Originally posted by catspaw27
Originally posted by Notor
Originally posted by Ballbright
To most of Oceania for being an ass lately. Several owners and players I unnecessarily jumped on, and it was wrong of me. I apologize.
I am going to drop the "collusion" argument, and leave it be. From where I sit atop a mountain of physical evidence Billyvassi is a liar and at best Catspaw27 is an idiot (at worst a cheater). However, I should not have allowed my opinions and extrapolations of the facts to carry on for as long as they have, and in the manner they have.
To Oceania: (with the obvious exclusions of Billy and Cats) I am sorry.
-Ben
Well you don't need to apologize for bringing the issue up in the first place, because there was certainly reason to believe something fishy was going on there and collusion is something that needs to be brought to the leagues attention or nothing gets done about it. Trading a long inactive, worthless lvl 12 for an active lvl 12 is not a fair trade by any stretch of the imagination, and there was a conflict of interest between the two parties involved as well, so there's good reason to think that there was collusion going on and to bring that to everyone's attention.
I am amazed when people comment about things they have zero knowledge about.
That level 12 HB is active again (happens all the time) and may come back to the Bandits next season. Your idea of "fair" is limited by the range of your information.
Did you have knowledge that he would ever return when you dealt him? How long was he inactive before you did? Just because he ended up coming back doesn't mean it was a fair trade at the time, and deals between two teams connected by one player are of course going to face extra scrutiny. It still seems pretty sketchy to me that you would make that deal at all, no even semi-competent owner takes an inactive player for an active player of the same level, and to do it at a time when you're effectively gutting that other team....it's suspicious at best. I don't really care, but your explanation doesn't satisfy what you're being accused of unless you want to plead complete ignorance to what a fair trade is as an owner.
Originally posted by Notor
Originally posted by Ballbright
To most of Oceania for being an ass lately. Several owners and players I unnecessarily jumped on, and it was wrong of me. I apologize.
I am going to drop the "collusion" argument, and leave it be. From where I sit atop a mountain of physical evidence Billyvassi is a liar and at best Catspaw27 is an idiot (at worst a cheater). However, I should not have allowed my opinions and extrapolations of the facts to carry on for as long as they have, and in the manner they have.
To Oceania: (with the obvious exclusions of Billy and Cats) I am sorry.
-Ben
Well you don't need to apologize for bringing the issue up in the first place, because there was certainly reason to believe something fishy was going on there and collusion is something that needs to be brought to the leagues attention or nothing gets done about it. Trading a long inactive, worthless lvl 12 for an active lvl 12 is not a fair trade by any stretch of the imagination, and there was a conflict of interest between the two parties involved as well, so there's good reason to think that there was collusion going on and to bring that to everyone's attention.
I am amazed when people comment about things they have zero knowledge about.
That level 12 HB is active again (happens all the time) and may come back to the Bandits next season. Your idea of "fair" is limited by the range of your information.
Did you have knowledge that he would ever return when you dealt him? How long was he inactive before you did? Just because he ended up coming back doesn't mean it was a fair trade at the time, and deals between two teams connected by one player are of course going to face extra scrutiny. It still seems pretty sketchy to me that you would make that deal at all, no even semi-competent owner takes an inactive player for an active player of the same level, and to do it at a time when you're effectively gutting that other team....it's suspicious at best. I don't really care, but your explanation doesn't satisfy what you're being accused of unless you want to plead complete ignorance to what a fair trade is as an owner.
Last edited May 30, 2008 12:35:10
