|
|
Post by Phil - Blue Jackets on Apr 16, 2007 1:03:17 GMT -5
Keep in mind that this poll does not pertain to the existing rule of 8 votes required for veto. Any discussion that ensues should be on the merits of each choice ONLY. Related discussion can be found on the Board Discussion and the Trade Talk forums. I highly encourage the review of this material before voting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nos - Sharks on Apr 16, 2007 3:42:41 GMT -5
The rule should be read as "two thirds of the league not involved in the trade" so 7 would be my vote.
|
|
|
|
Post by Phil - Blue Jackets on Apr 17, 2007 0:51:49 GMT -5
The rule should be read as "two thirds of the league not involved in the trade" so 7 would be my vote. I said in my original post that the ensuing discussion should not include anything about the original rule, but rather include arguments concerning the merits of each option. |
|
|
|
Post by Nos - Sharks on Apr 17, 2007 3:21:38 GMT -5
My opinion is basically the same thing though. I'll rearrange the wording.
The rule should be 2/3 of the league not involved in the trade itself.
Is that more to your liking? I believe my reasons are well documented.
|
|
|
|
Post by Phil - Blue Jackets on Apr 17, 2007 5:46:02 GMT -5
My opinion is basically the same thing though. I'll rearrange the wording. The rule should be 2/3 of the league not involved in the trade itself. Is that more to your liking? I believe my reasons are well documented. Yes, i like that better. I actually should have worded the choices in a similar manner. For future voting purposes, 7 votes means 2/3of the league not involved in the trade and 8 votes means 2/3 of the entire league. Think of the choices like that. Thanks for ammending that for me. P.S. Your wording sounds better because the current rule cannot be interpreted the way you are advocating it be interpereted. It is one of the rules that is very clear and unambiguous. |
|
So exciting.
You better make that pick or trade it! I'm excited to see if we can use up all the draft picks this year.