OT 2018-2019 Rip City Two FANTASY FOOTBALL

[hoopsjock]

Ok, just read all of the back and forth on this issue. I am one that likes to stick to rules, but I understand the adjusting of the rules if a majority of the league doesn't object. It does get murky with the commissioner being involved in the trade himself. I'd rather find solutions than have people upset with each other. What about having a Co-commissioner (or current treasurer @PtldPlatypus ) next year and their only responsibility is to step in a "arbitrate" trade timelines when the commissioner is involved in the trade? It might be a crap idea, but I would rather see solutions than league members genuinely upset with each other.

I completely agree with having an impartial vice commissioner. Currently we have a voting process, I don't like that the process can be circumvented because one person who is involved in the trade thinks it's fair. What is the point of even having a voting process if someone can make a trade and then just say it's fair and it's going to go through? The whole point of the voting process is to make sure that everyone has a say.

 

[trailblazer18]

Well I answered those questions, with the Stotts analogy. So yeah I get it. I also said I think going into next year we should pick rules and stick to them. I guess it's not too late to do that now, but at the same time it would be yet another change of rules mid-season, which is the problem isn't it?

Well there are set rules for this season already set in place. To avoid these situations, the solution is to make sure trades are made 48 hours before the player you want plays. If that doesn't happen, well you can still make the trade, you simply just miss one game with that player. It's not life and death, at least I think it is less important compared to keeping the peace among everyone in the league.

I like sticking to rules, but am also ok with adjusting on the fly if it's not ridiculous - this makes me seem wishy washy..haha

 

[BoBoBREWSKI]

Well there are set rules for this season already set in place. To avoid these situations, the solution is to make sure trades are made 48 hours before the player you want plays. If that doesn't happen, well you can still make the trade, you simply just miss one game with that player. It's not life and death, at least I think it is less important compared to keeping the peace among everyone in the league.

I like sticking to rules, but am also ok with adjusting on the fly if it's not ridiculous - this makes me seem wishy washy..haha

I agree.

 

[trailblazer18]

Yeah, I dislike that I've played a part in starting stuff on here because of trades I initiated. I think there are solutions such as having an arbitrator.
I think we should all give a big thank you to Bones for organizing the league and the Draft. I appreciate the work he's put in, and that shouldn't get lost here.
I think in terms of solutions we should put our brains together and come up with something next year that we stick to.

And yes, @BonesJones has to put up with rounding up people to get enough in the league and setting up the draft and everything else that comes with overseeing the league. Thank you very much for doing that. Your efforts are not unappreciated.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I agree.

You agree that he's wishy washy? How rude!

No, actually I'm on that same boat (not that my opinion matters, but I was tagged in a post, so I read through everything anyway).

• I understand why @BonesJones adjusted the timeline for that trade, and appreciate the public declaration thereof.
• I get where @hoopsjock is coming from--why have rules in the first place if they're constantly bent?
• I personally tend toward that same mindset as well; if the timing of waiver claims, trade vetoes, and the first game are inconvenient, so be it. That's life.
• However, I also understand a policy of making reasonable accommodations if that type of protocol is applied consistently.
• What I don't understand is any of this being a big deal--either the rules, the adjustment, or the objections. It's all supposed to be fun

Just my outsider's perspective.

Hopefully you all can get this all sorted without any hard feelings either way. If I can be of any assistance, let me know.

 

[hoopsjock]

Well I answered those questions, with the Stotts analogy. So yeah I get it. I also said I think going into next year we should pick rules and stick to them. I guess it's not too late to do that now, but at the same time it would be yet another change of rules mid-season, which is the problem isn't it?

The problem isn't that the rules themselves are changing, I'm totally fine with the rules being set whatever way the league wants. My issue is that we are changing the rules to make specific trades go through after the trades are agreed upon.

If you guys came in here and said you had agreed to a trade but it involves someone playing Thursday and you would appreciate if everyone voted as soon as possible so that the trade can go through or something along those lines it would be completely different. Instead we have a situation where the commish tells us it's going to go through unless there are any objections. I voiced my opinion and get told I am annoying and ruining the league even though I made a point to say that I would go along with whatever decision the rest of the league makes and not have a problem with it.

