Veto Topic

taz21
Posts: 470 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 93
Prospect
But we get to change our minds on MVP, ROY & Cy Young voting, We get to change our mind on hall of fame voting.  We get months, if not years in real life to decide who or what we want to vote for/against.  We get 24-27 hours in HBD.

I'm not too proud to admit that my mind has been changed, both ways on a trade when brought up in the coaches corner.  I'm not going to dive deep into every deal, especially early in the season when there might be 6+ accepted deals out there at one time.  A deal that passes mustard at first glance and you approve to clear it off your already cluttered screen might be worthy of a second glance after somebody points out something in the coaches corner.  Doesn't mean I'm going to change my mind, but I'd like to reserve the right to.

11/29/2011 12:08 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
What you do for awards has no effect on gameplay.   Approving or vetoing a deal does. 

If there are 6+ deals out there, wait until you have time to examine them.    If you don't have time over the next 24-27 hours, maybe you shouldn't be vetoing deals.
11/29/2011 1:27 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 166 32 129
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/29/2011 1:27:00 PM (view original):
What you do for awards has no effect on gameplay.   Approving or vetoing a deal does. 

If there are 6+ deals out there, wait until you have time to examine them.    If you don't have time over the next 24-27 hours, maybe you shouldn't be vetoing deals.
So if approving or vetoing a deal is more important than awards, shouldn't owners be afforded more than a "you'd better get it right the first time" one-and-done opportunity during the 24+ hour period?
11/29/2011 1:31 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
No.  Be decisive.  If you can't make a decision, wait until you can.   As I said a dozen posts ago, owners are always complaining that debating, one way or the other, on a trade affects how people vote. 

You and I both know I'm rather vocal about bad trades.   Almost every time I speak out against one, I get a TC saying "You're hurting my ability to rebuild my team.  Like it or not, people listen to your opinion.  Please let me trade."    I don't want people to listen to my opinion on a trade.  I want them to look at it and make up their own mind.  If you already made up your mind, I don't want my opinion changing it.
11/29/2011 1:36 PM
taz21
Posts: 470 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 93
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/29/2011 1:27:00 PM (view original):
What you do for awards has no effect on gameplay.   Approving or vetoing a deal does. 

If there are 6+ deals out there, wait until you have time to examine them.    If you don't have time over the next 24-27 hours, maybe you shouldn't be vetoing deals.
OK, if the trade is more important than postseason or hall of fame honors, then give me more time to form a solid opinion.

So far, the only reason you seem capable of arguing against is that once we cast our vote for mayor, we don't get to go back into the polls and change that vote.  Doesn't hold water; apples to oranges.

If it doesn't require a ton of programming, or tie up a bunch of server space, I don't see any drawbacks to allowing us the opportunity to change our vote for or against a trade at any point in that 24-27 hour window.
11/29/2011 1:42 PM
taz21
Posts: 470 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 93
Prospect
Mike,

People should listen to your opinion on a trade.  You've shown that your a good commish, you've shown that your dedicated to a solid world/team, you've shown that your willing to be vocal about your thoughts.  If you think a trade should be vetoed, I'll assume it deserves a closer look than perhaps I gave it the first time around.  It doesn't mean I'll change my vote, it just means I'll look at it closer, perhaps form a more informed decision based upon what others are saying.  When I see a trade come thru, I know I won't always get a chance to cast my vote one way or the other by the time the day is thru, I see no harm in allowing me to change my vote, if upon reflection I think it needs to be changed.  I can do so, and have done so with my end of the year awards, if a Trade is so much more important (and I agree that it is) then I'd like to have the same ability.  In however many seasons that I've played, I've only had 2 or 3 instances where upon further reflection I wish I could have changed my vote.  Once from a no to a yes, and another 1 or 2 from a yes to a no.  Giving me the option, gives me and everyone else more power.  Perhaps a noob that doesn't quite understand the game votes yes off the bat, then when its raised in the coaches corner, he now sees why he should have voted no.  I don't see a drawback to it, other than perhaps server space and programming time, which may or may not be a big deal.
11/29/2011 1:48 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect

Again, if you're not sure, don't vote.  I don't know about your worlds but there are very few "veto-worthy" trades in any of my worlds.   Nonetheless, there is a some validity to "loud".    Maybe those who haven't cast their votes think "Damn, if those two owners are so certain it's horrible, it must be.   I don't have time to research it so I'll just veto."   The time you spend reading the opinions of the loud after you've voted, could have been spent making a decision on your own. 

