Thread: Picker Or Pickee
View Single Post
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-06-2002, 22:25
archiver archiver is offline
Forum Archival System
#0047 (ChiefDelphi)
  
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pontiac, MI
Posts: 21,214
archiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ranking The Worms
Posted by Jerry Eckert.

Engineer from Looking for a team in Raleigh, NC sponsored by .

Posted on 1/11/2000 1:21 AM MST


In Reply to: Ranking The Worms posted by Bill Beatty on 1/10/2000 11:29 PM MST:



: I have a real problem with a system that forces a high seeded team to forfeiture it's right to select a partner! I am also against rejections and all the possible problems associated with it. Thats why I stated that I don't believe that FIRST thought this one all the way through. It appears that they tried to fix a part of the selection process that wasn't really broke.

Under what circumstances does a high seeded team lose forfeit their 'right' to select a partner? Even if rejections are allowed, they can select any partner they desire; however, the potential partner also has a 'right' to reject the association. If they are rejected they then choose another partner.

The 'rejection' scenerio is much closer to the way alliances and mergers work in the business world. Can you provide examples of real life situations which mirror the 'no reject' scenerio?

Jerry


__________________
This message was archived from an earlier forum system. Some information may have been left out. Start new discussion in the current forums, and refer back to these threads when necessary.