 

[hoopsjock]

You agree that he's wishy washy? How rude!

No, actually I'm on that same boat (not that my opinion matters, but I was tagged in a post, so I read through everything anyway).

• I understand why @BonesJones adjusted the timeline for that trade, and appreciate the public declaration thereof.
• I get where @hoopsjock is coming from--why have rules in the first place if they're constantly bent?
• I personally tend toward that same mindset as well; if the timing of waiver claims, trade vetoes, and the first game are inconvenient, so be it. That's life.
• However, I also understand a policy of making reasonable accommodations if that type of protocol is applied consistently.
• What I don't understand is any of this being a big deal--either the rules, the adjustment, or the objections. It's all supposed to be fun

Just my outsider's perspective.

Hopefully you all can get this all sorted without any hard feelings either way. If I can be of any assistance, let me know.

Part of my problem is that we've had this exact conversation I think 3 times now without any sort of resolution. Bones even said that he knew this would be my reaction. I said the other times that we should have in writing what the rules are. I'd be fine with a set of rules saying if a player is playing Thursday the trade will go through as long as it is made by this time the day before or if a trade is made by a certain time on Saturday that the trade will go through before the games on Sunday. Instead we have the last trade which was "close enough" to 24 hours prior to the game even though it was made a few minutes after. Now we have a trade that is made over 4 hours after the 24 hour period. I just want to know where the line is for being close enough.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

Part of my problem is that we've had this exact conversation I think 3 times now without any sort of resolution. Bones even said that he knew this would be my reaction. I said the other times that we should have in writing what the rules are. I'd be fine with a set of rules saying if a player is playing Thursday the trade will go through as long as it is made by this time the day before or if a trade is made by a certain time on Saturday that the trade will go through before the games on Sunday. Instead we have the last trade which was "close enough" to 24 hours prior to the game even though it was made a few minutes after. Now we have a trade that is made over 4 hours after the 24 hour period. I just want to know where the line is for being close enough.

I understand, and if I'm being honest mainly what I want is rules everyone's agreed too, and a process that's consistent, because we've had this similar conversation way too many times. I'm ok with 'skirting' the rules when it makes sense (which like @trailblazer18 ) makes me sound a little wishy washy, but I could definitely agree that maybe having someone who isn't playing be the one who gets to choose if it makes sense or not might make more sense. I know for some FF is serious, and I know there is money at stake (well for those who have a shot at winning lol), but it's still just a game to me, and I'm in it to have fun.

 

[hoopsjock]

Well I answered those questions, with the Stotts analogy. So yeah I get it. I also said I think going into next year we should pick rules and stick to them. I guess it's not too late to do that now, but at the same time it would be yet another change of rules mid-season, which is the problem isn't it?

I need to add this to the conversation because this is why I feel so strongly about sticking to the rules. I want to be absolutely clear that this is not an attack on Bones personally and is simply about why my opinion is that the rules should be upheld in a fantasy football league using this trade as an example.

The trade itself seems fair. However the only reason Cook is included is because Ertz is on bye this week. Cook unfortunately is playing in a Thursday game. The timing would be incredibly difficult to pull off the trade but it was still agreed upon knowing that it would have to be sped up in order for it to work properly (Maybe not during discussions but even Bones himself stated that he knew what my reaction would be so he knew at the time of the trade). The commish then tells us on here that this trade is going through ahead of schedule and that people need to voice their opinion if they have objections. First off, not everyone from the league is on here so why isn't that same message put on the league page where everyone can see it? Second of all, I don't think it's right to ask for people's opinions and then completely devalue them. Instead of saying if the trade had no objections by 5:00 it would be pushed through all of a sudden it needs 4 objections now for it not to go through?

