Constitutional Amendments : Current or Retroactive? (Player's Vote)

Absurd is a bit much here.

When anything is bound by a document (Constitution) it should always be protected. Amendments occur to correct issues within the document as times change. If you allow an amendment to rule over something in the past, then the document itself has no ass to sit on. People could vote in whatever rule they wanted to change the outcome of anything that happened before hand.

Just a huge can of worms there.

 

Sorry, just getting out of work.

I'm trying to say that changes should be retroactive. But at some point there is a line where changing previous results becomes detrimental rather than beneficial. That variable (the period where the retroactive policy applies) should be determined on either a case-by-case basis or set in stone with a single set amount of time (ex. two weeks)

 

But had there been another issue prior would this be a thing?

 

I don't envy your position in the least.

I, along with most people in this league, want to see series decided on the virtual ice. Any rules that facilitate that will always get my vote (although my opinion is irrelevant and always has been).

 

Then that's it. Retroactive to two weeks prior. It eliminates any bias if it's set in stone.

Sorry for the hassle today, take care.

 

What if a team was not well versed on the issue and took a forfeit. It never would have been handled.

You can make retroactivity a thing, but it has to be from this moment forward. It wasn't a thing yesterday, so you can't change it then use that to go backwards on an issue. You can move forward from here and be retroactive with any issue that has happened from this moment on should you decide retroactivity should be adopted.

 

Just retroactive the amendment and be done with it; my team had to forfeit in round 2 in S21 in game 5 and I appealed it because my grandfather had just passed and I got on at 945pm and my appeal was denied and the ff stood so honestly the ff should just stand and move on. @MCDONALD l19l

 

And both teams would be impervious to forfeits for the last two games, meaning they can happen whenever either team pleases and the league could only sit back and wait for round 1 to finish while the rest of the playoffs have moved forward.

In fact, it would force the leagues hand to eliminate both teams and give the subsequent opponent a bye week.

 

So this question does not apply to future amendments and only this one?

But you have no way to enforce the time frame of that game as there would be no forfeits.

 

I feel like you're answering my question, but I don't see an answer to my question in your answer, if that makes any sense.

What is the leagues plan, if Milwaukee or Stockton take 2, 3, maybe even 4 weeks to play game 6?

 

So are you saying if one team fails to show up for your scheduled game time, they will take a forfeit for no show, no message?

If I remember correctly,(if the rule isn't retroactive) there are no forfeits allowed under any circumstances.

 

Not i

a

If you make retroactivity a thing moving forward then forfeits can be enforced from today on.

Allowing it to affect the ruling that this discussion spurred, would allow it as well but would flip the decision made regarding Stockton.

Modifying a rule slightly to include the prior two weeks to change the outcome of one decision is crazy.

If you want retroactivity, that's great, but do it going forward. Otherwise it's more a mob with pitchforks and less about retroactivity being a good or bad thing for the league.