Yahoo question

[beisbol4ever94928]

So a dispute has arisen recently in my league. It involves a trade. I have it set up for commish approval and I approve all trades unless evidence of collusion. IMO this wasn't a bad trade but nevertheless someone complained. They then complained about it not being a league vote even though it has been commish decision all year. I decided to go further then I needed and opened a vote on our facebook group page where we do league business. It is a 12 team league and I said 7 of 12 needed to agree for further action. That is a bare majority which is what I always specified for other votes previously though none of those votes were regarding a trade. The manager again complained about the 7 of 12 because the two managers were obviously in favor which leaves just 10 teams to muster together 7 votes. Normally I would be willing to compromise and DQ the two managers, making the votes needed 6 of 10, but ive already gone further then I should have imo. Now the guy is claiming that because we are using yahoo that yahoo "laws" should be adhered to. And he claims that yahoo only requires 30 percent vote to veto a trade. Which is where my question is:

Is it accurate that in yahoo fantasy baseball only a 30% vote is required to veto a trade? Can someone please give me a link that explains their rule?

Thanks in advance!

[GRIN]

So a dispute has arisen recently in my league. It involves a trade. I have it set up for commish approval and I approve all trades unless evidence of collusion. IMO this wasn't a bad trade but nevertheless someone complained. They then complained about it not being a league vote even though it has been commish decision all year. I decided to go further then I needed and opened a vote on our facebook group page where we do league business. It is a 12 team league and I said 7 of 12 needed to agree for further action. That is a bare majority which is what I always specified for other votes previously though none of those votes were regarding a trade. The manager again complained about the 7 of 12 because the two managers were obviously in favor which leaves just 10 teams to muster together 7 votes. Normally I would be willing to compromise and DQ the two managers, making the votes needed 6 of 10, but ive already gone further then I should have imo. Now the guy is claiming that because we are using yahoo that yahoo "laws" should be adhered to. And he claims that yahoo only requires 30 percent vote to veto a trade. Which is where my question is:

Is it accurate that in yahoo fantasy baseball only a 30% vote is required to veto a trade? Can someone please give me a link that explains their rule?

Thanks in advance!

League Votes
In a custom or public league set for league votes as the trade-review method, a protest from one-third of managers will result in a veto. So, a 12-team league requires four votes for a veto.
We always round fractions up, so a 10-team league also requires four votes, even though one-third of 10 is actually three-and-a-third

http://help.yahoo.com/kb/index?page=con ... sions=true

[bigmck]

I have never played in a Yahoo league but having a third of the managers being able to control if a trade goes through or not is not very good. I don't see how a trade could ever be made. There are always 3 or 4 guys in every league that will veto a trade just because they don't want anyone to improve his team. == As far as your situation where you allowed a vote when it had been Commish Vetos all year was very wrong. You are playing favorites. Tell the guy to look at the rules and abide by them or quit the league.

[converge241]

You should only default to "Yahoo Rules" as a default if you have no rules addressing an issue.

[Quackman]

You shouldnt have even gave the option of a vote. If your rule is that you review and decide, than you should have just made a decision and stuck with it. Trying to please everyone just wont work alot of the time. Especially if you had that as a setting from the start. People joined the league with those settings in place and should abide by your decisions.

[mkultra]

This is why having a written Constitution for your league is a great idea

[yankee04]

You should just abide by the rules you set. There is nothing wrong with asking for other people's opinion on the issue but there should not have been an official vote on it. It should be your choice in the end because of the way you set the rules.

I prefer my league to be vote based (with majority + 1 veto required for an overturn) rather than commissioner veto only but that is just my preference. However on Yahoo, I do realize they only require 1/3 for an overturn which I still think is kind of ridiculous. When I was a beginner in fantasy, I started on Yahoo and wondered whether trading was even possible since it always got vetoed.

A good commissioner just sets the rules and follows them exactly as written. When you do that, no one can complain. They agreed to the rules by signing up for the league so there can be no argument. A well written league constitution makes it easy for both the commissioner and the league itself.

[americanleagueroto]

The first mistake was opening it up to a vote in my opinion. The rules are the rules and all season the rule was the commish reviewed all trades. If you had made your stance on trades known (unless there is collusion, they're going thru) the manager(s) against the trade should provide a reason for why they believe collusion is taking place, otherwise, it stands.

Like another person said, a clear constitution is the best way to go, especially when you as commish have certain powers the league must follow.

Again, the matter should have never come down to a vote as that appears to be a rule change midseason. In the future, if you do switch to a league vote setup, the 2 owners involved in the deal should not be given a vote in the matter.