The trade itself had no vetoes but gets vetoed anyway because one person out of 12 disagreed with the trade process being altered not the trade itself? Now instead of having everyone get a vote the commish wants to take away everyone's input and make his the lone determining factor. The facts are simple. All 3 trades that have brought up an unwritten rule have involved the person making up the unwritten rule. Instead of seeing how that could make the league look extremely sketch his solution is to give himself more power to do whatever he wants. What's next? If a player he really wants is dropped on a Saturday afternoon should he be able to have that player come off of waivers before the games start Sunday morning because he needs him to cover a bye or an injury? You can say that is an extreme example but it's no different than a trade period.

Blurry lines are being created where there shouldn't be. To make matters worse the person with the power is arguing with someone who is voicing their opinion, especially when I said that I had no problem with the matter if everyone else was fine with it. I haven't voted to veto a single trade in this league yet I'm the bad guy ruining the league? Since it was at 1:15 in the morning I'm sure none of you saw it but he actually deleted one of his posts about me that makes my reaction seem more over the top than it was intended to be. If we had set rules or an impartial trade judge none of this would ever even come up. Now that the trade has been canceled it seems shady as fuck. I know this is going to sound ridiculous to some but I now have an issue with the trade being changed simply because the voting period was trying to be shortened and when one person mentioned that it shouldn't be without even voting for the trade to be denied the trade goes away and gets amended? Once again, completely avoidable.

Instead of the reaction that was made, why not ask if anyone else feels that way? Like I mentioned before why not just ask if everyone could please vote ASAP because the trade has timing issues? I'd have no problem with that and would be fine with it going through, but no instead of a cordial response we get our voting privileges revoked. A trade that should've gone through gets taken away too. It's a slippery slope.

 

[hoopsjock]

For the record, I really like @BonesJones and my views about a fantasy football league have nothing to do with him personally nor would I think anything differently of him outside of this league based on something that happens in here. This has been a really fun league and the most active one I've ever been a part of, so thanks for setting it all up Bones. In the fantasy basketball league I don't really give a fuck what happens with the rules because there is nothing on the line. This league has actual money on the line and decisions like this one could influence the results which is why my vote is to always abide by the set rules and to take emotional decisions out of play.

 

[BoBoBREWSKI]

Wow. Some of you guys have too much free time.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

I need to add this to the conversation because this is why I feel so strongly about sticking to the rules. I want to be absolutely clear that this is not an attack on Bones personally and is simply about why my opinion is that the rules should be upheld in a fantasy football league using this trade as an example.

The trade itself seems fair. However the only reason Cook is included is because Ertz is on bye this week. Cook unfortunately is playing in a Thursday game. The timing would be incredibly difficult to pull off the trade but it was still agreed upon knowing that it would have to be sped up in order for it to work properly (Maybe not during discussions but even Bones himself stated that he knew what my reaction would be so he knew at the time of the trade). The commish then tells us on here that this trade is going through ahead of schedule and that people need to voice their opinion if they have objections. First off, not everyone from the league is on here so why isn't that same message put on the league page where everyone can see it? Second of all, I don't think it's right to ask for people's opinions and then completely devalue them. Instead of saying if the trade had no objections by 5:00 it would be pushed through all of a sudden it needs 4 objections now for it not to go through?

The trade itself had no vetoes but gets vetoed anyway because one person out of 12 disagreed with the trade process being altered not the trade itself? Now instead of having everyone get a vote the commish wants to take away everyone's input and make his the lone determining factor. The facts are simple. All 3 trades that have brought up an unwritten rule have involved the person making up the unwritten rule. Instead of seeing how that could make the league look extremely sketch his solution is to give himself more power to do whatever he wants. What's next? If a player he really wants is dropped on a Saturday afternoon should he be able to have that player come off of waivers before the games start Sunday morning because he needs him to cover a bye or an injury? You can say that is an extreme example but it's no different than a trade period.

