Buds Board Keepers League

Lee wroteCOLONWe've always had a separate set of rules for Mik ,why stop now?

you mean like the 'rules' that make this trade of mine rejected while same or worse deals have been allowed for others?

No, the rules where it said that if a trade isnt posted and confirmed before the deadline, then it's invalid.

It's not rocket surgery. It was confirmed at 6:03. It's invalid.

It has nothing to do with the fairness of the deal.

kyuss wroteCOLONmight be because this is the first trade posted before the deadline to be rejected?

Yes, we've not had to enforce this rule until now. Sorry you had to have a trade overturned because of it but this is the spirit of the rule.

You even thanked Dave and said good job when he posted the announcement...the reminder of this year's deadline.

Lee wroteCOLONNo, the rules where it said that if a trade isnt posted and confirmed before the deadline, then it's invalid.

It's not rocket surgery. It was confirmed at 6:03. It's invalid.

we always had a deadline assuming that, yet it didn't prevent later deals to go through, so how about rocket surgery.

This is the first time a deal posted before the deadline is not allowed, which is fine, but how ironic you bring up the 'different set of rules for me'

you also probably didn't take the time to read what the CC position (though not Dave position I guess) has been on this matter

Matthew even bumped and reminded everyone with 17 mins to go had to be posted AND confirmed

I took this as the standard being set for deadlines for here on out

Thanks for the free entertainment in this thread.

Shoalzie wroteCOLON You even thanked Dave and said good job when he posted the announcement...the reminder of this year's deadline.

you're probably referring to this:

kyuss wroteCOLON

dave1959 wroteCOLONI fixed the date in Announcement Thread and posted the correction in the Announcement discussion thread.

well done Dave, thx

which clearly referred to the fact he changed the originally wrong date and pointed it out.

Of course I had the chance to notice the announcement suggested a different (harder) application of the deadline than the one we discussed inside the CC and I didn't.. I mean, it's not like it is wrong that way, it's just different from what we apparently wanted. I see now you have changed your mind.

lightupdadarkness wroteCOLONMatthew even bumped and reminded everyone with 17 mins to go had to be posted AND confirmed

I took this is this was the standard being set for deadlines for here on out

It certainly appears to be the standard set for future deadlines after this precedent
(unless there is a clear, new change of rules before next year's deadline).

Btw I think what the CC suggested in its last discussion on the matter would help making the deadline more fun and entertaining, but whatever.

Is it really a trade deadline if we can't trade anyways because the season is over and we don't allow playoff trading unlike the NHL?

(Yes, it's that time of year for that argument again)

Mik, I didn't change my mind...I had no problem with the new rule. That was not a hill to die on.

I had a trade with Nick that was posted late years ago when the message board crashed when it was being posted. We got leniency because of that circumstance. We also didn't establish the earlier deadline as a safe guard against late trades.

It's not like the NHL where we have to send in a trade call to the league office. There were NHL trades announced after 3 but the calls were in before 3 to be processed and allowed. Our trades are official when both parties post verbal confirmation in a trade thread.

Lee wroteCOLONIs it really a trade deadline if we can't trade anyways because the season is over and we don't allow playoff trading unlike the NHL?

(Yes, it's that time of year for that argument again)

You can talk trades...just can't post until after our playoffs are over.

Shoalzie wroteCOLONMik, I didn't change my mind...I had no problem with the new rule. That was not a hill to die on.

I had a trade with Nick that was posted late years ago when the message board crashed when it was being posted. We got leniency because of that circumstance. We also didn't establish the earlier deadline as a safe guard against late trades.

It's not like the NHL where we have to send in a trade call to the league office. There were NHL trades announced after 3 but the calls were in before 3 to be processed and allowed. Our trades are official when both parties post verbal confirmation in a trade thread.

Just to show you we had late trades going through without message boards crashes..
this was 2015 trade deadline announcement:
http://bbkl.ca/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=1206 ... 80#p207249

and here are some late trades no one bothered to deny despite getting posted after the deadline:
http://bbkl.ca/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=12118
http://bbkl.ca/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=12116
http://bbkl.ca/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=12117

don't get me wrong, it's good we don't allow deals posted after the deadline to go through anymore

kyuss wroteCOLON

Shoalzie wroteCOLONMik, I didn't change my mind...I had no problem with the new rule. That was not a hill to die on.

