You need to show your work. Just like any algebraic equation where the final answer was realized after many steps, you can't just produce the answer - you need to show how you came about that answer. We demand that even after a 6-game resurrection tournament, but with teams that maybe have played 50 games and have a ST4 AG5 Wardancer to boot, of course online records of how that came about would have to be produced otherwise it's way too open to abuse.

Also we will need something to extract. And this is also the first iteration. If after such time there is a NAF program that's easier for all the paper and penners still out there to use after, then this requirement may not be an issue later. But for now it is. The only way I or anybody else can see someone's league other than line of sight is from their computer.

What downgrade are you referring to? And why would you imply that anybody's league is boring if they don't play with house rules? That's like saying every other game on the planet that doesn't employ house rules is boring.

We all know what a house rule is.

It's not my standard but a NAF one. As you point out open formats are presented in the rulebook. These rules in the LRB 6 are interchangeable when talking about leagues and tournaments, both on pg. 24 and 31. Yet NAF tournaments are never set up as open tournaments - they are scheduled, they are round robin, they are swiss, they are random, but they are never ever open. I, nor my league created that standard - it's the NAF tournament standard. So logically when classifying a standard of League play for NAF wouldn't you consider the tournament standard as the ideal one?

Perhaps Gold, Silver and Bronze are too iconic. The Silver and Bronze classifications are only viewed as lesser if you consider winning a Silver or Bronze as some sort of tragedy which I don't.

If you have anymore concerns Nate please feel free to post again. Like I said we are trying to be as inclusive as possible, and we want commissioners to submit their leagues, but without an online presence what are we looking at?

+1 to this for sure.
Our home league should be included in a registry at least if we choose to promote it.
Or the store leagues that don't have online presences.

To me, that's much more important than ranking.

I guess I don't see why information that is plugged into an online program is any less open to abuse than that which is not. The threat of collusion or corruption still exists, and is probably unavoidable in a project like this. The same is true with tournaments; if someone really wants to fix results for some reason, they could. It's also worth noting that NAF tournaments don't require the use of SCORE.

But I see how it's easier to make use of existing programs rather than adding a manual input to the NAF site. I'll email you with some more specific concerns regarding conversion.

I wasn't being facetious. Eliminating IP was a major sticking point for a couple of my coaches, who felt that it was an important aspect of the game. I take it that this change wouldn't constitute a house rule? How about bounties? Those are pretty commonplace, in my experience, but only serve to (potentially) change certain coaches' mindsets as opposed to affecting play on the field.

I'm not playing devil's advocate or trying to disrupt your plan; my main point here is that "house rules" need to be clearly defined if they're going to affect the division of results.

I'm not advocating equality between open and scheduled leagues. If anything, my point is that open leagues are going to produce results that are more skewed than in those with a few house rules.

I think the nomenclature is my main objection here (let me suggest mithril, vorpal, and unicorn hide).

BUT, I also think that you should consider splitting the "house rule" group into schedule and open divisions. Open leagues are just so different from those that are scheduled, and I think that makes much more difference than a few house rules.

As mentioned above, I'll email you about the prospect of modernizing my league.

The NAF already has a registry for Leagues:
http://member.thenaf.net/index.php?module=Web_Links

Could you confirm that you have to be using OBBLM to participate? If the answer is yes then sadly I will have to rule the HDWSBBL out of this one. We use our own system which we have developed for many years. It works for us and I don't intend to change it. Shame if this is the case.

It is virtually unused and full of out of date information. IMO the first job for a league officer should be facilitating an easily accessible, searchable and up to date list of all tabletop BB leagues around the world, ideally with a map like this one:http://www.thenaf.net/tournaments/information/upcoming-tournaments-map/

Anything else is a bonus and should follow after this.

i jump in this wagon without reading exhaustivelly all wall-text-posts so i may miss some point.
I will just speak about the world league database, as i was asked for because it looks like the tournament map(i will not speak about a world or global league ranking system. )
as i stated to sano and to a someone who sent me an email, it is possible to create a wordpress plugin to create a database and get information manually updated by league comissionar, but my primary concern is about the accuracy of those informations thrue time. i think a automatic devalidation of the entries is required so there is an active action from the league comissionar to update his league year after year. So the users of the database know that the information about the leagues are no more than 1 year old.

To do this we need to set up a cron script and this is a different matter than just adapting the tournament map. So for now i did not produce anything ( also because i am not developping that much those days and because i do prepar for the eurobowl). also i assume i am not the only one with php-fu so maybe there are underground work and i wish if they where that i would be aware of them before launching anything because i would hate to make this development and after learning that it has already been done by someone else.