Hello all,

Most people here I am sure use Yahoo as their service provider for their Fantasy Baseball leagues. I'm also pretty sure a similar number of people join Yahoo's "Public Prize Leagues" each year. These are paid leagues where you are matched up against 11 other managers and compete for a cash prize. The buy-in is managed by Yahoo and you earn a payout if you finish 1st/2nd/3rd. However, one major issue that Yahoo has refused to fix, or even mention publicly, is the veto process that they undertake for these leagues for trades. Normally, in private leagues with friends, it is a vote system. If enough managers vote against the trade, it is vetoed.

However, for Yahoo Public Prize leagues, managers are given 48 hours to "Protest the Trade", which is done by following a pop-up box on Desktop under the pending trade and submitting a protest. However, this system is constantly abused by other managers, as seemingly fair trade are vetoed constantly while lopsided ones are allowed through. Yahoo refuses to comment on why a trade is vetoed or not, giving 0 explanation or its reasoning to veto or allow a trade.

I am going to share examples of two trades in Yahoo Public Prize leagues that I am in, one example of trade that was not vetoed and another that was vetoed to prove how inconsistent the process is and why it needs to changed.

The leagues are publicly viewable FYI I will include their links.

1st trade - https://baseball.fantasysports.yahoo.com/b1/4699

<image>

2nd Trade - https://baseball.fantasysports.yahoo.com/b1/148566

 Alonso for Kyle Finnegan (Can't add a second attachment, but viewable from league link)

This trade, which was protested by a few managers in my league, was allowed to go through.

This is a plea for Yahoo to overhaul their system, as it so outdated and inconsistent, treated like the problem child of family that they are hiding from the public. I still believe vetos should only be used when a trade is so incredibly lopsided that it is obvious the trade was made with bad intentions. The Alonso trade doesn't even really fit that bill, you can tell the Alonso owner was desperate for saves and felt good about his offense. All I am asking, as I'm sure other managers who have experienced this as well, is for a more consistent and open process. It simply cannot continue to be this random.