Boards.ie Voting History Discussion

Blondie919 · 07-07-2014 04:41PM

I haven't been on Boards for a couple of weeks due to getting work which has me working the graveyard shift. I am only going through the motions on SM as I intend to quit once the Good League season finishes. So I don't really care one way or the other about the poll. I don't think I should vote in it because of this.

tupac_healy · 07-07-2014 04:43PM

Blondie919 wrote: »

I haven't been on Boards for a couple of weeks due to getting work which has me working the graveyard shift. I am only going through the motions on SM as I intend to quit once my respective seasons finish. So I don't really care one way or the other about the poll. I don't think I should vote in it because of this.

Fair play, out of pure interest seeing as though you are a current manager (of who by the way??) What is your take on all if this?

Edit, your still entitled to your opinion!!!!

KERSPLAT! · 07-07-2014 04:44PM

Iago wrote: »

I do agree with this, although we're on opposing sides on the debate, the more managers who vote the better.

I do wonder if you would be quite so keen if the Yes vote was ahead though

No need to keep wondering. I sent a PM in each of my gws asking people to vote in both polls, one of which my vote is winning the other, this one, losing

Blondie919 · 07-07-2014 04:48PM

tupac_healy wrote: »

Fair play, out of pure interest seeing as though you are a current manager (of who by the way??) What is your take on all if this?

Edit, your still entitled to your opinion!!!!

I manage Hearts in the Good League, Besiktas in Boards league and AC Milan in EB league. I guess I don't have an opinion cos I've been losing interest since even before I started this job. I nearly quit once or twice before. The third time will be the one.

Hercule Poirot · 07-07-2014 04:57PM

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

Then why are mails sent about manager positions? Sure if they posted here they'd see them?

It's OK for one agenda but not another?

As for your point on them being members, someone can be a member and not post or read the threads, they are still members of the GW

What about people who have since been banned from Boards but are still part of the GW?

#hewhomustnotbenamed

Al Capwned · 07-07-2014 05:16PM

Hercule Poirot wrote: »

What about people who have since been banned from Boards but are still part of the GW?

#thosewhomustnotbenamed

fyp

KERSPLAT! · 07-07-2014 05:43PM

Hercule Poirot wrote: »

What about people who have since been banned from Boards but are still part of the GW?

#hewhomustnotbenamed

I suppose they gave up their right to vote when they got banned, I'm not too sure really

@Al, sorry, I didn't mean your 'agenda', it was a poor choice of words, I just meant it should be the same for both, either a GW PM is sent for positions, votes, etc, or none are sent at all. Seems fair enough to me?

Al Capwned · 07-07-2014 05:48PM

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

I suppose they gave up their right to vote when they got banned, I'm not too sure really

@Al, sorry, I didn't mean your 'agenda', it was a poor choice of words, I just meant it should be the same for both, either a GW PM is sent for positions, votes, etc, or none are sent at all. Seems fair enough to me?

No problem this end man.
The GW pm's dont bother me one way or the other, as I see most topics in here. I'd actually prefer to use boards pms as a means of contacting other managers too.

Seamo87 · 07-07-2014 06:17PM

Got the GW Pm, thanks KERSPLAT....and I have voted.

KERSPLAT! · 07-07-2014 06:19PM

Seamo87 wrote: »

Got the GW Pm, thanks KERSPLAT....and I have voted.

Cheers

Maldjd23 · 07-07-2014 06:35PM

I am leaning toward not voting at all to be honest. I honestly can see the reasons for both sides of the argument.

KERSPLAT! · 07-07-2014 06:38PM

Who does 'My name is URL' manage?

GT_TDI_150 · 07-07-2014 06:58PM

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

Then why are mails sent about manager positions? Sure if they posted here they'd see them?

It's OK for one agenda but not another?

As for your point on them being members, someone can be a member and not post or read the threads, they are still members of the GW

Probably becausr of the 24hr window for manager jobs as opposed to 30days for this vote.

KERSPLAT! · 07-07-2014 07:11PM

GT_TDI_150 wrote: »

Probably becausr of the 24hr window for manager jobs as opposed to 30days for this vote.

Makes no odds really. Again, they should go out for all or nothing. I've no idea why such a big deal is being made about the PM anyway, surely you'd want as many people voting as possible!? A proper representation of what the league want instead of a miserable 20 or so of 60 managers voting.

Obviously some would rather no one else voted seeing as how the results may favor them but I'd rather if everyone, or as close as possible, voted, even if that means the side I'm on loses

GT_TDI_150 · 07-07-2014 07:25PM

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

Makes no odds really. Again, they should go out for all or nothing. I've no idea why such a big deal is being made about the PM anyway, surely you'd want as many people voting as possible!? A proper representation of what the league want instead of a miserable 20 or so of 60 managers voting.

Obviously some would rather no one else voted seeing as how the results may favor them but I'd rather if everyone, or as close as possible, voted, even if that means the side I'm on loses

Couldnt care how many vote, havent even deviced what way i'll vote yet but if people cant be arsed to contribute on the forum which this league is for then why should they be taken into account when it comes to voting???

Even the banned few know more bout what is said here than some.

KERSPLAT! · 07-07-2014 07:30PM

I had a long retort typed out but really all I need to say is, they are in the league so they should get a say on what happens in the league, It's a rule that you must be a member, not that you must take part in anyway

KERSPLAT! · 07-07-2014 07:31PM

Had a look at the contact list for the league but still can't see My name is URL, anyone know him or his team? Or has he just voted for the craic?

