Thanks, but I know what it means.
I will take your bait though. (And forgive me for writing another "completely unrelated to Joba Chamberlain - Mike Mussina" post. If you are not Matthias, you may want to stop reading now.
Your neo-libertarian term I will call a philosophical belief, then, that applies to the political spectrum
- in that it outlines how one's society
should be governed (not his fantasy football league). I have never seen it - before now - used outside of this definition. Now, in my opinion, I actually think you have it wrong
. You simply defined LIBERTARIANISM. Adding the "neo-" (again, in your pigeon-holing label) would imply that someone like me is constantly fighting to end ALL vetoing practices in ALL fantasy football leagues around the world. Because, as a neo-libertarian, I take it a step further by making my commitment, my way of life, to end all the unlawful commissioner involvement that exists in cyberspace.
And that, of course is silly.
This is why I call the use of the term pretentious. I read that and go, come ON...stop it. It's obnoxious to me. Just because some want minimal commissioner / league interference doesn't make it (neo-) libertarian. It just means...what it means: as you put it, to "set the rules, let 'em draft, and then let 'em play!!!" Leave it at that!!! The term would imply SOOOOO many other things that have nothing to do with fantasy football and that many may have nothing to do with or at least philosophically believe in.
This all started, remember, with this:
Your argument is like those Creationists who come up with crazy theories, "disproving" evoluton... and then when some biologist finally takes the time to show why their theories are cracked, they say, "Aha! There's a debate!!! You see! Obviously it's a close question!"
Now, I happen to BE a Biology teacher AND a Creationist. How about that, huh? But I also believe in much of Evolution: adaptation, natural selection, creation of new species, etc....hmmmm...You see, so many people pigeon-hole Creationists and assume that they ALL just think that Evolution is lies...LIES!!!! But whatever. Let's just say, for fun, that I am one of "those" Creationists that you know so much about. Apparently, not only is my statistical backing of Mussina just silly, but now so is my whole existential view of the universe. I came here to argue a baseball question, and you obnoxiously make sweeping generalizations. Regardless, I will say that I am amused at your arrogance: Creationists are just humored by Scientists with proof, and that's the only reason it's called a debate? Do you even know what you are talking about? So I say to you, good sir: stop labeling ideas and stick with good old fashioned fantasy baseball.
You'll sound just as smart and we'll all think you're just as great if you leave out the labels.
As far as Mussina and Chamberlain go? We can certainly agree to disagree. I was not arguing to be contrary. If you gave me a choice of the two to add on my current teams (I have neither on any), I would take Mussina.
OK, I will really be done...starting...NOW.