GM Removal Guidelines

[Rockies GM (Alex)]

Hi guys,

The Rules Committee has been helping work on some guidelines for what constitutes removing a GM.  In our league history, it has basically fallen on commissioner discretion for when a GM is removed.  I'd prefer to not have to subjectively decide when enough is enough going forward.  As it has always been, I want every GM who joins this league to stay as long as possible... this will remain my stance going forward, but guidelines that remove the gray areas and give us clarity where there is currently ambiguity are needed.  As a result, here are the guidelines from removing a GM that the committee has worked on.  These are not current league rules.  We are hoping to have some discussion on this initial post from the rest of the league (adjustments, changes, etc.) and then we will post a final draft for vote on by the league.  We would really appreciate your input!

Thanks!

---

BKDB GM Removal Guidelines

A GM will be subject to removal if two of the following criteria are met:

1. Has not responded to any message sent to them on either Proboards or Discord within 14 days of the message. Screenshots of the message attempt must be provided by the messaging GM.
2. Has not set lineup in any rolling 14 day period.
3. Has set their lineup in a manner that would be deemed as tanking. For example, leaving Aaron Judge on the bench while the OF slot remains empty.
4. Has been autopicked in 3 consecutive picks unless the GM has explicitly requested to be on autopick. 

Removal requests can be brought forth by any GM who identifies inactivity of another GM if it meets the above listed criteria.

GM's will receive a message from a committee member notifying them of their infraction and that future infractions will result in a vote to remove. If no response is received within one week, the committee will move forward with a removal vote.

For removal to occur, at least 4 of the 5 committee members must vote in favor of removal. The committee will have discretion in using other relevant information when casting their vote.

A GM who is suspected of cheating does not need to meet the above listed criteria and will automatically be put up for a vote with the committee. There must be clear evidence provided for there to be a committee vote.

The committee will also vote to select the replacement owner with a simple majority vote. Candidates can be brought forth to the committee by any GM, with priority being given to those on the waiting list.

---

Thanks friends!

[Pirates GM (Max)]

Thanks rules committee for putting this together. Overall I think this would work well, because discretion is kept in needing 4/5 committee members to agree on removal. But part of having objective criteria is clarity, so I'm seeking some clarification on these:

#1: I don't always check Proboards every 14 days just because there isn't much reason to, but I do check Discord because I get notifications. I imagine this is a relatively common experience. Should this be Discord AND Proboards, or Discord OR Proboards - I think that makes a difference

#2: For lineups that do not need setting (i.e., all eligible players are in the lineup at all times) will this apply?

#4: I think 3 might be a little aggressive, that could be a week of not checking during the offseason which I don't think is a good thing but also doesn't seem to imply removal. Maybe 5 is more fitting? Especially with a 12-round draft now

[Marlins GM (Travis)]

I don't like the time frames. 2 weeks? That's hardly enough time to consider someone inactive. What about during offseason? But ya, tanking teams, I would never look at my lineup. And I leave stupid trade offers on read, does that mean I could be removed? I think you guys really need to reconsider this altogether. And I also think if you've been in the league awhile, years and years, should be given more of a leash.

[D'backs GM (Kyle)]

Well the general idea is to have a framework so that the burden and decision making doesn’t fall on Alex’s shoulders completely. Part of the framework is reaching out to the GM in question. So obviously someone not responding to a trade offer shouldn’t feel like that’ll get them kicked out. This is something this league needs going forward and having a discussion on the specifics and ironing out the details is important.

[White Sox GM (Caleb)]

Okay so first off I’m not sure why this is necessary. This is a free league and to me it’s pretty clear as to when someone is checked out.

It’s also tricky trying to create wording for something that just isn’t black and white.

Take Derrick for example. Damn near unreachable unless you have an actual relationship with the guy. Multiple roster spots left unfilled. But he’s been in here forever and you know he knows his stuff and is a good owner when engaged. I got no problem giving him a longer leash.

Then you have Matt (no offense bro) But he may respond here and there, but he doesn’t really make any moves. I mean shit has he even made a move in the last calendar year? You offer him a rebuilding package/contending it doesn’t really matter. Talks go nowhere.

