Sim League Nirvana

Merv wrote: February 4th, 2025, 9:12 am For context, I was not sober last night and cooked up a tax system.

To enable graders to feel free to give more and curb billionaires I came up with the following. Let me know your thoughts, if it’s just yes whatever, then like the post.

Similar to a luxury tax in sports, we create a rev share model. For every RP some GM is over 100% the median RP bank you get taxed 0.25 RP. For Jesse purposes, I think I could create a super easy formula for this that he could add to an extra column on his sheet.

In practice, there is no RP wealth at the moment. Tong is the only billionaire. Using this system he’d be taxed 210 RP split amongst the 7 poorest franchises. This feels dumb now, but would be a mechanism to prevent Woo Ballmer from having 3X the RP most of the league has like when I joined as a poverty franchise.

pacers wrote: February 4th, 2025, 11:27 am

Merv wrote: February 4th, 2025, 9:12 am For context, I was not sober last night and cooked up a tax system.

To enable graders to feel free to give more and curb billionaires I came up with the following. Let me know your thoughts, if it’s just yes whatever, then like the post.

Similar to a luxury tax in sports, we create a rev share model. For every RP some GM is over 100% the median RP bank you get taxed 0.25 RP. For Jesse purposes, I think I could create a super easy formula for this that he could add to an extra column on his sheet.

In practice, there is no RP wealth at the moment. Tong is the only billionaire. Using this system he’d be taxed 210 RP split amongst the 7 poorest franchises. This feels dumb now, but would be a mechanism to prevent Woo Ballmer from having 3X the RP most of the league has like when I joined as a poverty franchise.

this guy tong must be really good at managing his RP balance, damn

jwoo wrote: February 4th, 2025, 11:27 am

mantypas/CavsCzar wrote: February 4th, 2025, 11:25 am I know there is some controversy with the grading in this thing, my name got thrown in somewhere, and I just wanted to say my piece.

My article with the schedules of the teams in the playoff hunt and my predictions on who was gonna win was fucking dope as shit!!! This was a dope article too IMO

yeah my comment was not a shot at you, it was just trying to frame my gripe about relative grading scale but i know the multiplier was applied

Merv wrote: February 4th, 2025, 11:29 am

pacers wrote: February 4th, 2025, 11:27 am

Merv wrote: February 4th, 2025, 9:12 am For context, I was not sober last night and cooked up a tax system.

To enable graders to feel free to give more and curb billionaires I came up with the following. Let me know your thoughts, if it’s just yes whatever, then like the post.

Similar to a luxury tax in sports, we create a rev share model. For every RP some GM is over 100% the median RP bank you get taxed 0.25 RP. For Jesse purposes, I think I could create a super easy formula for this that he could add to an extra column on his sheet.

In practice, there is no RP wealth at the moment. Tong is the only billionaire. Using this system he’d be taxed 210 RP split amongst the 7 poorest franchises. This feels dumb now, but would be a mechanism to prevent Woo Ballmer from having 3X the RP most of the league has like when I joined as a poverty franchise.

this guy tong must be really good at managing his RP balance, damn

I think when I joined Woo had like 16k and there were multiple folks 10+. RP purses have had all the strings massively tightened. Content factories got closed.

heimer wrote: February 4th, 2025, 8:41 am Certainly not trying to pick sides but I do think it’s worth mentioning my personal feelings on the grading scale. I’ve not written any articles in a long time mostly because I don’t think it is worth time spent. Everyone’s different some work faster than others, while some spend more time than others. For me, I work pretty slow. Whether that’s because i’m a perfectionist or just a little bit retarded is for you to decide.

Seeing this article, which clearly took time and some effort, being graded at 250 RP only further discourages more content being produced IMO. I understand no one wants a lot of shitty content, but I don’t think that’s the case here. I do enjoy JWoos thoughts and analysis on current league insights and trends and don’t want to discourage him from being very active.

However, no one wants RP to be limitless to the point where it becomes valueless. I get there is a fine line to balance, but maybe we can make it work. While this is Trump‘s America, it doesn’t have to be Trump‘s SLN. So how do we avoid someone stacking 30,000 RP and never having to worry about money again ? and how do we avoid shitty content from being produced?

I see this being solved in two parts. First we put into effect a permanent 1.5 multiplier on grading all articles (or just give more RP?). Second we cap the amount of RPs a GM can hold at any particular time. No more “daddy warbucks.” Someone stacking a lot of RP now also has to send RP out via a trade or lose RP they work for which will only further trade markets / flow of RP. Someone trying to gather RP when they have very little will find it somewhat easier.

I know 50% sounds like a lot, but i think the grading system is undervaluing articles by about that much. Meaning the 50% boost we get in the first article is really just fair value.