Blurry lines are being created where there shouldn't be. To make matters worse the person with the power is arguing with someone who is voicing their opinion, especially when I said that I had no problem with the matter if everyone else was fine with it. I haven't voted to veto a single trade in this league yet I'm the bad guy ruining the league? Since it was at 1:15 in the morning I'm sure none of you saw it but he actually deleted one of his posts about me that makes my reaction seem more over the top than it was intended to be. If we had set rules or an impartial trade judge none of this would ever even come up. Now that the trade has been canceled it seems shady as fuck. I know this is going to sound ridiculous to some but I now have an issue with the trade being changed simply because the voting period was trying to be shortened and when one person mentioned that it shouldn't be without even voting for the trade to be denied the trade goes away and gets amended? Once again, completely avoidable.

Instead of the reaction that was made, why not ask if anyone else feels that way? Like I mentioned before why not just ask if everyone could please vote ASAP because the trade has timing issues? I'd have no problem with that and would be fine with it going through, but no instead of a cordial response we get our voting privileges revoked. A trade that should've gone through gets taken away too. It's a slippery slope.

I honestly didn't see all of your interactions throughout the middle of the night (though I've read all of them currently up), I understand what you're saying. When we made the trade I had completely forgotten that Cook was playing tonight, so until the post saying it was going to get pushed through early I hadn't even really thought about it.

I guess at this point, there really is not much really left to be said. I don't really feel like you're even 'frustrated' by what's happening with the rules, so much as you're frustrated by the response you believe you're getting when you question how the rules are applied.

 

[The Professional Fan]

FWIW, I don't have any problem amending the veto rule, case by case, if it's clear the intent was to start the acquired player on short notice (whatever the reason may be). The amendment would need to be applied to all owners in a similar situation at all times, however. I believe this - if I had made a trade on a Wednesday and asked Bones if I could shorten the veto window so I could play the dude on Thursday, he'd say ok. Or at least he'd ask the league if it was ok. He made his intentions clear with the Cook trade and it was pretty obvious to me why he was doing it.

I don't have a problem with it. This isn't high stakes poker. I seriously believe everyone is on the up and up and if they're not then they need to get a new life.

 

[BonesJones]

The speeding analogy is a bad one and you answered why. A judge wouldn't be allowed to preside over his own case. Besides the trade itself isn't against the rules.

How would you feel if Adam Silver allowed the Rockets to trade 1st round picks in multiple years for Jimmy Butler because he thought the trade was fair so he used it to justify the rules being circumvented? How about now that the trade deadline is passed if Roger Goodell still allowed a trade because he thought it wasn't collusion or because someone like Aaron Rodgers got hurt and they really needed a QB?

You don't have traffic court in Oregon...?

And did you seriously just use that analogy? This isn't the NBA bro. In the NBA, there is no veto p ower so if you really wanna go that route..

 

[BonesJones]

I need to add this to the conversation because this is why I feel so strongly about sticking to the rules. I want to be absolutely clear that this is not an attack on Bones personally and is simply about why my opinion is that the rules should be upheld in a fantasy football league using this trade as an example.

The trade itself seems fair. However the only reason Cook is included is because Ertz is on bye this week. Cook unfortunately is playing in a Thursday game. The timing would be incredibly difficult to pull off the trade but it was still agreed upon knowing that it would have to be sped up in order for it to work properly (Maybe not during discussions but even Bones himself stated that he knew what my reaction would be so he knew at the time of the trade). The commish then tells us on here that this trade is going through ahead of schedule and that people need to voice their opinion if they have objections. First off, not everyone from the league is on here so why isn't that same message put on the league page where everyone can see it? Second of all, I don't think it's right to ask for people's opinions and then completely devalue them. Instead of saying if the trade had no objections by 5:00 it would be pushed through all of a sudden it needs 4 objections now for it not to go through?

The trade itself had no vetoes but gets vetoed anyway because one person out of 12 disagreed with the trade process being altered not the trade itself? Now instead of having everyone get a vote the commish wants to take away everyone's input and make his the lone determining factor. The facts are simple. All 3 trades that have brought up an unwritten rule have involved the person making up the unwritten rule. Instead of seeing how that could make the league look extremely sketch his solution is to give himself more power to do whatever he wants. What's next? If a player he really wants is dropped on a Saturday afternoon should he be able to have that player come off of waivers before the games start Sunday morning because he needs him to cover a bye or an injury? You can say that is an extreme example but it's no different than a trade period.

