Is Collusion Ok?

As everyone knows, these are the Fair Play rules on collusion (boldface mine):

"Collusion. You may not conspire with another manager, by making trades or by changing your team settings when playing against that team, to achieve any sort of anti-competitive goal, e.g. to help a team win, or to gang up on another team."

Well, a veteran player (LMBombers) in my Mystery League keeper league, who was upset about my keeper strategy and my leaving the league, actually posted this on our league boards:

"Strether is in first place with the worst run differential in the league. Lets dethrone him from making the playoffs. Come on eastern teams. He has an advantage in that he doesn't have to consider keeping under performing players that he wants to keep for the 70s like the rest of us have to consider.

When I mentioned this to him he said that he had Burgmeier and Maxvill that anyone would want to keep. How crazy is that? Oh well, lets just work on keeping him out of the playoffs in the 60s and just move on with the league." (boldface mine)

So, twice, he broke the rules of collusion here by encouraging other managers to gang up on my team. In the second paragraph, he actually asks others to conspire with him to gang up on my team and "keep (me) out of the playoffs." This is very disappointing. If veteran players are actually ok with such collusive posts, the rules of fair play are worthless.


http://onlinegames.strat-o-matic.com/te ... nt/2599046 (Here's the actual post)

As everyone knows, these are the Fair Play rules on collusion (boldface mine):

"Collusion. You may not conspire with another manager, by making trades or by changing your team settings when playing against that team, to achieve any sort of anti-competitive goal, e.g. to help a team win, or to gang up on another team."

Well, a veteran player (LMBombers) in my Mystery League keeper league, who was upset about my keeper strategy and my leaving the league, actually posted this on our league boards:

"Strether is in first place with the worst run differential in the league. Lets dethrone him from making the playoffs. Come on eastern teams. He has an advantage in that he doesn't have to consider keeping under performing players that he wants to keep for the 70s like the rest of us have to consider.

When I mentioned this to him he said that he had Burgmeier and Maxvill that anyone would want to keep. How crazy is that? Oh well, lets just work on keeping him out of the playoffs in the 60s and just move on with the league." (boldface mine)

So, twice, he broke the rules of collusion here by encouraging other managers to gang up on my team. In the second paragraph, he actually asks others to conspire with him to gang up on my team and "keep (me) out of the playoffs." This is very disappointing. If veteran players are actually ok with such collusive posts, the rules of fair play are worthless.


http://onlinegames.strat-o-matic.com/te ... nt/2599046 (Here's the actual post)

I don't know the details, but all I see is a guy urging on his fellow division mates to beat another player, unless there were tradee involved to stack the deck against you, that's a pretty big leap to say it's collusion.

Firstly, Niners, they weren't his division mates. Also, he's not "just urging my division mates to beat me (which is bad enough)". He is literally inviting teams to join him in ganging up on my team. That is--according to the rules--collusion. My correctly saying it is collusion is no leap at all. The rules explicity say that "you may not conspire with other another manager to gang up on another team," and that doing so is collusion.

LMBombers encouraged teams to do this twice. He did so first when he said: "Strether is in first place with the worst run differential in the league. Lets dethrone him from making the playoffs." This is a clear invitation to join him in ganging up on my team. That is collusion.

HIs next statement was even more blatant: "Oh well, lets just work on keeping him out of the playoffs in the 60s and just move on with the league." This is an even more explicit call for teams to join him in ganging up on my team, which is colluding.

If you are ok with this collusion, then you have to be ok with players contacting other players (by PM or public board) and working with them to gang up on other player, collude, and cheat. Considering you, too, are a veteran player, the rules of fair play are looking even more valueless.

Look, as I said I don't have the details, so I don't know the context, but this looks like good natured friendly banter/smack talk to me. You ever played in one of Jeep's theme leagues ? That's pretty mild compared to some of the stuff said back and forth there.


As far a "ganging up on you" how exactly is he accomplishing that? Granted, he's encouraging other teams to play their best against you, sure. And if I was in the division behind you I'd want/hope for the same thing, but what has he actively done to change results?

I mean, isn't the object of the game to try and win as much as possible? Isn't that all he's asking guys to do? How has he directly affected (or effected, always get em mixed up) any results??

Aren't the other teams supposed to work to keep their competition out of the playoffs? isn't that the whole point?

As I said, with out knowing the history and unless there's been trades made or denied, lineup changes made, or some other hankey pankey, that directly influenced outcomes, I do not see collusion, just good old fashioned smack talk and someone that might be to sensitive.

Niners, if I'm wrong and (as you say) too "sensitive", then point to the rules and show me like a grown-up how I'm wrong. I have seen you do that before. These are the SOM rules on collusion, and they are clear:

"Collusion. You may not conspire with another manager, by making trades or by changing your team settings when playing against that team, to achieve any sort of anti-competitive goal, e.g. to help a team win, or to gang up on another team.

