Wiskers and Paws Pass !

[Dave]

Additionally, I would amend to it "d) rarity for rarity".

A good point Dave but this one can get sticky sometimes too. Here's an example, a guy takes an Añejo 77 and puts a Padron 1964 worth about $10.00. Someone will come along and say "HEY, Añejo 77s are rarer than Padron 1964s, I call shenanigans!" :laugh:

Personally, I'm having a very easy time getting Añejo 77s so I would think that was an okay P/T. Other CPers in other parts of the country probably find it nearly impossible to buy Añejo 77s meanwhile, their local shop is stacked to the ceiling all the time with Padron 1964s.

Now getting back to the other point I raised (about the host calling all the shots) some might say the way to solve this is "Check with the host, it's his decision." Okay I guess BUT the guys who are in the pass AFTER this perceived unfairness about rarity should be consulted as well.

My point is the "rarity for rarity" is kind of tough to define, I'm not sure it really means much or adds value so I'd argue against adding that rule.

I'm certain the host wouldn't allow that kind of trade either. NEXT!!

 

[CoventryCat86]

I still don't quite understand why it is necessary to debate a pass starter's rules publicly if you aren't going to be in the pass, but I'm new and some more time here may shed light on that issue.

Ya wanna know why? Well here's what's happened to me in the past, and yeah, I've been around here for a fairly long amount of time and my guess is I've participated in passes here more than 99% of the rest of the membership.

When passes look okay at first then turn to crap, guys like me get PMs that say "Hey CC, can you take a look at XXXX's pass, it's all screwed up and .........(whatever)" A famous example of this was Barney's gobstopper pass. I then respond with "Well, I don't know why you would have joined that pass in the first place because of__________" to which the person who asked me the initial question replies with "Well why didn't you warn us?"

I saw potential problems with the rules as presented and listed my reasons why.

Get it?

 

[CoventryCat86]

Additionally, I would amend to it "d) rarity for rarity".

A good point Dave but this one can get sticky sometimes too. Here's an example, a guy takes an Añejo 77 and puts a Padron 1964 worth about $10.00. Someone will come along and say "HEY, Añejo 77s are rarer than Padron 1964s, I call shenanigans!" :laugh:

Personally, I'm having a very easy time getting Añejo 77s so I would think that was an okay P/T. Other CPers in other parts of the country probably find it nearly impossible to buy Añejo 77s meanwhile, their local shop is stacked to the ceiling all the time with Padron 1964s.

Now getting back to the other point I raised (about the host calling all the shots) some might say the way to solve this is "Check with the host, it's his decision." Okay I guess BUT the guys who are in the pass AFTER this perceived unfairness about rarity should be consulted as well.

My point is the "rarity for rarity" is kind of tough to define, I'm not sure it really means much or adds value so I'd argue against adding that rule.

I'm certain the host wouldn't allow that kind of trade either. NEXT!!

Well if I was the host I would, but the people down the line should be consulted as well.

And what's with the "NEXT!!" ???

 

[dk_ace]

D,

Within the confines of honorable intentions, it is not uncommon for many FOGs to survey the passes and ensure fair play even if they aren't playing. Let's leave it at that.

I'm not so dense as to wonder why a FOG would be checking pass rules, but my point was whether or not it was necessary to address it publicly with the exception of rules that made for profiteering. I was suggesting that PM's would stop this sort of thing from happening again. BTW - RED INK MAKES ME ANGRY!!!

D

 

[dk_ace]

I still don't quite understand why it is necessary to debate a pass starter's rules publicly if you aren't going to be in the pass, but I'm new and some more time here may shed light on that issue.

Ya wanna know why? Well here's what's happened to me in the past, and yeah, I've been around here for a fairly long amount of time and my guess is I've participated in passes here more than 99% of the rest of the membership.

When passes look okay at first then turn to crap, guys like me get PMs that say "Hey CC, can you take a look at XXXX's pass, it's all screwed up and .........(whatever)" A famous example of this was Barney's gobstopper pass. I then respond with "Well, I don't know why you would have joined that pass in the first place because of__________" to which the person who asked me the initial question replies with "Well why didn't you warn us?"

I saw potential problems with the rules as presented and listed my reasons why.

Get it?

Perfectly understandable. I was just suggesting that PMing the pass host might be a good starting point as opposed to making your concerns public immediately. If the pass host wasn't receptive to a FOG's PM, that would definately be something worth making the participant's aware of. Again, I'm new so I don't know about all the things that have happened in the past. Honestly, I wasn't expecting anyone to address my point as I'm new and that insight would probably appear to me at some point later in my time here.

D

 

[Rod]

Is the problem that one rule? Equal puts/takes? What is wrong with saying NC for NC or Cuban for Cuban? Is this really the only problem? So, if it's too hard to define rarity for rarity or whatever, why have any rules? Everyone needs to use their best judgment. As long as everyone in the pass is having fun and cigar takes/puts are fair, then that's all that matters. If someone takes premium cigars and places shitty cigars, then we'll address the problem IF it arises.

Are there any other problems with the current set of rules? Let's get this over and resolved.

 

[NorCalCigarLover]

This set of rules are ones that I originally wrote after hosting a few passes. Swissy and few others have been using them and changing them along the way to make them fit their Passes as well. I wrote them in response to some of the problems I was encountering as a Pass Host in an attempt to keep my passes running smooth and fun for all participants. At the time, I did feel the need to be very specific about a few things so I wrote them to fit my needs as a Host.

We've had some discussion on the Equal Puts/Takes rules in my passes and I've never been able to get that rule exactly right to fit "ALL" cases. What I was attempting to do was set a base level rule and then allow the participants of my Passes to make the final call on a participants P&T's. There were a few hurt feelings when someones P&T's were questioned so I added the part about not getting your feelings hurt.

I can go over each rule and tell you why I wrote them the way I did but a few have already done that here, and quite accurately I might add. I do know that I have had very little issues with running my Passes with these rules but they were written with very specific needs that I had as a Pass Host.

 

[Rod]

Hearing no further objections, I am going to close this thread and ask that a new thread be started. We have some established members in place who are going to assist with getting this pass underway, and will ensure that it's fair and reasonable.