Blurry lines are being created where there shouldn't be. To make matters worse the person with the power is arguing with someone who is voicing their opinion, especially when I said that I had no problem with the matter if everyone else was fine with it. I haven't voted to veto a single trade in this league yet I'm the bad guy ruining the league? Since it was at 1:15 in the morning I'm sure none of you saw it but he actually deleted one of his posts about me that makes my reaction seem more over the top than it was intended to be. If we had set rules or an impartial trade judge none of this would ever even come up. Now that the trade has been canceled it seems shady as fuck. I know this is going to sound ridiculous to some but I now have an issue with the trade being changed simply because the voting period was trying to be shortened and when one person mentioned that it shouldn't be without even voting for the trade to be denied the trade goes away and gets amended? Once again, completely avoidable.

Instead of the reaction that was made, why not ask if anyone else feels that way? Like I mentioned before why not just ask if everyone could please vote ASAP because the trade has timing issues? I'd have no problem with that and would be fine with it going through, but no instead of a cordial response we get our voting privileges revoked. A trade that should've gone through gets taken away too. It's a slippery slope.

So many words...

I also didn't delete a post about you at all bro. Quit making shit up! Do you see how that is annoying as hell? What did I say in this "post"?

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

You don't have traffic court in Oregon...?

And did you seriously just use that analogy? This isn't the NBA bro. In the NBA, there is no veto p ower so if you really wanna go that route..

Im on a lot of meds right now so bare that in mind.
Didnt Stern veto the CP3 trade. Though I guess he did that as the owner rep for the hornets and not as the Commish right?

 

[BonesJones]

@hoopsjock Are you talking about the post where I said "You're acting like a guy whos never sped before, your acting like a guy who always looks for a crosswalk"? I didn't delete that, a Mod must have. Get your stuff straight before trying to call me out for something I didn't do.

That's also not a personal attack, you misconstrued that as well. The fact that a Mod agreed is silly. I'm using a metaphor for your actions (posts). That's why I said "acting". FFS.

 

[BonesJones]

Im on a lot of meds right now so bare that in mind.
Didnt Stern veto the CP3 trade. Though I guess he did that as the owner rep for the hornets and not as the Commish right?

Yup.

 

[The Professional Fan]

Also, I think the Veto rule should stay in play but shortened to 24 hours.

 

[BonesJones]

Also, I think the Veto rule should stay in play but shortened to 24 hours.

Next year it's gone. If people could vote in a timely manner it'd be fine.

 

[hoopsjock]

@hoopsjock Are you talking about the post where I said "You're acting like a guy whos never sped before, your acting like a guy who always looks for a crosswalk"? I didn't delete that, a Mod must have. Get your stuff straight before trying to call me out for something I didn't do.

That's also not a personal attack, you misconstrued that as well. The fact that a Mod agreed is silly. I'm using a metaphor for your actions (posts). That's why I said "acting". FFS.

You've called me annoying, you've said I'm ruining the league, you've said my opinion doesn't mean anything because it's your league, and you've held my spot on the 3-on-3 team over my head like some punishment because I don't like a rule in a fantasy football league. I didn't report any of your posts and they were deleted before I said they were so obviously someone else felt they were worse than you think they were.

And look here you are still coming at me instead of the issue at hand. I've wasted enough time on this conversation and you today. If you can't see how you're being an absolute jerk to me just because I don't like the bending of a rule then just fucking drop it. I'm entitled to my opinion and fuck off for asking for objections and then chastising me for making one.

There has been a very civil conversation about whether or not there should be exceptions to set rules and how people feel about making exceptions today but it looks like you care more about making me look bad then to contribute to the conversation. You'd think since you don't like the rules of the basketball league that you'd at least consider other people's thoughts when enforcing the rules in your league but I guess not. Instead you are just going to abolish the rule altogether which I don't think anyone else wants to do.

