|
OAK-CHI
Sept 21, 2017 17:02:28 GMT -5
Post by Buffalo Bills (Salvatore) on Sept 21, 2017 17:02:28 GMT -5
Im a veto
|
|
|
OAK-CHI
Sept 21, 2017 18:25:52 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Cleveland Browns (Kevin) on Sept 21, 2017 18:25:52 GMT -5
Veto
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
OAK-CHI
Sept 21, 2017 18:31:50 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2017 18:31:50 GMT -5
Now that it has been accepted by the other party I will put my veto vote again.
|
|
|
OAK-CHI
Sept 21, 2017 23:03:13 GMT -5
Post by Cincinnati Bengals (Chris) on Sept 21, 2017 23:03:13 GMT -5
I'll approve as me, not as OAK obviously.
|
|
|
OAK-CHI
Sept 21, 2017 23:04:45 GMT -5
Post by Carolina Panthers (Justin) on Sept 21, 2017 23:04:45 GMT -5
Veto
|
|
|
OAK-CHI
Sept 22, 2017 11:32:40 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Philadelphia Eagles (Andrew) on Sept 22, 2017 11:32:40 GMT -5
I'll approve as me, not as OAK obviously. Not sure if this was just a joke but it's definitely not okay for you to vote on your own trades.
|
|
|
OAK-CHI
Sept 22, 2017 14:31:06 GMT -5
Post by Cincinnati Bengals (Chris) on Sept 22, 2017 14:31:06 GMT -5
Not a joke. This is not my trade. This is OAK's trade. I am a member of the TRC, so I'm supposed to vote on all trades that are not my (CIN) trades.
Edit: I consulted with MIN, and he told me that I am not supposed to vote on the trades for OAK if I am running them. I will adjust that moving forward. Sorry for any confusion. I still don't see how it was a joke though and why anyone would think that would be funny.
|
|
|
OAK-CHI
Sept 22, 2017 17:13:16 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Philadelphia Eagles (Andrew) on Sept 22, 2017 17:13:16 GMT -5
I was hoping it was a joke because it's such a gross abuse of power and conflict of interest
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
OAK-CHI
Sept 24, 2017 1:15:10 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2017 1:15:10 GMT -5
I would of approved. This is a boring trade. Neither has value, why veto?
|
|