AllDay wrote:Okay, so you move it to 200 and people whine about prospect 201 not being there.
OK, that's just ignorant. Now you're arguing just for the sake of trying not to look stupid. Like I mentioned previously, I would guarantee that if the top 200 prospects were made available, there would be no complaining that Scott Cousins wasn't available. If you think otherwise, I have nothing else to say and you can argue all you want otherwise.
You say I've been here for a year, I say I've been here longer than you. Are we limited to one ID over our lifetime?
Haha! Nice. Of course there's no way to tell, so you're bulletproof on that one.
A site that provides free fantasy services and information (or optional pay services) isn't exactly holding users over a barrel. You don't like them, play somewhere else.
This is the point I've been trying to make! If this continues to be a problem, people will go play elsewhere. That's not a good thing for Yahoo! The game has evolved so that minor leaguers are a big part of it (to an extent that Yahoo's own writers are addressing it). In order to stay with the changing landscape, providers would be wise to go with the flow, not resist it. All this complaining is useful because Yahoo should use it to better itself as a provider.
I like Yahoo!'s service. I think they do a good job. I also realize the technical issues that are present in running their service and think they have done a wonderful job overall in presenting a fair and enjoyable product to the public for free (or if they wish to pay for some frills - then they can go that route).
Again, we agree. I wouldn't have payed for a PLUS league otherwise. I said numerous times that I have no complaints about their articles nor the way they add players. Let's try this a third time. Maybe it'll sink in. I SIMPLY HOPE THEY WORK ON EXPANDING THE PLAYER POOL IN THE FUTURE, OTHERWISE I MAY BE FORCED (ALONG WITH MANY OTHERS, IT SEEMS) TO MOVE MY LEAGUE TO ANOTHER PROVIDER.
Hey, if you don't want it expanded, I don't care. That's your opinion and you're entitled to it. But if you think that expanding it (or offering an option, as Genie hinted at. Great idea, by the way...) isn't a good idea, then I'll reiterate that it's not good customer service. Obviously, if people don't like it they can "...STFU and go somewhere else" as you so eloquently put it. Obviously, it won't affect you and your Yahoo public buddies, but do you think that's what Yahoo wants?