Grand Prix Rejects

With the explosion of the size of the ASMF, from what was previously just three series and a standalone competitor (RoLFS), it's becoming quite difficult to manage everything fairly and transparently, especially when it comes to decisions that affect many of these series at once.

For this reason, I propose the Rejects World Federation; a governing body for all of F1R canon. It will comprise a board of administrators from the following places; 1x RWRS Representative, AutoReject representative, 1x Rejects Touring representative, 1x Enduro Racing representative, 1x American representative, Current F1RTA chairperson, Current Canon Manager & 1x Teams Representative.

Each individual sector will decide among themselves who to put forward as their representative. The teams representative will be democratically elected as an 8th person with no controlling interest in any series. The Canon Manager position will also be democratically elected every 2nd 'year'. F1RTA will go through it's traditional re-elections seperate to RWF.

This group will make necessary canon-wide rule adjustments and amendments, and also host debates and votes on critical issues. They will be responsible for a short, concise rulebook that is applied to all series. They will also absorb the responsibilities of the previously standalone Court of Arbitration for Sport - one of these eight administrators will act as the arbitrator in each case, with the choice depending on which of these eight are considered to be unconnected to the case in question & who is available at the time.

To be clear, individual series will still remain in control of their own rulebooks. We're not trying to dictate how every series should be run, but rather, measures that are important to every series and would be better controlled under one roof.

I would also consider giving the RWF some small powers over handing out punishments for rule breaking - having a DEC quota of a manager restricted for a season if they are found to be deliberately flaunting the rules, as an example. However, individual rules being broken within a series will still remain in the jurisdiction of said series.

I agree with this, Out of curiousity, what kind of punishments are you proposing?

If the RWF is for all of canon, I'd suggest adding a F1 representative.

The Canon Manager position will also be democratically elected every 2nd 'year'.

That's way too short. For a canon to be such, consistency is rather important. If we have to vote on a canon manager (and I really don't think there is any need for that, salamander is just the right person for this job) we should do it only every sixth or eighth season.

I think this thread is a very good idea.

Klon wrote:

The Canon Manager position will also be democratically elected every 2nd 'year'.

That's way too short. For a canon to be such, consistency is rather important. If we have to vote on a canon manager (and I really don't think there is any need for that, salamander is just the right person for this job) we should do it only every sixth or eighth season.

I think 4 "year" would be a good time as 2 "years" is a bit short and 6-8 seasons may become a bit long...

I'll support this proposal. As for the canon manager's post, I'm not sure if we need a regular vote at all - a new manager should be elected only if the current one goes AWOL or suddenly starts behaving erratically. But if you want a regular vote I'm not going to stand in its way.

Nuppiz wrote:I'll support this proposal. As for the canon manager's post, I'm not sure if we need a regular vote at all - a new manager should be elected only if the current one goes AWOL or suddenly starts behaving erratically. But if you want a regular vote I'm not going to stand in its way.

I think if the canon manager is doing well and don't behave like a complete idiot the chances are pretty high that he will be re-elected.

I dont see why the canon manager has to change at all - Salamander has been doing a great job as it is, and there's not many things he's had to do in the post either.

pasta_maldonado wrote:I dont see why the canon manager has to change at all - Salamander has been doing a great job as it is, and there's not many things he's had to do in the post either.

Since when does it have to change? I never said that! Then why do we have F1RTA elections at all? No, it's all in the name of consistency. It's a formality even, but if Salamander were ever to relinquish his position, and we were to regret our choice of replacement, we could rectify it. It's a safey net...

Anyway, people are delving into the wrong details here. That's all to be figured out later. At the moment the only thing in question here is whether a body dictating overall rules is something people want or not. And the reaction so far has been a resounding yes, but it's early days...

I don't think it's necessary - I think it's redundant, given the F1RTA, and all the other series are run well enough not to need another organization to dictate the rules. The F1RTA itself is run informally, I'm not sure if the recent rule passed on the DEC will go through Aerond. Regardless, a second ruling body would only give us an endless amount of bureaucracy. Things are fine the way they are.

Aerospeed wrote:I don't think it's necessary - I think it's redundant, given the F1RTA, and all the other series are run well enough not to need another organization to dictate the rules. The F1RTA itself is run informally, I'm not sure if the recent rule passed on the DEC will go through Aerond. Regardless, a second ruling body would only give us an endless amount of bureaucracy. Things are fine the way they are.

This is precisely why we need something like the RWF.

