Excuse? You're the one who's doing the most. I don't need an excuse. You're entitled to your opinion but quit trying to shove it down my throat. I don't change rules at my discretion, but you wouldn't know that!
Yeah, when forming my opinion I chose simply to go by what the official rules say. I don't really get how that makes me in the wrong here or why that opinion should be invalid because I'm new. In my opinion all disputes should conform to the official rules first and foremost. I'm in no way saying that it has to be my way, that is just what I believe.
That's the type of way I've operated in the past but apparently that's a problem for Mr. Brandt here....seems like if there are 4 'no' votes that could veto a trade, then why isn't 4 'yes' votes pushing this thru? We've had at least 4 'yes' votes now, right? So then common logic would state that shit trade should go thru
Wouldn't you need 5 yes votes to make sure? If there is 4 yes votes there still would be the possibility of 4 no votes, right?...seems like if there are 4 'no' votes that could veto a trade, then why isn't 4 'yes' votes pushing this thru? We've had at least 4 'yes' votes now, right? So then common logic would state that shit trade should go thru
Bones, once again please stop making this personal. I don't have a problem with anyone's opinion, nor is stating mine the same as having a problem.
On the app it lets me vote, but I dont know if it actually counts it or not.
If that is the case then allowing trades to go through with only 4 yes votes seems crazy to me since 2 of those could be the two teams involved in the trade.
Again just my opinion, if thats the way its worked before, and everyones ok with it than that is ok with me. It might be good to have it in writing some where so people are aware of it.
It doesnt tell me if it counted it, or what the count currently is.
This shouldn't even be a big deal SMH.
Im not really trying to make it a big deal...
works for me. I didnt know thats how you guys had done things.
It just shouldnt alter anything you guys do and shouldnt be something that is an issue. It's basically me pushing through trades that are obviously fair and will obviously go through. That's literally all it is.
It's not you, didnt mean to make it seem like it was.
Is this why you're mad? Because you want to pick someone up?
No, that's not why I'm mad. Don't imply blame off you're actions onto something silly.
Once again, I'm just asking questions. We can't see the vote. Why have a 48 hour period if that's not how it's been done? Why not just vote on shortening it or just saying if you don't vote within 24 hours it will go through?
I can see the vote... It's 5 to uphold, 0 to veto. There's a 48-hour review period for questionable trades. Even if I think it's reasonable, if there's a couple of veto votes after the first 12-24 hours then I let the process play out to allow more people to vote since others think its questionable. However, if I think it's reasonable, and 5 people vote to allow and 0 vote to veto, it's pointless to wait because it's gonna go through. That's the logic.
What are my actions? You called me annoying, are complaining this is ridiculous, and basically told me my opinion is shit because I'm new. I'm trying to have a discussion with you. I've asked you several times to stop the personal stuff.
Okay, but before this topic came up couldn't I have thought I had 48 hours to vote given league rules and hadn't decided yet? Only 8 votes should matter, the two involved in the trade shouldn't get a vote, in my opinion, so that means in this case there are only 3 yes votes (assuming you also voted).
I'll make sure to file a conplaint with ESPN.
Thats my whole ideology. I'm gonna do that.
Or let Cook get points...
