|
Post by Bwanna on Feb 10, 2010 9:37:28 GMT -5
I'm going to propose that we change the in-season trade approval method on Yahoo to commissioner approval instead of league votes.
Personally, I think there are too many opportunities for conflict of interest when the league votes. It's simply too easy to vote against a deal that would help the guy directly above or below you in the standings.
And, I don't think commissioners should prevent any trade as along as both parties are trying to make their team better. But, owners will always value players differently, and I'm not going to make them value players like I think they should.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Moonshiners on Feb 10, 2010 9:42:04 GMT -5
I think one problem too...is that when minor leaguers are involved, or picks, it doesnt' show in the yahoo sent email and you can just push the veto button too easy. I'd much rather see an email sent out by the commish, and a thread set up to discuss any reasons why a veto might be necessary. That's fine with me.
|
|
|
Post by ensanimal on Feb 10, 2010 9:42:54 GMT -5
I'm ok with it. If anyone ever has a problem with a deal, they can e-mail you and if there is enough support, it could be brought up for league discussion.
|
|
|
Post by Colonels on Feb 10, 2010 12:59:07 GMT -5
Sounds good to me. I hate it when people veto trades for selfish reasons.
|
|
|
Post by oneloveboomer on Feb 10, 2010 15:40:28 GMT -5
I'm on board too.
|
|
RSN
Junior Member
Posts: 50
|
Post by RSN on Feb 10, 2010 15:57:00 GMT -5
No argument here. I'm facing the same decision as commish in my money league where, in the past, there have been some veto shenanigans. Don't want to pay for the upgrade for Yahoo to handle trades, but might have to. I don't know that I want the veto riding with me when there's a couple hundred dollars riding on it.
|
|
paw75
Full Member
Crash Davis Express
Posts: 178
|
Post by paw75 on Feb 10, 2010 16:32:30 GMT -5
Sounds good to me.
|
|
|
Post by Bwanna on Feb 10, 2010 16:45:27 GMT -5
Great, we have a majority. We'll go with it.
|
|