Good work all round to those who came up with the idea and rules written down so far. Looks like an excellent proposal to me.

I also support this.

I don't see any problem with the RWF as proposed, though adding an F1 representative would certainly help.

As for voting on canon manager, I think the best way of settling it would simply be to allow people, such as the remaining members of the RWF, to simply give the title to someone else if need be. That way, if a change needs to happen, it happens. Otherwise, things stay as they are.

This is a very good idea. The RWF has a strong base to build upon, and it certainly would have a great use in the canon PMMF. I honestly couldn't see much of a problem here. I say with some suggestions to improve and some more planning, this may become the go to place to discuss issues within the canon across all series rather than F_RWRS sanctioned series. I say let it roll.

This is a good idea, but would it replace the F1RTA as a mean of rule discussions?

FMecha wrote:This is a good idea, but would it replace the F1RTA as a mean of rule discussions?

The F1RTA is for the discussion of F1RWRS rules. RWF is for the discussion of rules which affect all or many canon series.

Salamander wrote:As for voting on canon manager, I think the best way of settling it would simply be to allow people, such as the remaining members of the RWF, to simply give the title to someone else if need be. That way, if a change needs to happen, it happens. Otherwise, things stay as they are.

For me, I think this is the correct approach. The canon manager will stay as is unless the members of RWF deem a change is necessary. At which point, we will seek candidates and vote internally as to which candidate should be the new canon manager.

Anyway, I'm seeing almost entirely positive responses to this idea. Of course, the fine details will need discussed further, and I will start that in the coming days when I'm a little less pressed for time.

As for a misunderstanding; F1RTA's juristiction will remain as only being for the RWRS series. Because RWRS used to constitute by far the biggest part of the canon, its teams body was the defacto canon management tool. Now everything will be a little more clear, as to who can decide what.

I think this is a good idea. And about time things were aggregated in one body. That way, I feel all the series can evolve in similar directions and maybe things would seem more connected to each other as I feel they are loosely connected for the time being, but maybe I am in the wrong here as I only participate in the FxRWRS.

Well, there's not been much discussion for a little while, and it's been all positive, so I'm delcaring the Rejects World Federations is now....a thing!

The automatically elected members are as follows;

Biscione (F1RTA Chairperson)
Salamander (Current canon manager)
Klon (AltF1 representative)

The following need to be decided amongst the relevant parties. If each section can't come to a mutual agreement amongst themselves, we'll take public elections between all those interested;

RWRS ELECTED - Pasta
AutoReject ELECTED - Nuppiz
Enduro ELECTED - pi3141

As Pasta will be taking over F1RICS from 2017 onwards, the Stateside representative position will be dropped.

Seen as Aerond and TMLW are frequently busy/haven't been bothered to nominate themselves, I'll represent RWRS at the table. I will listen to their opinions if they actually tell me what they are when voting time comes.

The six-man panel of RWF is settled. After some though, I elected not to drag everyone through the teams' rep elective process, but I can still do that if there's a big demand for it. Otherwise, we can just get down to business. We'll elect a chairperson amongst ourselves and crack on with the new rules after that.

Effective immediately, I am removing the Endurance seat from the RWF Panel. It is under my belief that there are alternate motives that are being interpreted to Personal Gain in the ASMF that will be achieved through the RWF. This is something that I do not wish to be a part of, as I believe it is ruining a privileged we all share here.

RealRacingRoots wrote:Effective immediately, I am removing the Endurance seat from the RWF Panel. It is under my belief that there are alternate motives that are being interpreted to Personal Gain in the ASMF that will be achieved through the RWF. This is something that I do not wish to be a part of, as I believe it is ruining a privileged we all share here.

1. You can't do that. You're not in a position to run the show by yourself in this way. Everyone was supportive of this movement and now you're making decisions on behalf of the entire board which you don't have a right to make. So you'll be doing no such thing.

2. By default, pi3141 takes your place.

3. I think attacking the other six of us like that, so publically as well, is out of order. What personal gain? Do you care to elaborate on those accusations? How are we to retort if you make such a blow to our intentions without explaining the reasoning? All I can tell you from my perspective is the RWF is here to create and enforce the brand new DEC rules, to act as the panel for CAS cases, and that's mostly it at this moment in time. Anything else is just evaluation for what could/should be the scope of RWF in future, and there's nothing malicious or biased in that.

Biscione wrote:1. You can't do that. You're not in a position to run the show by yourself in this way. Everyone was supportive of this movement and now you're making decisions on behalf of the entire board which you don't have a right to make. So you'll be doing no such thing.