My point is it’s damn near impossible to create wording that is gonna be a catch all in this situation.

To me I trust the committee. Y’all just take a vote on an owner and if the majority thinks it’s time to move on then see ya. It’s so clear when an owner is isn’t going to be a fit long term. And I’ll say even right now as things stand Alex and whoever have like a 5x longer leash than most leagues.

In my basketball league if a guy isn’t active he gets the boot… that simple. What’re they gonna do press charges? If they didn’t wanna be kicked then they should have been somewhat active. And guess what? Now we have 30 owners who genuinely love the league and all contribute.

This league is already awesome, but imagine trimming the fat and adding 3-4 more owners who genuinely love being here, are active and engage in trades. It makes all the difference.

Anyways that’s my two cents, forget the whole what constitutes a removal. Let the committee vote, every single guy in that committee is fair and isn’t just gonna boot a guy because they don’t like someone. Get guys in here who contribute and the league will only get better.

(Yes I know I was grossly inactive for awhile and I appreciate Alex for sticking with me but let’s be honest that was a pretty extreme/rare case of an owner coming back to life)

[Marlins GM (Travis)]

Jun 6, 2023 17:25:14 GMT -5 D'backs GM (Kyle) said:

Well the general idea is to have a framework so that the burden and decision making doesn’t fall on Alex’s shoulders completely. Part of the framework is reaching out to the GM in question. So obviously someone not responding to a trade offer shouldn’t feel like that’ll get them kicked out. This is something this league needs going forward and having a discussion on the specifics and ironing out the details is important.

Sorry, let me rephrase. I like the idea, but these initial 4 things don't seem like reasonable requests is all I'm saying. Of course we should have something like this.

[Cardinals GM (Nik)]

I think there should be general guidelines that the committee use to make decisions. These shouldn’t be hard and fast guidelines, but should be made public so that GMs are aware that if they violate the guidelines they are at risk of being voted off the island. Ultimately, the committee should make these decisions as a whole and keeping or booting a GM should not be made by just the commish.

[Cardinals GM (Nik)]

One more suggestion on this topic. I suggest reaching out to the next guy in line to make sure they’re still available to join before booting someone. You guys may already do this, but thought it was worth mentioning if it isn’t.

[Guardians GM (Thomas)]

Just for consideration, there was a time where I would have hit all of these parts of the list, yet now I’m one of the more active members of the league. I’m honestly a bit surprised I didn’t get the boot, but I’m glad I didn’t. Current activity isn’t always the best determination of future activity.

[Rockies GM (Alex)]

Jun 7, 2023 19:40:05 GMT -5 Cardinals GM (Nik) said:

One more suggestion on this topic. I suggest reaching out to the next guy in line to make sure they’re still available to join before booting someone. You guys may already do this, but thought it was worth mentioning if it isn’t.

This was a part of the initial conversation... just didn't have the wording right so I didn't put it in the official post.  Great idea that should happen!  

[Rockies GM (Alex)]

Jun 6, 2023 15:43:09 GMT -5 Pirates GM (Max) said:

Thanks rules committee for putting this together. Overall I think this would work well, because discretion is kept in needing 4/5 committee members to agree on removal. But part of having objective criteria is clarity, so I'm seeking some clarification on these:

#1: I don't always check Proboards every 14 days just because there isn't much reason to, but I do check Discord because I get notifications. I imagine this is a relatively common experience. Should this be Discord AND Proboards, or Discord OR Proboards - I think that makes a difference

#2: For lineups that do not need setting (i.e., all eligible players are in the lineup at all times) will this apply?

#4: I think 3 might be a little aggressive, that could be a week of not checking during the offseason which I don't think is a good thing but also doesn't seem to imply removal. Maybe 5 is more fitting? Especially with a 12-round draft now

Lots of good thoughts... just quoting Max as he addressed some specific things.  As you all know, I'm probably on the far lenient side of the committee, but I agree it'd be beneficial to have something like this in place.  

#1... I think Discord OR Proboards would be helpful.  We just want to make sure teams are voting on trades/contributing to threads like this... that was the heart behind that. Maybe Discord OR Proboards is better for a league removal discussion.

