Heh, there's no rules against discussing trades in this thread.bookworm wrote:Trade offers can be discussed via pm.
I'm really hoping to get my favorite fantasy player, Calvin Johnson, but JWS isn't responding to my trade offers.
Heh, there's no rules against discussing trades in this thread.bookworm wrote:Trade offers can be discussed via pm.
The funny thing is, I did. Megatron was #1 followed by Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees. I set my "Draft Strategy" to pick "Best Available" in the first round, though, so maybe it decided that Arian Foster was better than Megatron, even though I ranked it differently. Oh well. There's no use whining about what is done...Mike Lowery wrote:Haha I wanted Megatron as well. Shoulda put him at #1 if you really wanted him AE.
Did I say there was? Each participant can do it as they wish. I do it in pms.American Eagle wrote:Heh, there's no rules against discussing trades in this thread.
Did I ever say that you did?bookworm wrote:Did I say there was?American Eagle wrote:Heh, there's no rules against discussing trades in this thread.
When your statement comes after quoting me, yes that is the message it conveys.American Eagle wrote:Did I ever say that you did?
Only when others have a tendency to read implications into my posts.American Eagle wrote:bookworm, you seem to have a tenedancy to imply something and then vehemently deny it.
Yes, I did imply something, as did you. When you phrase things like, "trade offers can be discussed via pm," it sounds like you're making an official statement. Instead, you could've said, "Feel free to send me a trade offer via PM," or "I only like to discuss trades in private. PM me." Those sound less official and authoritative. However, I never accused you of any wrongdoing. Your statement sounded curious in my head and I wanted to clarify something. No big deal.bookworm wrote:When your statement comes after quoting me, yes that is the message it conveys.American Eagle wrote:Did I ever say that you did?
I must disagree. My statement was immediately after and directly responding to EK’s, it should not have appeared to be addressing anyone other than him. Had I said “Hey everyone, don’t discuss trades here” that would be another thing.American Eagle wrote:When you phrase things like, "trade offers can be discussed via pm," it sounds like you're making an official statement.
That is what I said, in the correct context. He wanted a response to his proposal, my response was ‘Let’s do this through pm.’American Eagle wrote:Instead, you could've said, "Feel free to send me a trade offer via PM,"
And I now understand that your post was meant to express a personal preference and not an league guideline. Moving on.bookworm wrote:But I get that your post was a clarification versus a retort. It was just not immediately recognizable as such, for reasons I already said.
You should of played last year so I could dump him on you because he stunk.Mike Lowery wrote:I also got DeSean Jackson who's a proven wide receiver and while he's on the enemy team (Eagles)