Where was it in the fine print that said I couldn't withdraw my position and the seat from the board? Who said I wanted to run the whole show? Who counted as everyone in this situation, everyone who wanders into the IRC? Clearly the matter of the RWF is paramount on the future of this corner of the forum and if it's my decision to leave the board with no replacement, then tough luck. Clearly you aren't doing enough to get more of the ASMF user-base involved. It's one position on the board for two series that are more than happy to govern themselves, so why bother forcing us into a position that will be disadvantageous to our series. You said that "you don't care" when Pi and I wanted to co-chair the seat, so why should I care if you are refusing to admit that you and a imperial tonne of unnecessary bureaucracy aren't needed? Stop trying to rule the world so you can dominate everything and stomp everyone who goes into your way.

Biscione wrote:3. I think attacking the other six of us like that, so publicly as well, is out of order. What personal gain? Do you care to elaborate on those accusations? How are we to retort if you make such a blow to our intentions without explaining the reasoning? All I can tell you from my perspective is the RWF is here to create and enforce the brand new DEC rules, to act as the panel for CAS cases, and that's mostly it at this moment in time. Anything else is just evaluation for what could/should be the scope of RWF in future, and there's nothing malicious or biased in that.

Implying of course I'm attacking all of the other six current participants. These accusations befall on the impression of the recent impressions and changes that follow your long term intention to take over the ASMF, of course. This is has been something you've never denied, but always been vocal if someone decided to get in your way from reaching that goal, which isn't the first time you've done this to me. The issue now are the broken bones and the lack of endorphins that lay in the path that the ASMF has taken and will be taking if the RWF continues with it's overarching capacity. And guess what, a issue now lining right in front of us is the lack of new blood, and that's because you all kick them out, hate them or just ignore them. A rule like the RWF won't help the cause by making everything more intimidating than they already are. You shouldn't have to read The Valve Employee Handbook to be a part of a racing series. Rather it just weeds out those who don't want to enter so you can win easier. Cynical, I know. But welcome to real life, where you don't win everything and you have to deal with the consequences.

The 10% DEC Rule is fine. DanielPT knows what he's doing in terms of the CAS as was demonstrated throughout the 2016 season. Dagnall doesn't need to be banned from RWS1 and Series Organiser-run teams should only leave their own series only if they win any championship in their series. The RWF is unnecessary and your ego is making it a red-taped disaster waiting to happen once you get your way and no one gets in your way. Was there an issue with the others? Maybe if they are blatantly being antagonistic, but that remains to be seen. If there are issues with a certain series, bring it up with the organiser without having to go to Judge Judy.

I'm sorry, but all of this is not worth it.

RealRacingRoots wrote:

Biscione wrote:1. You can't do that. You're not in a position to run the show by yourself in this way. Everyone was supportive of this movement and now you're making decisions on behalf of the entire board which you don't have a right to make. So you'll be doing no such thing.

Where was it in the fine print that said I couldn't withdraw my position and the seat from the board? Who said I wanted to run the whole show? Who counted as everyone in this situation, everyone who wanders into the IRC? Clearly the matter of the RWF is paramount on the future of this corner of the forum and if it's my decision to leave the board with no replacement, then tough luck. Clearly you aren't doing enough to get more of the ASMF user-base involved. It's one position on the board for two series that are more than happy to govern themselves, so why bother forcing us into a position that will be disadvantageous to our series. You said that "you don't care" when Pi and I wanted to co-chair the seat, so why should I care if you are refusing to admit that you and a imperial tonne of unnecessary bureaucracy aren't needed? Stop trying to rule the world so you can dominate everything and stomp everyone who goes into your way.

Biscione wrote:3. I think attacking the other six of us like that, so publicly as well, is out of order. What personal gain? Do you care to elaborate on those accusations? How are we to retort if you make such a blow to our intentions without explaining the reasoning? All I can tell you from my perspective is the RWF is here to create and enforce the brand new DEC rules, to act as the panel for CAS cases, and that's mostly it at this moment in time. Anything else is just evaluation for what could/should be the scope of RWF in future, and there's nothing malicious or biased in that.

