I think Side A is significantly better. If I was in a league where you could vote to veto, I probably would. If I was in a league where I was commissioner, I would let it go. The difference comes out of the different duties that entail between a fellow owner who is only asked to use their own judgment and a commissioner who is supposed to look out for the best interests of the league.
Rationale for voting veto: A-Rod and Wright are pretty close... people here think Wright is the #2 pick to A-Rod's #1. And after that, the two others just don't match up.... Rivera is a stud and has been for over a decade and Broxton is looking really, really good as a young reliever and future closer. On the other side, Cain has yet to really bust out and be more than a decent fantasy starter and Soria has only had one year in the bigs, didn't look that great, and doesn't project out nearly as well as Broxton. Other relevant factors are how long the league has been around, what trades have been vetoed in the past, if the other owner really knows what they're doing, and the relationship between the two owners so as to infer whether or not there's some monkey business going on.
But if you give people the right to vote against you, don't be surprised and indignant when they do.
0-3 to 4-3. Worst choke in the history of baseball. Enough said.