Early Bird bonus for tournaments

[stanrichardson]

I agree with Silliysod

The NAF should not support tourneys with loans.

Regardless of having a "proper set of rules", legally the NAF would be in an impossible position.

Who is going to review the loan applications? Are people going to be credit checked? Who is going to pay for that? How is it going to be controlled? Who is going to ensure legal compliance in all the countries that run NAF tournements?

So if someone takes a loan and does not repay it, what happens? Who is going to monitor the system?

Debt collectors? Small Claims Court? Written Off?

These all cost both time and money and would generate bad feeling.

Now lets get to the legal side if the NAF was to provide credit to anyone, it needs certain lisences and needs to meet certain conditions. Otherwise its ILLEGAL. Yes they loaned money to WC but thats only every 4 years, the NAFC is their own event, and the Spike was a donation. I am talking if the NAF starts reguarly providing credit. And thats just in the UK, I have no idea how it work in other countries. Who is going to sort this and pay for it? Who is going to be LEGALLY responsible and accountable? Ask yourself would you go to prison for the NAF?

Without the correct paperwork in place, the NAF would not have a leg to stand on if it wanted to take action against anyone defaulting, and at worse the NAF would be in position where it would get fined, if not worse.

Its very easy to write the NAF should do this, but has anyone thought of what the practical implactions are? Having seen and havign to deal with how much work and time it takes a £15 million pound a year company (with a lot more resources then the NAF) to deal with loan/credit agreements i can honestly say this is pie in the sky thinking.

But some poeple with just use this as another stick to beat the NAF with regardless of the fact its (in my opionion) impossible.

[Darkson]

But some poeple with just use this as another stick to beat the NAF with regardless of the fact its (in my opionion) impossible.

Who? I don't see anyone beating the NAF in this thread.

If it's impractical (and I'll take your word for it, as I've no knowledge in what's involved) so be it, but I don't see how suggesting something is "having a go"? Perhaps take off those glasses that tell you "oh, X posted, it must be NAF-bashing" and actually read what's written might be a good idea.

[Glowworm]

But some poeple with just use this as another stick to beat the NAF with regardless of the fact its (in my opionion) impossible.

Who? I don't see anyone beating the NAF in this thread.

If it's impractical (and I'll take your word for it, as I've no knowledge in what's involved) so be it, but I don't see how suggesting something is "having a go"? Perhaps take off those glasses that tell you "oh, X posted, it must be NAF-bashing" and actually read what's written might be a good idea.

Im a fan of the NAF and therefor would be shocked to think anyone would believe I was "NAF bashing"

It was an idea floated by someone (not me originally) that I read and thought " that could be worth looking at" that's all

Ive no experience in the field of loans ect, so will bow to your expertise, I just mentioned that the NAF had been forthcoming with funds before and wondered if there was a possibility that it could work. as someone stated it MAY benefit the community as a whole.

TBH, if every thread on TFF is going to be an exercise in NAF bashing OR Protect the good name of the NAF from any perceived threat then its going to get old quickly.....

ill retire from this thread now, ive asked my question, been given my answer and all is well in my (BB) world.

as someone in another thread once said: let common sense prevail!!

[stanrichardson]

quote="Darkson"]Who? I don't see anyone beating the NAF in this thread.[/quote]

Me neither, At no point did I say anyone was doing that in this thread.

My feeling is that people will bash the NAF for not doing implementing ideas/suggestions regardless of there being a valid reason for not doing so. That's my feeling, and I chose to express it.

Perhaps take off those glasses that tell you "oh, X posted, it must be NAF-bashing" and actually read what's written might be a good idea.

[

Maybe you should take your own advice. Read what is actually written instead of thinking everything is pro naf/pro cliche/anti person X.

I feel the NAF can do more, I've made no secret of that I think it does a good job but it could do more.

But I think we all need to be realistic on our approach. I know the NAF welcomes and acts on suggestions. But they need to be well thought out and considered.

Again this is purely my thoughts and NOT aimmed at anyone thast posted here.

As a group we have alot of ideas that are put out there, which is great and to be encouraged.

But the issue is (I feel) that people just put the idea out there, without thinking it about in more detail, instead just focusiing on the result of wouldn't it be great if The NAF did X.

Now this leaves is in a position where we have a lot of suggestions but not much practical knowledge/research/planning on how to get to the result (if possible) someone suggested.

So unless someone takes ownership of that suggestion and looks at the big picture and not just the outcome, nothing happens with the suggestion. Now since all these ideas are out there and nothing is happening with them, people thing The NAF or whoever are doing nothing with them and nothing is moving forward. The all the bad feeling builds up.

So whoes responsibilty is it to look at the full road map to take a suggestion and turn it to an outcome?

Again my feeling is that some people believe thats NAF staffers role.

But my feeling is a fully rounded out idea and plan is the ideas creaters responsilibity. Yes people do not have all the knowledge and skills to take an idea and turn it solid proposal. So that where we help each other, we have a vast area of skills between us, so we can help each other with our ideas.

I am sure if The NAF received a documented plan and proposal of any idea, they would consider and you would see a response and action a lot quicker then is you approach them and go "You should do this", and leave them to do the work.