Implying of course I'm attacking all of the other six current participants. These accusations befall on the impression of the recent impressions and changes that follow your long term intention to take over the ASMF, of course. This is has been something you've never denied, but always been vocal if someone decided to get in your way from reaching that goal, which isn't the first time you've done this to me. The issue now are the broken bones and the lack of endorphins that lay in the path that the ASMF has taken and will be taking if the RWF continues with it's overarching capacity. And guess what, a issue now lining right in front of us is the lack of new blood, and that's because you all kick them out, hate them or just ignore them. A rule like the RWF won't help the cause by making everything more intimidating than they already are. You shouldn't have to read The Valve Employee Handbook to be a part of a racing series. Rather it just weeds out those who don't want to enter so you can win easier. Cynical, I know. But welcome to real life, where you don't win everything and you have to deal with the consequences.

The 10% DEC Rule is fine. DanielPT knows what he's doing in terms of the CAS as was demonstrated throughout the 2016 season. Dagnall doesn't need to be banned from RWS1 and Series Organiser-run teams should only leave their own series only if they win any championship in their series. The RWF is unnecessary and your ego is making it a red-taped disaster waiting to happen once you get your way and no one gets in your way. Was there an issue with the others? Maybe if they are blatantly being antagonistic, but that remains to be seen. If there are issues with a certain series, bring it up with the organiser without having to go to Judge Judy.

I'm sorry, but all of this is not worth it.

Lies, lies, and more lies. All I can see is gross slander. Let's break this down part by part;

1. Your exact wording when resigning was this;
[quote=RealRacingRoots]Effective immediately, I am removing the Endurance seat from the RWF Panel[/quote]
You can remove yourself from a position yes, but you cannot the position altogether. By attempting to doing so, you are putting your own wishes above those of the RWF as a whole. "Everyone" refers to the unanimous support on the forums during consultation for the formation of the RWF as an impartial governing body of the canon, well in the knowledge that I was the one proposing it and indicating I would remain a part of it following its formation.

Why don't I care that you wanted a co-hosting agreement? Because it's a total lack of respect to the system in place. Everyone else managed to hash out an agreement fitting what was asked, why couldn't you? There is nothing wrong with collaborating on an answer with other relevant parties, but at the end of the day, what was asked was one representative, and you wouldn't give a straight answer. The format to be used was put in black and white for all to see, and nobody put foward concerns about it until you decided to have this very public outrage out of the blue. Also, to suggest the RWF will 'forc[e] us into a position that will be disadvantageous to our series' is an ignorance of the founding principle of the entire project. Series owners can make their own ruleset, we just take charge of issues that span across mutliple series. If there is a series-specific problem, RWF does not get involved.

The rest...wow, great conspiracy theory you have there. My intention is to take over the entire ASMF, right? That I want complete and utter regulation of who can and cannot race? That I want to shun all the new users and form the elite?

Wizzie makes funny jokes about myself aiming to be the all singing all dancing dictator of PMMF, and it is funny, because Voeckler is in everything. I do want to win every series, that's true. But I want to do it by starting on a level playing field with the rest and doing it by the same rules as everyone else. The only way to be the best is to start from the same position and make the most of what you have. I want as many people as possible competing, becuase then it makes the whole contest worth something. But ok, why don't you humour me, and point out the many examples of me "kick[ing] them out" on purpose?

Everything I've ever done has been aimed towards impartiality, transparency and parpticipation. The TRRS is specifically desigend to give newbies a chance to enter something, pick a driver that exists and take it as their own. But I can't force new users to sign up, they have to do so of their own volition. The F1RICS will be geared the same way.

What you're suggesting is an oxymoron. Until this week I didn't run a single canon series. Zero. How can I be deliberately manipulating the way series in the ASMF are run, if I don't control a single one of them? The series owners are in charge and decide what to do. The RWF will be six people, I have five other people to kick me into place if I try anything overreaching, and as all the discussions are public, a gallery of team owners who can cry foul if something amiss is up. I can't control how other people run their teams either - they are all human beings of free will, what they choose is up to them.

The RWF is here to help everybody. You are crying wolf here. The RWF was asked for. What you're saying doesn't align with the vast majority of opinion posted so far. My position of influence has increased in the PMMF, I don't pretend that isn't so, but almost entirely from taking over hosting of the wiki, which is beneficial for all. Shoutwiki has crashed four times since we moved, and spent 48 hours offline for maintenance just last week. Taking the first week of weeding bugs out of the equation, FormulaRejects has had 100% uptime. This is a forward step. The day-to-day operation of the wiki is almost identical to what it was before, but with better reliability. If you can't get onboard with trying to improve the ASMF and increase the number of channels with which new users can get involved (because, let's face it, they'll all get old and die before they get an FxRWRS entry at this rate), then you shouldn't be trying to dictate what happens.

