SoxAndTheCity wrote:Matthias wrote:SoxAndTheCity wrote:Matthias wrote:Ender wrote:Well obviously the problem comes down to when people think a trade is 'official'.
Some think its when the two player click accept and all veto's should be based on that moment of time. Some think that its when the trade is allowed by the commissioner and trades should be veto'd based on the latest news. Thats why there is no right answer unless your league has clear cut rules about the situation.
True. But I would say the default position if you don't have any clear-cut rules on it would be that a trade is completed once both parties agree to it.
Interesting that you think your opinion should automatically be some sort of default. Thankfully, your opinion only matters for your vote, same as mine.
Well, it's not my opinion so much as it how things work in the rest of life. The player receiving Matsui has received the risk of loss by agreeing to the trade.
And if someone vetoes it, that's their right. But it isn't right to do so. They should only be evaluating the trade as it existed at the moment it was made. That's how the real world and the real law works.
Not just my, "opinion."
You are comparing real life with Fantasy baseball? Interesting.
Fantasy baseball is in stark contrast to real baseball/life at least as often as it mirrors it. In fact in real life I think that you'd pretty much see the opposite trend, however, in friendly exchanges like those in FB.
You and I agree over the phone to trade my Xbox for your PS2 (for sake of example) and consider it a done deal minus the physical exchange - we just have to meet somewhere to do it. Before we do the actual exchange, a pipe in my house bursts and floods the place, destroying the Xbox. Are you still going to give me your PS2, lamenting that the deal was already agreed to before the catastrophe but still sticking to the bargain?
Obviously there are a thousand different scenario's one could dream up, but a lot of you make it sound black and white and it just isn't.
To ZIG. You are building a strawman to knock down. This isn't a warranty period or a button to take things back after buyer's remorse. This is a built in review period for the trade and unfortunately things change during that time and you cannot eliminate that. If you don't want to be able to have things change between the time the managers agree and the time the trade is processed then don't have a review period, have trades go through immediately or set up something other than league vote. Otherwise people are free to vote as they wish, not as ZIG commands.
I won't even respond to what you said about my comment considering you didn't argue against it but simply said it was wrong.
ZIG: Provides clear arguements.
Sox: Just states ZIG is wrong as well as implies what ZIG thinks.
I clearly lost that arguement.
As for your Xbox scenario, it has absolutely nothing to do with it. The Xbox/Ps2 aren't real people and have no control over themselves. Matsui hurt himself, the Xbox does not magically hurt itself, it has no life. On top of that verbal agreements are not the same as a pending trade. You said you verbally agreed to trade the PS2 for the Xbox, I can verbally agree to trade Pujols for Womack, does not mean it is official.Your example is quite meaningless it fact, and I suggest you:
A) Get better examples and
B) Stop critisizing people without proper arguements.