12-22-2018, 06:07 PMNJBadApple Wrote:

12-22-2018, 05:53 PMKing Wrote: I did try to change it.

You even got annoyed at me at the time for doing so and spoke about on our your podcast Link. At the time you were upset I was graphics head and recruitment head and was suggesting so many changes to both models.

I replied to your post here explaining I did make changes to graphics but they were turning out well and that I had just taken the recruitment job so too early to say how I'd do.

Also I wasn't recruit head for awhile. I got the job Sept 29th proof and there was already a new head by Oct 13th proof.

Nice.  Even with being relieved early from the position, two weeks running the recruitment drive seems like enough time to make a change that most people are likely on board with.

Not saying you did a bad job at that (or GFX, now that you bring it up), but you've had consistent inactive recruits each season under the 2TPE rule.  I don't like @Keygan that much but he has a solid point, they all amount to almost no time on the site combined.  It leaves me [and clearly] others to wonder if you're caught red-handed, via example, abusing the system and you're trying to backtrack saying it should be changed.

I wasn't relived, I stepped down. And I did bring that up in my few days as head and at the time people weren't on board. The feeling was the system wasn't broken so no need to fix it.

I've had 1 super active recruit, 3 semi actives and 5 completely in-actives. But I also don't mind stopping to try bringing people.

"abusing the system and you're trying to backtrack saying it should be changed."

Since this will likely come up again in a couple years, I think the regression system is broken. I currently plan on keeping my player fighting regression indefinitely unless its changed. The reason I disagreed with the rule is because it can be abused.