The GTRWC is a great series, but you can't try to tear down something that was unanimously asked for because you have a problem with person who proposed it. I would suggest getting back onboard with the concept, if not back to your old position, because it's not going away any time soon.

Biscione, you really should consider getting into politics (it might actually be an improvement for your country, ironically)

This wrote:Biscione, you really should consider getting into politics (it might actually be an improvement for your country, ironically)

I'm not of a wealthy enough background to go to Fettes, or Eaton, or whatever damned school or college all the politicians go to (left, right, centre, they all go to the toff schools). But you're right, someday I'll launch a UK incarnation of the Best Party. Why are you voting for anyone else, vote for me, I am the best! My policies are the best;

1. Free RWRS for all - all budgets are now unlimited, because our government is caring and giving.
2. Free bus pass for injured drivers - we need to consider the welfare of the drivers. And the fans. OK, we give free bus passes to the fans too.
3. No more bills - the teams have unlimited budgets, so why are we charging them for engines? We don't need to do that anymore, so let's stop that.
4. Free McDonalds, KFC and Dominos for all the drivers - this is not F1. We will put the minimum weight limit up by 200kg in all series, so drivers can be as fat as they want, without being punished in speed. Because we care about the welfare of the drivers!
5. Originality - We promise to make all new manifeso promises, because we don't steal from others, and want to show we are not trying to rip-off our opponent's stances.
6. Stop corruption - We promise to stop corruption. We'll accomplish this by participating in it openly.
8. Concise - No rambling promises.
7. Make democracy illegal - we'll make a referendum next week to vote on whether to make democracy next week. Don't worry about your voting rights for this poll, I made government militias illegal of my own desire and sent the whole army on holiday to Rome. I made a big takeaway pizza order, you see. With the new weight limit increase, it shouldn't be a problem.
5. Numeracy - All politicians must have a qualification in Mathematics.
10. I like the number 10, it's a nice number, and it will be my office when you vote for me. I don't have any more policies to list, I just think 10 is a nice number to finish the manifesto on.

I support Biscione's position on this matter as he at least knows what out premier series is actually called

In all seriousness, I don't really care that our canon is corrupt and run with various degrees of an iron fist. I have no desire to try and game the system* so unless there is a (unlikely) gross injustice against me i have nothing to be worried about.

Jeez, didn't expect this topic would turn ugly.

Anyway, I'm putting myself forward as a chairperson candidate.

Nuppiz wrote:Jeez, didn't expect this topic would turn ugly.

Anyway, I'm putting myself forward as a chairperson candidate.

Aaaaaaand it's a no contest. Nuppiz is installed as chairperson, as other candiates (Klon, Salamander) indicated they would step aside if you ran, as is now the case.

Nuppiz is delcared Chairperson of the RWF.

OK, I would raise our first issue:

For 2017, many series have declared a ban on double dutying - this could lead to a de facto double duty ban across RWRS. Shall we make a rule that completely prohibits double dutying for current-time canon series?

Biscione wrote:Aaaaaaand it's a no contest. Nuppiz is installed as chairperson, as other candiates (Klon, Salamander) indicated they would step aside if you ran, as is now the case.

Nuppiz is delcared Chairperson of the RWF.

Well then, time to get to work.

FMecha wrote:OK, I would raise our first issue:

For 2017, many series have declared a ban on double dutying - this could lead to a de facto double duty ban across RWRS. Shall we make a rule that completely prohibits double dutying for current-time canon series?

This issue has been discussed upon for quite a while, but so far without any definite decision in place. As FMecha pointed out, quite a few series have already implemented rulings that are banning or limiting this practise. So I figured it's time to get a definitive discussion and decision on this matter. As you may know, I wrote a lengthy post on the flaws of double-dutying a few months back, but I'd also like to hear arguments from the opposing side, if there are any.

You have the following options to vote on:

[ ] Ban double dutying completely - once a driver has signed in a series he cannot compete in other races unless he quits the first series first.
[ ] Allow double dutying in special cases only (no clashing races, only a short period of time as a supersub). The driver owner has full responsibility to ensure there are no clashes.
[ ] Let the series decide upon this individually.

Option 1: 0 votes
Option 2: 4 votes (Nuppiz, pi314159, Salamander, pasta_maldonado)
Option 3: 1 votes (Klon)

[ ] Ban double dutying completely - once a driver has signed in a series he cannot compete in other races unless he quits the first series first.
[X] Allow double dutying in special cases only (no clashing races, only a short period of time as a supersub). The driver owner has full responsibility to ensure there are no clashes.
[ ] Let the series decide upon this individually.

