorWhat mention, the ATD can be a bit intimidating. It's not always the most welcoming place, and I don't mean that in an absolute sense, as if people are treating others like shit. It's just the overall experience, if you're really trying to make noise post draft, can be overwhelming and when you continually get knocked out early and see the same general group of people advancing, can be perceived as cliquish.

With that being said, I think people here are willing to vote for who they think best in any given match ups. I've been very happy with the limited amount of instances we've had regarding personal attacks or just general snotty behavior. The last 2 drafts especially have gone pretty darn smoothly in my book after we had some really up and down ATD's (with me being an ass multiple times certainly).

I do think we can strive to make the section more accessible and help the new crowds that come in, feel welcomed and assist them in expanding their knowledge.

Either way, discussion is good. Let's please try and keep the personal stuff out of it and all will work itself out. By all means, please bring forth ideas for how we can improve the ATD. Nothing is absolute and with the minds that participate, we can certainly find ways to keep things from getting super stale or redundant.

Thanks everyone!