I had a trade with Nick that was posted late years ago when the message board crashed when it was being posted. We got leniency because of that circumstance. We also didn't establish the earlier deadline as a safe guard against late trades.

It's not like the NHL where we have to send in a trade call to the league office. There were NHL trades announced after 3 but the calls were in before 3 to be processed and allowed. Our trades are official when both parties post verbal confirmation in a trade thread.

Just to show you we had late trades going through without message boards crashes..
this was 2015 trade deadline announcement:
http://bbkl.ca/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=1206 ... 80#p207249

and here are some late trades no one bothered to deny despite getting posted after the deadline:
http://bbkl.ca/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=12118
http://bbkl.ca/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=12116
http://bbkl.ca/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=12117

don't get me wrong, it's good we don't allow deals posted after the deadline to go through anymore

So why are you fighting so hard then?

kyuss wroteCOLON

Shoalzie wroteCOLONMik, I didn't change my mind...I had no problem with the new rule. That was not a hill to die on.

I had a trade with Nick that was posted late years ago when the message board crashed when it was being posted. We got leniency because of that circumstance. We also didn't establish the earlier deadline as a safe guard against late trades.

It's not like the NHL where we have to send in a trade call to the league office. There were NHL trades announced after 3 but the calls were in before 3 to be processed and allowed. Our trades are official when both parties post verbal confirmation in a trade thread.

Just to show you we had late trades going through without message boards crashes..
this was 2015 trade deadline announcement:
http://bbkl.ca/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=1206 ... 80#p207249

and here are some late trades no one bothered to deny despite getting posted after the deadline:
http://bbkl.ca/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=12118
http://bbkl.ca/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=12116
http://bbkl.ca/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=12117

don't get me wrong, it's good we don't allow deals posted after the deadline to go through anymore

One was payment of a bet and the other was.. also involving you. A member of the CC. And look, there is me. Complaining that it was posted after the deadline.

I guess there is some consistency in the league after all.

and they are all OLD TRADES...

nothing from 2017 or 2018 (other than yours) that didn't break the 6pm rule.

CasperX22 wroteCOLON So why are you fighting so hard then?

there have been assholes laughing at the simple idea the deal being good or not could have been debatable, despite what people said and did in the past.

And in case you didn't notice the difference, unlike those others this deal was posted (and agreed) before the deadline.

Lee wroteCOLON One was payment of a bet and the other was.. also involving you.

there are three there, not two

I guess there is some consistency in the league after all.

there were no complaints actually (when you are really complaining you make it abundantly clear), which if anything shows no consistency in how the league reacted. It's like that time it was fine cause they were all happy I overpaid for Ribeiro, whereas in this case they clearly didn't like me getting Drouin for T.Johnson.
(the only guy saying I was overpaying for Drouin did it privately, didn't complain in the thread)

kyuss wroteCOLON

Lee wroteCOLON One was payment of a bet and the other was.. also involving you.

there are three there, not two

Ah yes, the Dana Tyrell sweepstakes of '15. Regardless, player details should be irrelevant, as is my statement, apparently. It was posted and confirmed at 6:01. If only you had fought so fervently to reverse that trade as you are to allow this one...

I guess there is some consistency in the league after all.

there were no complaints actually (when you are really complaining you make it abundantly clear), which if anything shows no consistency in how the league reacted. It's like that time it was fine cause they were all happy I overpaid for Ribeiro, whereas in this case they clearly didn't like me getting Drouin for T.Johnson.
(the only guy saying I was overpaying for Drouin did it privately, didn't complain in the thread)

Apathy is a hell of a drug.
As is the absolute joy I get out of watching you try to spin this to get the deal pushed through, despite clearly violating the deadlines stated well before the actual deadline.

I would complain about this deal going through no matter who it was or what was paid. Im sure you noticed in our trade talks i can be a stickler for the rules.

We should just have the cc vote and end this. We all know how it will end.