 

[BonesJones]

You've called me annoying, you've said I'm ruining the league, you've said my opinion doesn't mean anything because it's your league, and you've held my spot on the 3-on-3 team over my head like some punishment because I don't like a rule in a fantasy football league. I didn't report any of your posts and they were deleted before I said they were so obviously someone else felt they were worse than you think they were.

And look here you are still coming at me instead of the issue at hand. I've wasted enough time on this conversation and you today. If you can't see how you're being an absolute jerk to me just because I don't like the bending of a rule then just fucking drop it. I'm entitled to my opinion and fuck off for asking for objections and then chastising me for making one.

There has been a very civil conversation about whether or not there should be exceptions to set rules and how people feel about making exceptions today but it looks like you care more about making me look bad then to contribute to the conversation. You'd think since you don't like the rules of the basketball league that you'd at least consider other people's thoughts when enforcing the rules in your league but I guess not. Instead you are just going to abolish the rule altogether which I don't think anyone else wants to do.

I love how you don't have a strong enough position right now so you have to resort to the past times you annoyed me..

I said you're ruining the league for me. Which is kinda true. Sorry if you don't wanna here it.

I used the 3-on-3 thing simply to try to get you to stop ranting because when you get going, you don't stop.

Did you see the word acting? Then it was an attack on character, it was an attack on your actions (posts). You know that wasn't a personal attack but you won't admit you're wrong. Oh well, I don't need you to.

Seems to me like the discussion is that my discretion is fine, because people know I wouldnt try to screw them over. I don't consider others thoughts? Claims like that is why you're being so goddamn annoying.. how have I ran this league for 3 years and not had an issue over trades then? You havent been here long enough to claim anything definitive about how I run this shit bro. Had more issues with you than with anything else in those 3 years. Somehow, you'll attribute that to me.

I asked for objections over the fairness of the trade, not for you to create an issue over this again after I've said all season I have discretion, and I wouldn't abuse it because I never have.

I don't care about making you look bad.. for anyone who can see through your crap, you do it to yourself.

 

[BonesJones]

You personally attacked me by saying I'm being annoying, so you're being a jerk!!

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

Ive never reported anyone on a website ever, and probably wont. I think the last 3-4 posts are way more “person” than “post”.

Why dont we just start with tagging the participators in the league about these rules and having a “poll” question of what they want the rules to be going forward. Going at each other wont make this situation better or make everyones enjoyment go up.

Heres a couple ideas to start with; see if @PtldPlatypus will arbitrate trades for us.
Make a firm 24 hour veto rule.
Just push all trades through no vetos.
Ultimately I understand that its not “my” league so I cant tell you guys what to do.
Just my thought at this point is to move on cause this isnt constructive and I doubt this is very fun either...

 

[BonesJones]

Ive never reported anyone on a website ever, and probably wont. I think the last 3-4 posts arent way more “person” than “post”.

Why dont we just start with tagging the participators in the league about these rules and having a “poll” question of what they want the rules to be going forward. Going at each other wont make this situation better or make everyones enjoyment go up.

Heres a couple ideas to start with; see if @PtldPlatypus will arbitrate trades for us.
Make a firm 24 hour veto rule.
Just push all trades through no vetos.
Ultimately I understand that its not “my” league so I cant tell you guys what to do.
Just my thought at this point is to move on cause this isnt constructive and I doubt this is very fun either...

I've done this a lot in the past, in a neat form that I messaged to people, but apparently I DON'T CARE WHAT OTHERS THINK....

 

[BonesJones]

I've done this a lot in the past, in a neat form that I messaged to people, but apparently I DON'T CARE WHAT OTHERS THINK....

... Someone would probably want the screenshots of all of them to make sure I wasnt altering vote counts to my own preferences. SMH.

 

[hoopsjock]

... Someone would probably want the acreenshots of all of them to make sure I wasnt altering vote counts to my own preferences. SMH.

Stay classy!

 

[BonesJones]

Stay classy!

Ironic.

 

[Hoopguru]

Zfender!

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

Zfender!

Lol I think you’re implying Zach will fix it!