#2 - I don't think anyone intended this to apply to a lineup that doesn't change... only a lineup that has the potential for more, but the GM is negligent and not setting his lineup.  

#3 - Curious what this thought initially was in your mind

#4 - Agreed from my perspective.  Others have different perspectives though.  I don't think it hurts teams as much now that we have auto-pick on all 12 rounds of our draft.  


Any other thoughts?  Let's sharpen this and make it beneficial for all parties... as much as we can!

[D'backs GM (Kyle)]

I'm in agreement with the discord or proboards change. Also, the lineup thing is more about people not setting a proper lineup and obviously is directed more at teams with depth and complete rosters. I think a person involvement with the draft is something essential. I obviously don't want force someone to draft if they feel the auto draft is better for their team. But that should probably be posted and communicated. The draft is such a big part of building a team in this league that I would hope an active GM can log in and make most of their picks. I think 5 may be more appropriate considering how fast some of the rounds can go.

[Rockies GM (Alex)]

If we edited to this would be people be more on board? Or do you have different ideas? I added some off-season things and expanded deadlines to give y'all more time....



BKDB GM Removal Guidelines

A GM will be subject to removal if two of the following criteria are met:

1. Has not responded to any message sent to them on either Proboards AND Discord within 14 days of the message. Screenshots of the message attempt must be provided by the messaging GM.
2. Has not set lineup in any rolling 14 day period. This does not include lineups that do not need setting. Is the team setting their lineup everyday and filling all their lineup slots they are able to... that is the question.
3. Has set their lineup in a manner that would be deemed as tanking. For example, leaving Aaron Judge on the bench while the OF slot remains empty.
4. Has been autopicked in 5 consecutive picks unless the GM has explicitly requested to be on autopick.
5. In the off-season... has not submitted their roster decisions in within one week of the announced deadline and fails to participate in free agency when doing so would be clearly advantageous to their team (a team is allowed to express their desire to save money, but no reason given + no spending = lack of effort).
6. A a replacement GM has been found and is ready to step in.

Removal requests can be brought forth by any GM who identifies inactivity of another GM if it meets the above listed criteria.

GM's will receive a message from a committee member notifying them of their infraction and that future infractions will result in a vote to remove. If no response is received within two weeks, the committee will move forward with a removal vote.

For removal to occur, at least 4 of the 5 committee members must vote in favor of removal. The committee will have discretion in using other relevant information when casting their vote.

A GM who is suspected of cheating does not need to meet the above listed criteria and will automatically be put up for a vote with the committee. There must be clear evidence provided for there to be a committee vote.

The committee will also vote to select the replacement owner with a simple majority vote. Candidates can be brought forth to the committee by any GM, with priority being given to those on the waiting list.

[Rockies GM (Alex)]

Jun 15, 2023 9:49:28 GMT -5 Rockies GM (Alex) said:

If we edited to this would be people be more on board? Or do you have different ideas? I added some off-season things and expanded deadlines to give y'all more time....



BKDB GM Removal Guidelines

A GM will be subject to removal if two of the following criteria are met:

1. Has not responded to any message sent to them on either Proboards AND Discord within 14 days of the message. Screenshots of the message attempt must be provided by the messaging GM.
2. Has not set lineup in any rolling 14 day period. This does not include lineups that do not need setting. Is the team setting their lineup everyday and filling all their lineup slots they are able to... that is the question.
3. Has set their lineup in a manner that would be deemed as tanking. For example, leaving Aaron Judge on the bench while the OF slot remains empty.
4. Has been autopicked in 5 consecutive picks unless the GM has explicitly requested to be on autopick.
5. In the off-season... has not submitted their roster decisions in within one week of the announced deadline and fails to participate in free agency when doing so would be clearly advantageous to their team (a team is allowed to express their desire to save money, but no reason given + no spending = lack of effort).
6. A a replacement GM has been found and is ready to step in.

Removal requests can be brought forth by any GM who identifies inactivity of another GM if it meets the above listed criteria.

GM's will receive a message from a committee member notifying them of their infraction and that future infractions will result in a vote to remove. If no response is received within two weeks, the committee will move forward with a removal vote.