TheGunns · 07-07-2014 07:32PM

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

Had a look at the contact list for the league but still can't see My name is URL, anyone know him or his team? Or has he just voted for the craic?

I recognise the name but it might just be from another section

Iago · 07-07-2014 07:40PM

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

Had a look at the contact list for the league but still can't see My name is URL, anyone know him or his team? Or has he just voted for the craic?

What about DVD lots? Or are you just that determined to undermine the "leave it off" vote?

Or indeed shemo87, who seems to have a team in the copa world but not this league.

KERSPLAT! · 07-07-2014 07:47PM

Iago wrote: »

What about DVD lots? Or are you just that determined to undermine the "leave it off" vote?

Or indeed shemo87, who seems to have a team in the copa world but not this league.

Not at all, any vote that doesn't have a team in the boards league shouldn't count. Whatever side it's on.

You think awfully bad of me for some reason. As before, you're thinking is wrong. I've PMed My name is URL to try clear it up. He said he didn't vote but his housemate may have and may have used his account by mistake, he said he'll ask and get back to me.

I'm not some mad eejit on a rampage, I'm just looking for a fair vote, the same as anyone else

edit- My name is URL was pointed out to me by someone. If the others were I would have said the same about them

KERSPLAT! · 07-07-2014 07:57PM

From My Name is URL, anyone else can feel free to PM him. Hopefully if his mate is on SM he can get back to us

My name is URL wrote:

My name is URL wrote:

No bother. Though tbh I'm not even sure if he has a Boards account =/

I've certainly never seen him on the site nor ever heard him mention it. If his vote is causing any problems for the forum or members just disregard it! He shouldn't have used my account to vote in the first place :pac:

KERSPLAT! wrote:

Haha, sound! Mind if I quote that last PM? Just to clear things up as the vote is really close

Not at all. Go ahead

Iago · 07-07-2014 07:59PM

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

Not at all, any vote that doesn't have a team in the boards league shouldn't count. Whatever side it's on.

You think awfully bad of me for some reason. As before, you're thinking is wrong. I've PMed My name is URL to try clear it up. He said he didn't vote but his housemate may have and may have used his account by mistake, he said he'll ask and get back to me.

I'm not some mad eejit on a rampage, I'm just looking for a fair vote, the same as anyone else

edit- My name is URL was pointed out to me by someone. If the others were I would have said the same about them

I don't think awfully bad of you at all, I'm curious as to why you seem to be on a one-man crusade to overturn the monitoring situation alright.

As for the fair vote, I completely agree but so far you've

- said the deck is stacked and it was never going to be a fair vote
- took it upon yourself to PM everyone in the GW to get them to vote, ostensibly because everybody should, but I still stand over my earlier comment

- In a list where 3 posters are unknowns, 2 of whom are on your "side" of the vote, you picked the 1 that's on the opposing side to call out, not once but twice inside of a couple of hours

I just find it interesting that you've such a bee in your bonnet about it, that's all.

tupac_healy · 07-07-2014 08:01PM

I see no issue with sending out a PM to the GW members, but what does need to be transparent is how people have voted...

Otherwise anyhow from any Sub-forum on boards could vote!

KERSPLAT! · 07-07-2014 08:05PM

The deck was stacked, we weren't allowed discuss certain topics, then days and many votes in we are allowed...

I didn't PM everyone, I sent 2 global messages in each of my game worlds. There are probably still some in the Boards league who haven't got a PM or know about the votes

As for the 3 unknowns, I apolagise. I was told about the URL account and brought it straight to the table, I should have looked closer.

As for being on a one man crusade, others have spoken out too. I just do it more often.

ctrl-alt-delete · 07-07-2014 08:06PM

I pointed out the vote to Kersplat! and only that one because it was the only name I had not recognised to be honest.

What it does highlight is why all votes need to be public and people can now see why we insist on this when people decide to set up polls.

KERSPLAT! · 07-07-2014 08:07PM

tupac_healy wrote: »

I see no issue with sending out a PM to the GW members, but what does need to be transparent is how people have voted...

Otherwise anyhow from any Sub-forum on boards could vote!

Yep. We just need to match the account to a team in the Boards league. No match, no vote

KERSPLAT! · 07-07-2014 08:08PM

ctrl-alt-delete wrote: »

I pointed out the vote to Kersplat! and only that one because it was the only name I had not recognised to be honest.

What it does highlight is why all votes need to be public and people can now see why we insist on this when people decide to set up polls.

I didn't want to go naming names, cheers for coming forward

Wilberto · 07-07-2014 08:12PM

This may be end up being a ridiculous proposal, and if it is then I apologise, but I'm more than willing in setting up a new thread, sift through this thread, and move any posts that are actually related to this debate into that thread, from this one.

Of course, with a new poll added it means certain banned members wouldn't be able to vote in the new one.

Like I said though, if you think this is a ridiculous proposal then don't hesitate to say so. I won't be offended! I'm just putting the suggestion out there!

KERSPLAT! · 07-07-2014 08:13PM

I think it's fine the way it is. Evil will be defeated!!! :P

That's a joke

ctrl-alt-delete · 07-07-2014 08:16PM

I would say leave it as is Wilberto.

I think rather than spend time doing that now, maybe you could go through the names when the poll has closed and post an official result verified by yourself?

I just think another thread will be overkill and scare people who might still want to vote away lol.

Boards.ie Voting History Discussion

Comments