I think there should be a Commissioner's Forum and that would be a fine place for them - without that they should all be moved to the AC forum
AGREED!FBG needs a Commissioner's Corner Forum. There is plenty of discussion that could happen in there.
I also think there are some shortcomings on the veto advice given here. 95% of the posters say No Collusion = No Veto. I believe there is a special circumstance that is occuring more frequently every year as fantasy football grows in popularity. I will use my main money league as the perfect example.
I started the league started in 2006 with 8 managers who had never played FF before and 2 managers who had played for a year or two. We were all friends and were excited to see what this game was all about. I printed out my ESPN rankings on the day of my draft and made sure to reach on Tampa's Defense so I could cheer them on as I rooted for my favorite team.
None of us really knew what we were doing, but we all were quickly becoming addicted to the game. Trades were happening left and right, but none of us were really savvy enough to know when a major fleece had taken place.
That all changed in the 2nd year. By this time everyone in the league thought they were an expert and knew exactly how valuable every player was. Guys were starting to get emotional over this stuff. We had one manager in the league who was clearly weaker than the rest and he made three trades over the first 5 weeks with a single other manager. No collusion was occuring, we just had one manager who focused on fleecing our weak manager. Over the course of the three trades, he was able to acquire the weak manager's 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 6th, and 8th round picks. Any of the trades alone would have gotten a whole page of DO NOT VETO if I had posted them on the FBG forum, but they combined for a championship roster to the preying manager.
The third year of our league began and another trade went through between these two managers before week 1 even started. I didn't think it was a bad trade, but the league was up in arms. People were threatening to quit and demanding that the trade be vetoed through our 3 man trade review committee. The stronger manager in the trade threatened to quit if the trade was vetoed, citing my rules that only collusion should be vetoed.
I went to the league message board and established a new, simple rule: Anyone who quits for ANY reason will not be refunded their money and will never be invited back to the league. Then the review committee allowed the trade to go through.
Since that time we have added two new members and everyone has moved up the learning curve enough that fleece trades don't really ever happen anymore. There are a lot fewer trades in general as everone is so afraid of getting ripped off.
My point here is that leagues go through an evolution, especially when you are dealing with new players. Fleece trades are bad for the league and it's not as simple as No Collusion = No Veto. If you are in a league with friends, family, or co-workers, the relationships are more important than the league. I don't think you set up a very fun environment if the goal of your league is to rip off the weaker manager as quickly as possible before someone else does. I don't like the idea of veto's in general, but I think they can serve a purpose to keep guppy leagues fun for everyone until new managers catch up to speed.
I have an idea that most here will hate, but I think would have worked well in the early years of my league: No one can trade their 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 4th round picks. This doesn't really hamper anyone as you can still make trades, but it's harder for one manager to build a super team through the weakness of another.
There's a lot of crap in here. I've never clicked on it, but who cares "what's the worst dynasty trade you've been offered?" I see threads like that pop up all the time and they actually get a lot of replies. Means there must be an interest, but it just doesn't belong in the shark pool.