For removal to occur, at least 4 of the 5 committee members must vote in favor of removal. The committee will have discretion in using other relevant information when casting their vote.

A GM who is suspected of cheating does not need to meet the above listed criteria and will automatically be put up for a vote with the committee. There must be clear evidence provided for there to be a committee vote.

The committee will also vote to select the replacement owner with a simple majority vote. Candidates can be brought forth to the committee by any GM, with priority being given to those on the waiting list.

No one is allowed to complain about any GM's they think are not active unless they participate in this discussion.  Just saying.

[Cardinals GM (Nik)]

I’m good with this if we update #1 to be 30 days instead of 14 and we clarify that it has to be a repeat offense. So in other words it can be up to 30 days and it happens more than once.

[Marlins GM (Travis)]

I like 30 days too. One thing not addressed: let's say I commit the infraction and respond to committee message. Is the infraction on my record forever? That seems a bit much. Like, oh I infracted in 2019, then in 2023 is the next one. So I'm gone.

[Rockies GM (Alex)]

Jul 25, 2023 20:21:30 GMT -5 Cardinals GM (Nik) said:

I’m good with this if we update #1 to be 30 days instead of 14 and we clarify that it has to be a repeat offense. So in other words it can be up to 30 days and it happens more than once.

So adjust #1 to 30 days... and then say if two of these criteria are met... twice?  So two strikes you're out if you respond and apologize?

[Nationals GM (Tim)]

sure

[Rockies GM (Alex)]

Get your thoughts in in the next 24 hours if you have any, putting this up for a vote tomorrow night!

[Cardinals GM (Nik)]

I like Travis’ suggestion that it should be a rolling 12 months and you have your penalties removed for “good behavior”

[Cardinals GM (Nik)]

Well they would have to break one of the other rules too right? Since it’s a requirement of the overall guidelines

Jul 29, 2023 14:15:37 GMT -5 Rockies GM (Alex) said:

Jul 25, 2023 20:21:30 GMT -5 Cardinals GM (Nik) said:

I’m good with this if we update #1 to be 30 days instead of 14 and we clarify that it has to be a repeat offense. So in other words it can be up to 30 days and it happens more than once.

So adjust #1 to 30 days... and then say if two of these criteria are met... twice?  So two strikes you're out if you respond and apologize?

[Mariners GM (Phil)]

I think I’d rather have it be a league vote than a committee vote

[Tigers GM (Jon)]

I’m good with all of the proposed criteria. I agree with Phil; although I trust the committee, seems like this should just go to a league vote like anything else.

[Rockies GM (Alex)]

Jul 30, 2023 8:02:02 GMT -5 Mariners GM (Phil) said:

I think I’d rather have it be a league vote than a committee vote

Yeah… not sure where you’re getting “committee” vote from… maybe I mistyped something, but as usual with rule changes, we will vote on this as a league.

[Tigers GM (Jon)]

Jul 30, 2023 14:29:14 GMT -5 Rockies GM (Alex) said:

Jul 30, 2023 8:02:02 GMT -5 Mariners GM (Phil) said:

I think I’d rather have it be a league vote than a committee vote

Yeah… not sure where you’re getting “committee” vote from… maybe I mistyped something, but as usual with rule changes, we will vote on this as a league.

That’s my B - I misread Caleb’s comment and confused myself. 

[Mariners GM (Phil)]

Jun 6, 2023 15:23:42 GMT -5 Rockies GM (Alex) said:

Hi guys,


Removal requests can be brought forth by any GM who identifies inactivity of another GM if it meets the above listed criteria.

GM's will receive a message from a committee member notifying them of their infraction and that future infractions will result in a vote to remove. If no response is received within one week, the committee will move forward with a removal vote.

For removal to occur, at least 4 of the 5 committee members must vote in favor of removal. The committee will have discretion in using other relevant information when casting their vote.

A GM who is suspected of cheating does not need to meet the above listed criteria and will automatically be put up for a vote with the committee. There must be clear evidence provided for there to be a committee vote.

The committee will also vote to select the replacement owner with a simple majority vote. Candidates can be brought forth to the committee by any GM, with priority being given to those on the waiting list.

