Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Philadelphia Freedom
Thanks for thinking of me. ;) I did not post anything because I figured this would just fizzle out. Bet wrong on that one.
In all honestly I don't really care but since Mike caught the mistake on his own, fessed up to it and feels compelled to be penalized I would say $125.
I would also suggest that following criteria be applied to future violations with one addition:
1- If this offense has already been committed (exactly) then we go with that. If not,
2 - Was there intent to violate the rule?
3 - What was gained by the team because of the rule violation?
4 - How promptly did the team respond to remedy the situation?
5 - Is it a repeat offense of the same violation?
6 - Is the team a repeat offender of other rule infractions?
7 - Is the penalty in the rules commesurate with the violation?
Hope that helps!
|
$125 sounds fine to me - lets get this particular issue past us.
Fleshing this out, however, please clarify: are you suggesting these benchmarks are applied to each situation and a different $ amount assigned for each individual penalty? We're going to end up with a debate ensuing for every penalty we try to hand out. I just don't see how you can fairly quantify the results after considering those benchmarks.
I think first time offenders should have the penalty waived - after that, why can't we give everyone the same, standard $ amount as defined in the rules?