Quote: Originally posted by smoelheim on 2/13/2010

Quote: Originally posted by nfet on 2/12/2010For example, most worlds would generally be against no unbalanced trades. If an owner in a world points out what he thinks to be an unbalanced trade to a commish .....what's his role then?
Does the commish make a point to ask everyone to consider the trade, take a second look...in case it was glossed over in the veto process? Or, is that considered campaigning against the trade?

Perhaps, if one owner has a problem with a particular trade, and NONE of the 31 other owners (or 29 other owners not involved in the trade) even casually mentions that trade in an otherwise very active league chat... maybe that one dissenting owner needs to come to grips with the fact that it was not as lopsided as he thought.

ok, so pretend last season's MVP is traded for a High A scrub. for some strange reason no one comments on or vetoes the deal. Should the commish do or say anything?

Unlikely example, but the point is when does the commish use his own judgement in taking any sort of action? In a "don't rock the boat" approach, probably not very often.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

Quote: Originally posted by nfet on 2/13/2010ok, so pretend last season's MVP is traded for a High A scrub. for some strange reason no one comments on or vetoes the deal. Should the commish do or say anything?

Absolutely. And the commish should also pursue collusion and/or potential aliases.

But if nobody questions the deal, one of two things needs to occur... (a) owners should understand why they are in a bad world, where undeniably lopsided trades are not even discussed... or (b) the owner who is questioning the trade should realize that maybe it wasn't as lopsided as he thought.

Quote: Originally Posted By nfet on 2/13/2010

Quote: Originally posted by smoelheim on 2/13/2010

Quote: Originally posted by nfet on 2/12/2010For example, most worlds would generally be against no unbalanced trades. If an owner in a world points out what he thinks to be an unbalanced trade to a commish .....what's his role then?
Does the commish make a point to ask everyone to consider the trade, take a second look...in case it was glossed over in the veto process? Or, is that considered campaigning against the trade?

Perhaps, if one owner has a problem with a particular trade, and NONE of the 31 other owners (or 29 other owners not involved in the trade) even casually mentions that trade in an otherwise very active league chat... maybe that one dissenting owner needs to come to grips with the fact that it was not as lopsided as he thought.

ok, so pretend last season's MVP is traded for a High A scrub. for some strange reason no one comments on or vetoes the deal. Should the commish do or say anything?

Unlikely example, but the point is when does the commish use his own judgement in taking any sort of action? In a "don't rock the boat" approach, probably not very often.

This would fall under the category of a "trade rape" (even if it were 2 veteran owners and possible collusion). Sandberg has addressed this by setting up a panel of 5 owners any of which can bring a completed "trade" to the panel. If 3 out 5 panelists view the trade as a "trade rape" like event the commish (one of the panel) will discuss the situation with the owners and make a decision about disposition. Hopefully this will never be necessary. Hopefully the trade would be vetoed and the panel never need to "sit". Just knowing there is the risk of review will keep owners from getting to flagrant in their trades. Sandberg does allow Newbies to join so some "rules" exist to prevent the abuses that could otherwise occur.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

It's called a "private" world for a reason.

And it's also why I've been "encouraging" you to do better in Coop.

Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 2/13/2010Yeah, if the commish requests it, they actually will. 

Who has ever been "removed" from a room for simply not following an arbitrary rule like I mentioned? I'm not saying it isn't true... I just haven't heard of it ever happening.

Following Season 7, I had a battle with support asking them to remove someone from Mordecai who was clearly tanking, not filling out minor league rosters, etc.. and they outright refused. I had to beg, plead, and insult the owner to get him to finally leave voluntarily.

Hence my surprise as WIS' willingness to remove someone who just didn't put their team in a city that the league wanted.

As for my performance in Coop... when I discover the code for the steroid cheat, my team will improve. I'm still looking for it.

Quote: Originally Posted By smoelheim on 2/13/2010Following Season 7, I had a battle with support asking them to remove someone from Mordecai who was clearly tanking, not filling out minor league rosters, etc.. and they outright refused. I had to beg, plead, and insult the owner to get him to finally leave voluntarily.

You should have started with the insults. They can be quite effective.

domisgod was removed without any reason at all. Other than his overall bad attitude. It's happened more than once.

Again, it's a "private" world and, presumably, the commish founded the world with an "idea" of how the world would work. If someone is allowed in, and they're not following the plan(and I assume the other 31 owners are), why would WifS **** off 31 owners for the sake of 1?

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

Sounds like a real jerk.

He was/probably still is.

It's weird how some people will join a world with full knowledge of what goes on and, for some reason, thinks they can change the way things are done. Just plain odd.

Just plain odd. Any MG openings?

Probably. I think I'm gonna drop MG and try to get into Double Mendoza. That seems like a nice, stable world.