[USML Announce] NOTICE OF HOT WAX SEAL

Sun May 13 21:04:15 EDT 2007

That's exactly what I'm suggesting.  I foresaw this exact possibility and proposed a rule to deal with it.  My idea was rejected in the voting.  Hence there needs to be a week delay on the transaction.

"Richard E. Robbins" <RERobbins at iTinker.net> wrote:      That's an interesting observation Jim.

  Are you suggesting that we specifically rejected what Andy seeks and that he needs to activate Sweeney and then wait a week before trading him to Brad?

  -- Rich

---------------------------------
  From: announce-bounces at usml.net [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net] On Behalf Of Jim Barrett
Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2007 10:56 AM
To: USML Announcements
Subject: RE: [USML Announce] **NOTICE OF HOT WAX SEAL**

  These were the options.  I voted for 2A but 2B won.

  2A.  Amend the USML Constitution by adding the following provision:

    "From the commencement of the USML auction until June 1, if a player whose USML contract is not running is traded, that player will be deemed to be in the first year of his USML contract without regard to whether the acquiring owner rosters the player." 

  2B.  Amend the constitution by adding the following provision:

  "From the commencement of the USML auction until June 1, a team can not trade a player whose USML contract is not running."

Jim Barrett <chicagojab at yahoo.com> wrote:
    I believe if you review the history, you'll see that I proposed the variant that the team trading the player away did not need to activate the prospect before the trade, provided that the acquiring team did so on receipt.  However, when we did the actual voting, my variant was not approved.  Rather, the winning variant was the "simpler" version that required the player's contract had to be running at the time of trade.  

"Richard E. Robbins" <RERobbins at iTinker.net> wrote:
      Me and Justice Scalia . . .

---------------------------------
  From: announce-bounces at usml.net [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net] On Behalf Of Andrew R. Klein
Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2007 9:23 AM
To: USML Announcements
Subject: Re: [USML Announce] **NOTICE OF HOT WAX SEAL**

Are you ignoring Jim Barrett's personal proclamations concerning the Barrett Rule?  You're probably the type that ignores Thomas Jefferson's statements concerning the Constitution ...

Richard E. Robbins wrote:       Legislative history?

  You might also recall that I circulated four possible variations of text for this rule that dealt with this issue specifically, however, in order to simplify things given the compressed time period in which we acted, I believe Jeff circulated the simplest variant.  Gee, maybe we should allow more time to fuss with rules.  Naah -- it's more fun this way.  (grin)

  -- Rich

---------------------------------
  From: announce-bounces at usml.net [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net] On Behalf Of Andrew R. Klein
Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2007 9:00 AM
To: USML Announcements
Subject: Re: [USML Announce] **NOTICE OF HOT WAX SEAL**

On the merits, I have no preference either way -- for this trade or future trades.  My recollection is that the creator of the rule -- Jim Barrett -- suggested that players could be activated by the receiving team.

I will amend my usmltrans message on the assumption that the trade goes through this week, as that seems to be the consensus (Doug notwithstanding).  Brad -- don't forget to activate Sweeney!!!

-Andy

jhwinick at aol.com wrote:   
I agree with Rich on this one. It seems to me that as long as there is a consensus, either rule would be fine.     Is anyone else entertained (but not surprised) that its these   two gentlemen that are testing the parameters of the   new rule?     Jeff   Sent from my BlackBerry? wireless handheld      -----Original Message-----  From: "Richard E. Robbins" <RERobbins at iTinker.net>  Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 07:27:34   To:"'USML Announcements'" <announce at usml.net>  Subject: RE: [USML Announce] **NOTICE OF HOT WAX SEAL**    I don't have a strong view either way on this one.    New Section 12.13 doesn't clearly address the matter.    I wouldn't object to permitting the activation of a player whose contract  isn't running to be coincident with the trade.    -- Rich     -----Original Message-----  From: announce-bounces at usml.net [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net]   On Behalf  Of Andrew R. Klein  Sent: Sunday, May   13, 2007 6:04 AM  To: USML Announcements  Subject: Re: [USML
 Announce] **NOTICE OF HOT WAX SEAL**    It occurs to me that this trade might not be effective until next Sunday, as  Sweeney's contract will not be "running" until today at noon.      Commissioners ... a ruling please.  I have Sweeney set to go active today.  Does that mean he is a Riptorn this week or next week?    -Andy    Andrew R. Klein wrote:    

Happy Mother's Day.    The Klein Nine trades Ryan Sweeney to the Riptorns for Hammern' Hank   Blalock.    -Andy  _______________________________________________  announce mailing list  announce at usml.net  http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce        

_______________________________________________  announce mailing   list  announce at usml.net  http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce        _______________________________________________  announce mailing list  announce at usml.net  http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce    

---------------------------------
  _______________________________________________  announce mailing list  announce at usml.net  http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce      

---------------------------------
    _______________________________________________  announce mailing list  announce at usml.net  http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce    
_______________________________________________
announce mailing list
announce at usml.net
http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce

_______________________________________________
announce mailing list
announce at usml.net
http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce

_______________________________________________
announce mailing list
announce at usml.net
http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lyra.siteprotect.com/pipermail/announce/attachments/20070513/c249c012/attachment.htm