|
Post by Foo Cheong on Sept 16, 2013 15:02:04 GMT 8
If a filler never held a place until later, the same principle doesn't apply. But the no-show filler would still be spoiling the game for the other 15 players. This is even worse that late withdrawals who could deny someone (those on the wait list) a place. Which is why I brought up the worst-case scenario of what would happen if this becomes a more common malaise. You may want to re-think the pinciple and penalties (whether fine or block) for such situations. And I still do not know whether the no-show on Sunday gets a waiver, or whether his no-show would be taken into consideration should it recurs again. For sure, he is not getting a fine.
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Sept 16, 2013 15:15:19 GMT 8
If fewer players want to play, or players are getting enough games elsewhere, that's fine. As far as as our games are concerned, if there are enough players, the game will go ahead, even with uneven numbers. I do make an extra effort to make sure we get even numbers, but I'm not sure it is appreciated by everyone. The fussier players get, the fewer games there will be. .... And I still do not know whether the no-show on Sunday gets a waiver, or whether his no-show would be taken into consideration should it recurs again. For sure, he is not getting a fine. As it was a no show, not a late withdrawal, Andrew B will pay the $8 penalty.
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Sept 16, 2013 16:58:00 GMT 8
I've moved the posts above from the "Making time to play & punctuality" thread on the Discussion board.
|
|