Our rules have been updated (but not changed) under the Private World Rules tab, but I am inclined to add a new one. We haven't voted anyone out yet for posting 200 losses, despite having a referendum every season since the rule went into effect. That actually doesn't bother me too much, because I think that reflects our relaxed, friendly attitude here.
But I am strongly inclined to automatically boot owners if they reach 200 losses over two consecutive two-season periods. (Does that make sense? What I mean is, you post 200 losses over, say, seasons 1 and 2, and then 200 losses over seasons 2 and 3. I guess it could more easily be expressed as losing 300 games over three seasons.)
I've heard from some of you during our referendums (referenda?) who say that it takes time to turn around a bad franchise, and I can understand that. But having rebuilt several teams across several leagues, I don't believe that it's necessary to lose 100 games or more over consecutive seasons to rebuild a franchise. I don't want to be a hardass here, but I feel like we need the no-questions rule for the third season so our relaxed, friendly attitude isn't abused. I'll wait to change anything until budget day is over (at least) to gauge reactions, but that seems like a reasonable rule to encourage competition. More than reasonable, actually.