We all need to work together is we are to improve things, its not just on the shoulders of the NAF, its down to use all to pull together and help and support each other

DISCLAIMER
Again these are purely my feelings and thoughts, anything that appears critial is not aimmed at anyone thats posted here or anywhere else past or present.
This are my opinions solely and do not reflect anyone else thougths, feelings, or attitudes.

[Darkson]

Who? I don't see anyone beating the NAF in this thread.

Me neither, At no point did I say anyone was doing that in this thread.

My feeling is that people will bash the NAF for not doing implementing ideas/suggestions regardless of there being a valid reason for not doing so. That's my feeling, and I chose to express it.

Perhaps take off those glasses that tell you "oh, X posted, it must be NAF-bashing" and actually read what's written might be a good idea.

Maybe you should take your own advice. Read what is actually written instead of thinking everything is pro naf/pro cliche/anti person X.

Then why bring it up in the first place? You're moaning about NAF-bashing when there isn't any NAF-bashing. Why not save those comments for threads where it's at least vaguely relevant?

[Joemanji]

Aside from all of Stan's reasons, which rule it out logistically, why would such a system of loans even be necessary? Is anyone suggesting that there are not enough tournaments in the UK? If anything there are too many. Now there are 35 tournaments a year, paying months in advance seems strange given that you might be going to 5 or 6 tournaments beforehand. I regularly think "I'll go to either A on that weekend or B the weekend after, but I'll wait until closer to the time to see what other plans I make". 5 years ago you'd put a tournament in your diary months in advance and work around it.

The costs and commitment involved are in my mind a good thing. In the current climate of a tournament every week, I want people to think twice about setting up another one. Otherwise everyone will be starting one up without the experience or dedication to do it properly. The last thing we want is people saying they are going to run an event without thinking it through, then having to cancel when people have paid for trains or hotels.

[Darkson]

Is anyone suggesting that there are not enough tournaments in the UK?

I don't think anyone was suggesting the UK specifically for anything.

[Joemanji]

More pointless sniping, excellent work Mr Moderator.

[SillySod]

Thats a pretty sweeping statement, am i to assume your implying that the UK is more honest than the rest of the world?

Correct.

Different countries have different cultural values. A trust based lending system is probably viable in the UK, certainly the UK bloodbowl community (you would mostly lose money from honest mistakes and failed tournaments rather than dodgy accounting). The same system might be a disaster in another culture.

(this is obviously moot given the regulation surrounding money lending)

More pointless sniping, excellent work Mr Moderator.

Ironic statement is ironic?

[Joemanji]

I had a point, it being that he is a moderator but is actually the person most responsible for dragging threads off course with vitriol, sniping, not addressing the point and off-topic NAF-bashing. It really is tiresome.

[Darkson]

More pointless sniping, excellent work Mr Moderator.

Not pointless at all, nor was it sniping. You seem to be posting from a UK-centric viewpoint, whereas I believe this is a discussion about world-wide BB. If you're not, then why argue against a point that no-one was using?

[sann0638]

Though we have gone somewhat off-topic...

[Joemanji]

Not pointless at all, nor was it sniping. You seem to be posting from a UK-centric viewpoint, whereas I believe this is a discussion about world-wide BB. If you're not, then why argue against a point that no-one was using?

You are bickering about semantics. Everyone here (bar Magictobe who hasn't posted on this issue) is from the UK, so I mentioned the UK. You can easily subsitute "UK" for many other nations and the point remains. The fact is you chose to try scoring points by taking a minor point like this out of context and ignoring my wider post. It would be pathetic from anyone, but you are a moderator. And no, you are not successful goading me (as you were attempting with your abusive PM). It is just time someone had the balls to say what everyone is thinking but is afraid to post because we know how you abuse your powers.

[Darkson]

1. If you believe my PM was abusive, then by all means, ask another admin to look at it. It's no worse than some of the PMs you've sent me though.
[Edit] In fact, I'll post it to them myself.

2. If you want me to answer the rest of your point, I will. No, the UK probably doesn't need any more tournaments, though it can have more - then the ones that coaches enjoy will be successful, the others won't carry on. The Rest of the World might need more tournaments though - perhaps if the was some way the NAF could give TOs a financial hand (and yes, from Stan's post I can see that might be difficult to do, if not impossible) then the tournament scene around the world might grow. Obviously, there are countries like the UK and Spain that don't need the leg-up, but others might.
So yes, your post comes across as very UK-centric because while we are very lucky here and probably don't need a NAF leg-up, some other countries aren't in the same boat. So just saying swap "UK" for "somewhere else" doesn't cut it.

[lunchmoney]

Though we have gone somewhat off-topic...

Yeah, can we get back to "Early Bird bonus for tournaments"? The NAF cash loan idea has been floated, I for one dont think its fesable, for many of the reasons already stated. Can we move on to other ideas and explore them?

One of the ideas floated was a raffle, with more tickets going to those that pay early and extras to those that submit rosters/team race early. A good idea. I havent been able to give prizes this year due to low numbers, so it could be a bit risky due to increased costs in buying them in, but if it would prompt a few more coaches to attend then all good. But where would you draw the line on who gets tickets? Say you need 20 coaches to break even, do you give raffle tickets to the first 18? 20? 24?