Giving those willing to argue, and I'm one of them, more "power" isn't a solution.   It's just the creation of another problem.  

11/29/2011 2:22 PM
taz21
Posts: 470 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 93
Prospect

I've seen very few veto worthy trades in any of my worlds, I don't think this would honestly affect them much in any of my worlds.  however, the rare times that a trade is called into question on the coaches corner, its usually not just 1 or 2 voices speaking for or against it, but a handful of 6+ coaches weighing in.  If an owner will simply vote yes or no, because you voted yes or no, then my guess is that's an owner you don't want in your world, and an owner who is more likely let any trade pass on thru w/o a glance.  I don't think it gives you or anyone any more power than you'd currently have w/ that owner.  Again, I don't see the downside.

11/29/2011 3:24 PM
shobob
Posts: 3404 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 370
Prospect
I'd like to chip in here, and I think I've said it before, that I would like to see the trade still after I've voted.  I think that it would be a good thing to be able to change my vote too.
11/29/2011 4:17 PM
gjello10
Posts: 164 (0)
All Star
6 26
Prospect
I'm surprised this simple suggestion caused such a furor. 

I don't like overly loud pushes for veto.  And I do feel that people should look at the facts for themselves and form their own opinions.  But simply bringing a trade to everyone's attention can be a good thing.  And I do feel that sometimes a brief discussion in World Chat can illuminate the facts about a trade in a way that helps people form their own opinions in a more informed manner.  We're all only human, we have lives, sometimes there's an option or other fact about a player involved in a deal that you missed, and World Chat can be a good place to quickly have someone else bring it to your attention.

I have no particular opinion on changing your vote- I typically form an initial opinion, then let any debate unfold, before voting towards the end of the period anyway, so it wouldn't really change anything for me.  But I would definately like to be able to refer back to the trade once I've hit the veto button in case someone else asks for my reasoning or whatnot, and so I think there is no reason for it to be removed from the trade list.

Also, I see no reason for there to be an "approve" button at all.  Just drop it.  If you don't veto, then you approve. 
11/29/2011 5:22 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
I have no objection to allowing us to view it after we've voted.   But I don't beleive the same person who approved it because there were 6+ pending and he didn't have time to look at them couldn't be affected the other way because of several pages of debate.   Maybe he still doesn't have time to research them.

As I said, maybe that person shouldn't vote.   Neither of them(the guy who approves because he doesn't have time to look or the guy who'd veto because a handful of owners railed against the deal), in my opinion, should be voting on deals.   And neither of them is more desirable than the other.
11/29/2011 6:08 PM
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
Show
shazamoos
Posts: 27 (0)
Hall of Famer
20 2 34
Prospect
There are several discussions ongoing on how to make the leagues more fair and prevent leagues from losing too many owners from season to season.  As a "Noob", I think it is essential to prevent us from being taken advantage of to have the guys listed with the HF next to their names to speak up in the coaches corner when they see a bad trade.  I've only played a few seasons but I can definitely see how quickly the competitive balance can swing with a questionable trade from for a superstar pitcher or dynamite position player.  If you look at a trade with your experience and see the person giving up the all star isn't getting any benefit other than lifetime minor leaguers, us "Noobs" need you to watch out for us.  Bad trades make for dominant teams and high turnover.  I don't think it is being "loud", I think it is keeping a league competitive for future seasons.
11/30/2011 8:04 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Well, the first thing I tell n00bs is "If you're not sure, don't do it."   The first thing I tell lesser owners is "You're not winning a trade with a successful owner." 

If everyone would heed those two comments, the only "bad" deals you'd see would be collusive ones.
12/1/2011 4:13 PM
◂ Prev 12
Veto Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.