---

Thanks friends!

i mean this whole section talks about "we bring this up to a committee member and then they bring it to the group as a whole." while i don't have a problem with that being a place where removal starts, as in they can vet what removal requests are worth listening to and which should be thrown out as nonsense, but if we are now voting people out of the league i guess I'd like a say.

I'll expand a little further, i'm talking about the vote to remove someone as a GM that should be a league vote. I know you probably don't like that since sometimes its tough to get votes. in that case just put a time limit like 1 week or something if by that point more people want Derrick gone then that's what the league wants.(I'll use Derrick as an example but we all know what this is for). for the record I'm not nearly as trusting of the committee, its not like I dislike them but I also don't know them besides Alex.

[Rockies GM (Alex)]

Jul 30, 2023 15:47:58 GMT -5 Mariners GM (Phil) said:

Jun 6, 2023 15:23:42 GMT -5 Rockies GM (Alex) said:

Hi guys,


Removal requests can be brought forth by any GM who identifies inactivity of another GM if it meets the above listed criteria.

GM's will receive a message from a committee member notifying them of their infraction and that future infractions will result in a vote to remove. If no response is received within one week, the committee will move forward with a removal vote.

For removal to occur, at least 4 of the 5 committee members must vote in favor of removal. The committee will have discretion in using other relevant information when casting their vote.

A GM who is suspected of cheating does not need to meet the above listed criteria and will automatically be put up for a vote with the committee. There must be clear evidence provided for there to be a committee vote.

The committee will also vote to select the replacement owner with a simple majority vote. Candidates can be brought forth to the committee by any GM, with priority being given to those on the waiting list.

---

Thanks friends!

i mean this whole section talks about "we bring this up to a committee member and then they bring it to the group as a whole." while i don't have a problem with that being a place where removal starts, as in they can vet what removal requests are worth listening to and which should be thrown out as nonsense, but if we are now voting people out of the league i guess I'd like a say.

I'll expand a little further, i'm talking about the vote to remove someone as a GM that should be a league vote. I know you probably don't like that since sometimes its tough to get votes. in that case just put a time limit like 1 week or something if by that point more people want Derrick gone then that's what the league wants.(I'll use Derrick as an example but we all know what this is for). for the record I'm not nearly as trusting of the committee, its not like I dislike them but I also don't know them besides Alex.

Oh, makes sense.  I thought you were referring to voting on this guideline.  I'm fine with the whole league voting personally... but that would make removing GM's a whole league decision every time.  Is that a Rules Committee thing or a whole league thing.... I could see the argument for whole league.  

[Mariners GM (Phil)]

Jul 30, 2023 16:44:46 GMT -5 Rockies GM (Alex) said:

Jul 30, 2023 15:47:58 GMT -5 Mariners GM (Phil) said:

i mean this whole section talks about "we bring this up to a committee member and then they bring it to the group as a whole." while i don't have a problem with that being a place where removal starts, as in they can vet what removal requests are worth listening to and which should be thrown out as nonsense, but if we are now voting people out of the league i guess I'd like a say.

I'll expand a little further, i'm talking about the vote to remove someone as a GM that should be a league vote. I know you probably don't like that since sometimes its tough to get votes. in that case just put a time limit like 1 week or something if by that point more people want Derrick gone then that's what the league wants.(I'll use Derrick as an example but we all know what this is for). for the record I'm not nearly as trusting of the committee, its not like I dislike them but I also don't know them besides Alex.

Oh, makes sense.  I thought you were referring to voting on this guideline.  I'm fine with the whole league voting personally... but that would make removing GM's a whole league decision every time.  Is that a Rules Committee thing or a whole league thing.... I could see the argument for whole league.  

I mean getting booted from the league is kinda the biggest issue that can come up with the league. IF IT WERE ME… I would want a public league wide vote saying more people wanted me gone than not. Also it makes you think (at least it makes me think) as everyone casts their vote they realize what that means, cuz that person probably doesn’t get a 2nd chance.

[Marlins GM (Travis)]

I vote we boot Phil so we have a new champion not named Phil.

[Mariners GM (Phil)]

Coward