here's a broad:

and another thing.... plague does a great job with his world career leaders page.

perhaps he should seperate the leaders, those who come from leagues with scruples and those that come from leagues that are scrupleless.

Gentlemen, some people have no shame!

Quote: Originally posted by coldfeet on 11/07/2009and another thing.... plague does a great job with his world career leaders page.perhaps he should seperate the leaders, those who come from leagues with scruples and those that come from leagues that are scrupleless. 

I will take the suggestion under advisement :) Along with the suggestion that I got of separating tard worlds from good worlds. Now if we can just get someone to suggest separating players from favorable ballparks with players from unfavorable ballparks we can eventually have 100 variations of the career leader board.

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

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

So, essentially, you're saying that the practice of n00braping doesn't create a situation that would make a world "bad". That's fair. Stupid but fair.

You can label it whatever you desire, that is your choice, just don't put your words in my mouth.

Quote: Originally Posted By plague on 11/06/2009

Quote: Originally posted by tecwrg on 11/06/2009
Why do you keep saying the other 31 owners get a free pass?

Why do you keep refusing to admit that YOu are part of the problem?

Because we differ on it being a problem. You think its a problem, I don't think its a problem but a reflection of the quality of the world. The system will work if the coaches use the system and good worlds will use the system. When you can't get 10 of 30 coaches to veto obviously lopsided trades then you have to accept the world for what it is, and it's a world that does not plan on vetoing trades.

What is "the system"? Is it vetoing obviously one-sided trades? You're saying that "good worlds will use the system". Which implies that bad worlds won't, i.e. bad worlds won't veto lopsided trades.

So by your own words, worlds that let your n00b-rape trades go through are not good worlds.

Don't put his words in his mouth.

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

I will make it simple and you can twist it how you desire.

1 coach offers a trade because he thinks the trade is in his favor.

1 other coach receives the trade and decides if he likes the trade, if he chooses to accept the trade then he has made the decision the trade is favorable for him. Ignorance is no excuse for hitting the accept button.

30 other coaches now have the option to decide as a group if the trade is considered reasonable. If 10 of the 30 coaches hit the veto button then the trade is not considered acceptable, if less than 10 hit the veto button then the trade is considered acceptable.

If a trade goes through then no one should be complaining. If you are a coach that vetoed but 10 did not veto, then you have to decide if your veto is justified or if this is the type of world you should be participating.

My stance is no one 1 person is too blame by any other person who considers a lopsided trade that went through the system, everyone had the chance to participate and they considered the trade acceptable. You guys can whine, cry,complain or whatever you want to label it, negatively label the trade or the person involved all you want, but the trade was considered acceptable by the world. No reason to complain after a coach wins 130 games when the world was given the chance to stop the trade.

translation of plagues speech

1) I believe it is statutory trade rape only if convicted

2) I play in leagues that won't convict a statutory trade rapist

3) Send more Virgins

plague makes a very valid point.

If you are in a world that allows stupid trades to go through repeatedly with the same owner, the world as a whole is guilty for allowing such behavior to go on. If this was a legitimate league he would have been stopped after the first stupid trade.

It's just like letting a dog eat off the dinner table every day. It's not the dogs fault if you leave food on the table and he jumps up and eats it. Learned behavior is learned with repetition.

Step one in solving that problem is to not leave food on the table until he is taught better. You can't say "Damn that dog. I could put the food away but, most likely, someone else would leave food out and he'd just eat that. No real point in being responsible."