Press conference

Game's news: FPC Season 103 Review
-- 104 S 11 d.
FPC Season 103 Review
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+16
Great, finally some overview and direction for the community! Honest congratulations. When I brought up such idea of seeking clarifications, mostly it was ignored even though a few I think would fit into here described cases. I was accused of making noise and reporting hundreds of old trades - but then it is surprising to see here a total of "only" 113 ;). In that case, I believe, the FPC was not able to filter their emotions aside, because I reported around 15-20 of trades also adding reasoning, but all were voted 100% fair. Also, I received a warning for unfair behavior approx. one week after my last messages.
Even though I was the "guilty" one, it seems that afterwards the order and holding to some kind of principles increased. We do not need all of us to agree on the applied principle, but at least it has to be applied in the same way for all of the users. -- 104 S 11 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+7
Bravo. Finally some communication. -- 104 S 11 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+2
Lape's message dissapears in 3... 2.... -- 104 S 11 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+0
Is it official FPC statement or only your pure opinion on the matter? -- 104 S 11 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
Houdini – If you ask me, I’d say it doesn’t violate any rules, if I understood your question correctly.
benislovas – It reflects the agreed FPC position/thoughts. It is not my personal opinion. -- 104 S 11 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+5
"Buying players and then [...] trading them is unacceptable" - > what should this mean? If I am good/lucky enough to take a free agent for a low price (e.g. a good young player whose market price is usually not his minimum wage) why should I be punished if I exploit him for good trades? Also, one can't see skills for free so buying free agents is prone to errors... -- 104 S 11 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+3
ale92c - If you bid "above market price" for a player, you must use him yourself. Releasing him deprives the original team of their rights, like a robber; and trading him shifts the burden, also unfairly to the original team. However, bidding around the minimum salary, allows you to trade him out fairly without any problem. -- 104 S 12 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+4
Later it the text it was detailed:
Anyone can buy players in the market, but players bought, especially at a price higher than the market price, must be used for the team's purposes. Personally I would mark "especially at a price higher than the market price" in this sentence. -- 104 S 12 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+0
I understand the goal, I disagree with how it has been written. First, there is no mention about buying "in the restricted market" then literally it applies to free agency as well: if I take a free agent paying X, no matter what X is, and there is someone else willing to trade some player which I deem better than the one I bought, why should the trade be reverted? Also, saying "especially" means that the statement holds no matter the price you pay, it is just stronger if you pay above par: but then, if I am able to pay X and trade, it means the market price of the player is X by basic economical theory, even though somebody could think it's 0.5*X for example, so why should it be an issue?
Assuming this publication will be taken as reference for FPC, can the section be re-written so that we don't end up getting unjustified warnings, punishments, etc.? -- 104 S 12 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+0
I believe that these days, if you trade a black person for a blond person, the FPC will sanction you. Except for those who invest money in the game every month, who can do whatever they want and never receive a punishment. -- 104 S 12 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+7
"..malicious behavior in the market - buying players and then releasing or trading them - is unacceptable.."
And what about buying coaches and firing them immediately? -- 104 S 12 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
Houdini – The most important aspect is the average player value as determined by the system. It’s also worth considering any outliers in the current season’s player market values. Overall, this is assessed holistically based on the information available to FPC members at the time.
ale92c – You’re right, the word "restricted" somehow was forgotten in the final version. This will be added back.
Rarz09 – As far as I know, it is currently not regulated.
antisergey – What applies to players also applies to coaches, of course. -- 104 S 12 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+3
So let me ask about coaches then, as i know this team was not punished by buying and releasing coaches. Bought for like 2x or 3x or even more than average price and releasing on day 1.
https://www.basketpulse.com/lt/Team/29601/description
https://www.basketpulse.com/lt/Coach/99884/description
https://www.basketpulse.com/lt/Coach/100608/description
https://www.basketpulse.com/lt/Coach/109834/description

Should i report again? Because by stated FPC rules this is unfair behavior -- 104 S 12 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
Again, as it was stated: Overall, this is assessed holistically based on the information available to FPC members at the time. Please note that it is not possible to specify an exact threshold amount that would trigger an FPC evaluation (need), etc. We kindly ask you to assess the situation holistically and consider any current or potential risks arising from the activities of another manager in the market. -- 104 S 12 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+2
I wonder how the committee would evaluate the Doncic-Davis deal =) -- 104 S 12 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+6
Last season, I received a 70k fine, a team image reduction of 1, and was banned from trading players for a month, simply for sharing the same IP address with a user. When I explained why this had happened, and there was never any cheating between the two teams in the matter of trades or loans between the two teams, I asked for justification and to please show me where the cheating was, which would have resulted in such a punishment. They just told me, "Read the rules." The only explanation they gave me was...

I understand that sharing an IP address is punishable, but if there's no evidence of cheating, it seems unjustifiable to me. And this is all because of the Chinese who own and owned farm teams, and now, at the first sight of something suspicious like what happened to me, they punish you.

When you, as FPC and Darius as the owner, have all the information at your fingertips and don't use it -- 104 S 12 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+4
Press message hidden by federation volunteer or administrator -- 104 S 12 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+2
FPC congrats!!!!
Go ahead with your job,
Your detailed explanation has been a good decision -- 104 S 12 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+5
Kas čia db darosi? Vėl dariaus žinutė paslėpta. O kenkiančių savanorių tai nebėra, visi patikimi likę :D -- 104 S 13 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+5
"If user has some questions, he can reply to the message informing about the sanctions." - Why there is no such possibility to reply, when receiving message regarding FPC decisions? Or maybe the game rules were not applied properly? -- 104 S 13 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
Does anyone know what happened to Discord server? -- 104 S 13 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+13