I agree with banning double dutying except for short time replacements and part-time/guest entries.

I'm with Pi on this one.

[ ] Ban double dutying completely - once a driver has signed in a series he cannot compete in other races unless he quits the first series first.
[X] Allow double dutying in special cases only (no clashing races, only a short period of time as a supersub). The driver owner has full responsibility to ensure there are no clashes.
[ ] Let the series decide upon this individually.

[ ] Ban double dutying completely - once a driver has signed in a series he cannot compete in other races unless he quits the first series first.
[X] Allow double dutying in special cases only (no clashing races, only a short period of time as a supersub). The driver owner has full responsibility to ensure there are no clashes.
[ ] Let the series decide upon this individually.

Although I think it's the series owners' own prerogative to introduce these rules, I also believe that everyone should co-operate. Therefore, I'm in favour of leaving a loophole ready for special cases such as injury.

Ataxia wrote:[ ] Ban double dutying completely - once a driver has signed in a series he cannot compete in other races unless he quits the first series first.
[X] Allow double dutying in special cases only (no clashing races, only a short period of time as a supersub). The driver owner has full responsibility to ensure there are no clashes.
[ ] Let the series decide upon this individually.

Although I think it's the series owners' own prerogative to introduce these rules, I also believe that everyone should co-operate. Therefore, I'm in favour of leaving a loophole ready for special cases such as injury.

Agree.

Following my Wolf-ATS-Kauhsen situation, we do need to set out specific rules about handling 'debts' and 'takeovers/mergers'
Now this situation is occuring in non-canon series, so the series manager can decide about this himself. But for all canon series, i think this is worth considering. There will always be people who will try to bend the rules (including me), but some people will also bend the rules unknowingly, because they just don't get it. Now my solution always used to be asking dozens of questions like 'do you allow this, that?' to the annoyance of some people. My suggestion is putting up universal financial rules and ownership rules for the canon series, instead of every series running their own independent system.

[ ] Ban double dutying completely - once a driver has signed in a series he cannot compete in other races unless he quits the first series first.
[x] Allow double dutying in special cases only (no clashing races, only a short period of time as a supersub). The driver owner has full responsibility to ensure there are no clashes.
[ ] Let the series decide upon this individually.

[ ] Ban double dutying completely - once a driver has signed in a series he cannot compete in other races unless he quits the first series first.
[X] Allow double dutying in special cases only (no clashing races, only a short period of time as a supersub). The driver owner has full responsibility to ensure there are no clashes.
[ ] Let the series decide upon this individually.

This wrote:Following my Wolf-ATS-Kauhsen situation, we do need to set out specific rules about handling 'debts' and 'takeovers/mergers'
Now this situation is occuring in non-canon series, so the series manager can decide about this himself. But for all canon series, i think this is worth considering. There will always be people who will try to bend the rules (including me), but some people will also bend the rules unknowingly, because they just don't get it. Now my solution always used to be asking dozens of questions like 'do you allow this, that?' to the annoyance of some people. My suggestion is putting up universal financial rules and ownership rules for the canon series, instead of every series running their own independent system.

The problem with that statement, is that non-canon meaning that is not in this world and in a completely different world with each series.

HawkAussie wrote:

This wrote:Following my Wolf-ATS-Kauhsen situation, we do need to set out specific rules about handling 'debts' and 'takeovers/mergers'
Now this situation is occuring in non-canon series, so the series manager can decide about this himself. But for all canon series, i think this is worth considering. There will always be people who will try to bend the rules (including me), but some people will also bend the rules unknowingly, because they just don't get it. Now my solution always used to be asking dozens of questions like 'do you allow this, that?' to the annoyance of some people. My suggestion is putting up universal financial rules and ownership rules for the canon series, instead of every series running their own independent system.

The problem with that statement, is that non-canon meaning that is not in this world and in a completely different world with each series.

The problem is completely unrelated to the series being non-canon or canon. Although my virtual F1 is non-canon, the problem This mentioned applies to all series that use some kind of a budget system, for example F1RWRS, Le Mans Cup, F1RICS, and Canon F1 in 2013 as well as in 1954.

But I think it is impossible for all these series to use the same system. The 1954 Alternate F1 system works really well for that series, but using it for F1RWRS wouldn't really make sense. But also the F1RWRS system wouldn't work for 1954 Alternate F1.