I like to think - The greater the article, the bigger the reward of the 50% gain. As it should. MAKE ARTICLES GREAT AGAIN !! Rather than encouraging one good article (the first article) to be produced, we can hopefully encourage multiple articles produced by active GMs. I think the ratio of good to shit articles is leaning heavily in the good department. Let’s just trust our GMs to not abuse the system.

Inflation ? please. Will more RP really cause a ratings inflation problem ? Maybe if we all do a bunch of really great articles ? But isn’t that juice worth the squeeze ?

I’m almost done walking my dog so I will get to my last thought. Recurring articles should be graded the same whether it’s the first time it has been written or the hundredth time. GMs should not be losing creativity points just because they or someone else thought of it before.

Would love to see some thoughts on top of my thoughts.

Heimer out

Matt wrote: February 4th, 2025, 12:51 pm

heimer wrote: February 4th, 2025, 8:41 am

Heimer out

is anyone actually like afraid to just speak their mind publicly?

Matt wrote: February 4th, 2025, 12:51 pm

heimer wrote: February 4th, 2025, 8:41 am Certainly not trying to pick sides but I do think it’s worth mentioning my personal feelings on the grading scale. I’ve not written any articles in a long time mostly because I don’t think it is worth time spent. Everyone’s different some work faster than others, while some spend more time than others. For me, I work pretty slow. Whether that’s because i’m a perfectionist or just a little bit retarded is for you to decide.

Seeing this article, which clearly took time and some effort, being graded at 250 RP only further discourages more content being produced IMO. I understand no one wants a lot of shitty content, but I don’t think that’s the case here. I do enjoy JWoos thoughts and analysis on current league insights and trends and don’t want to discourage him from being very active.

However, no one wants RP to be limitless to the point where it becomes valueless. I get there is a fine line to balance, but maybe we can make it work. While this is Trump‘s America, it doesn’t have to be Trump‘s SLN. So how do we avoid someone stacking 30,000 RP and never having to worry about money again ? and how do we avoid shitty content from being produced?

I see this being solved in two parts. First we put into effect a permanent 1.5 multiplier on grading all articles (or just give more RP?). Second we cap the amount of RPs a GM can hold at any particular time. No more “daddy warbucks.” Someone stacking a lot of RP now also has to send RP out via a trade or lose RP they work for which will only further trade markets / flow of RP. Someone trying to gather RP when they have very little will find it somewhat easier.

I know 50% sounds like a lot, but i think the grading system is undervaluing articles by about that much. Meaning the 50% boost we get in the first article is really just fair value.

I like to think - The greater the article, the bigger the reward of the 50% gain. As it should. MAKE ARTICLES GREAT AGAIN !! Rather than encouraging one good article (the first article) to be produced, we can hopefully encourage multiple articles produced by active GMs. I think the ratio of good to shit articles is leaning heavily in the good department. Let’s just trust our GMs to not abuse the system.

Inflation ? please. Will more RP really cause a ratings inflation problem ? Maybe if we all do a bunch of really great articles ? But isn’t that juice worth the squeeze ?

I’m almost done walking my dog so I will get to my last thought. Recurring articles should be graded the same whether it’s the first time it has been written or the hundredth time. GMs should not be losing creativity points just because they or someone else thought of it before.

Would love to see some thoughts on top of my thoughts.

Heimer out

1st off - big fan of people thinking through a point of view and sharing it on the boards. I personally am not a fan of the "I've talked to other GMs and the consensus is x" stuff - we're all grown men, is anyone actually like afraid to just speak their mind publicly?

Jordo's article, which was objectively one of the most creative in recent memory, got over 1k RP. I think it's pretty hard with the first content bonus for a first article that isn't a repeat article to earn less than like 600-650 as a bare minimum (my article was pretty shitty but was a first article this year and was a new idea, and it got 650). I think my question to you, Heimer, would be - what is the amount of RP that makes the time worth it? Because I don't think looking at the lowest-graded article and using that as a proxy is fair to the graders - they've made a system with certain published incentives and that completely ignores those incentives.

I also think the value in keeping RP scarce isn't to curb ratings inflation through camps, but rather to ensure that they have value in the trade market. If everyone has as much RP as they want and RP is easy to come by, it becomes less valuable and actually could lead to LESS content since someone who might want to write an article for 1000 RP may just prefer to sell their 2nd rounder for 500 instead. Positive shock to supply leads to a decrease in quantity demanded for the nerds out there like me.

I do agree with the recurring article point - I think the current system heavily disincentivizes articles that are generally well-liked because they've been done before. I think the line here is stat articles that are just plug and play - Nav famously had about 10 different stat articles that he wrote for our old league that took him a combined 20 minutes and earned him around 4000 RP a season - that should not be a thing.