The rules here are explicit: You may not conspire with another manager (or managers) to gang up on another team. That means never. You can't contact another team to work against another team. You may not strategize with other team(s) to beat another team. And you may not encourage other teams to gang up on another team with you. This is exactly what LMBombers did twice. He did so because he was angry that I was leaving the league. And he did so, as you can see above, because he incorrectly surmised I had an advantage. So he encouraged them to join him in placing extra focus on my team as opposed to others. That is ganging up.

So, yes, we should try to win (fairly) as much as possible. We should also work (fairly) to keep our competition out of the playoffs. But we can't conspire with other teams to gang up on other teams to do so. That would be collusion.

If you truly think I'm wrong here, and you're not just defending a fellow veteran manager, then use the SOM rules to actually show that I am. If you can't, then I'm clearly right on these matters and LM's post was collusive and wrong. Also, we've debated quite extensively before, and I didn't show much "sensitivity" in engaging you full-on in our debate. I have 401 posts, if you think I've been too "sensitive" in any of them, please point them out...


P.s. I love trash-talk. LM's post wasn't trash talk, and it certainly wasn't funny. Also, have you played LMBombers before? You seem awfully defensive of the guy

The collusion rule means you are not allowed to take actions against teams. Just simple words cheering on your opponents does not seem like collusion.

What was the Strat reply when you sent this complaint to them?

Just a word to the wise, you can probably leave out the "like a grownup" part of your dialog. The use of similar phases in the past is what gets posts deleted.

I didn't send it to them yet. And words are taking action. If you work to convince other teams that they need to work harder against a certain team, then you are conspiring with other teams to gang up on that team. If you use words to help another team against another team, you are ganging up on that team.

The rules don't say anything about words vs. actions. I have no idea where you got that notion

P.s. Badjam, it's best you not give any advice at all; that's what usually gets posts deleted.

Niners, if I'm wrong and (as you say) too "sensitive", then point to the rules and show me like a grown-up how I'm wrong. I have seen you do that before. These are the SOM rules on collusion, and they are clear:

"Collusion. You may not conspire with another manager, by making trades or by changing your team settings when playing against that team, to achieve any sort of anti-competitive goal, e.g. to help a team win, or to gang up on another team.

The rules here are explicit: You may not conspire with another manager (or managers) to gang up on another team. That means never. You can't contact another team to work against another team. You may not strategize with other team(s) to beat another team. And you may not encourage other teams to gang up on another team with you. This is exactly what LMBombers did twice. He did so because he was angry that I was leaving the league. And he did so, as you can see above, because he incorrectly surmised I had an advantage. So he encouraged them to join him in placing extra focus on my team as opposed to others. That is ganging up.

So, yes, we should try to win (fairly) as much as possible. We should also work (fairly) to keep our competition out of the playoffs. But we can't conspire with other teams to gang up on other teams to do so. That would be collusion.

If you truly think I'm wrong here, and not just defending a fellow veteran manager, use the SOM rules to actually show that I am. If you can't, then I'm clearly right on these matters and LM's post was collusive and wrong. Also, we've debated quite extensively before, and I didn't show much "sensitivity" in engaging you full-on in our debate. I have 401 posts, if you think I've been too "sensitive" in any of them, please point them out...


P.s. I love trash-talk. LM's post wasn't trash talk, and it certainly wasn't funny.

Show me how they are ganging up on you?? ONE guy made a post asking guys in the league to try and beat you. That's all I see. See what I highlighted in red in the rules? If they've done that, then you are right, but merely posting "lets all try and beat this guy" is not collusion it's competition, where's the proof anyone ELSE has done anything???

Two have collusion, you have to have two parties working together.

Have they made trades, changed lineups, done anything to effect the outcome of games, as spelled out clearly in the rules??

As for playing lmbombers, I'm sure I have at one point or another, but I'm not real close with him, he's not in any of my keeper leagues. I have no horse in this race, just don't like to see fingers pointed and accusations made when they seem unfounded.

Firstly, LMBombers is a regular Jeep player as well, so I would have been surprised if you didn't know him at all. I do believe you, but you have defended him quite vigorously. And, if you're truly against making unfounded accusations, then you should retract some of the things you have said about me, particularly since my "accusations" are legitimate and correct...but I don't need you to do so.

Secondly, you need to re-read the syntax of the SOM rules on collusion:
Collusion. You may not conspire with another manager, by making trades or by changing your team settings when playing against that team, to achieve any sort of anti-competitive goal, e.g. to help a team win, or to gang up on another team.

The rules end with the clause "or to gang up on another team." That means that "making trades," and/or "changing settings" are not necessary for "ganging up on another team" and colluding to occur. Conspiring usually consists only of words proposing taking an action together. When LM used words to encourage other players to join him in ganging up on my team as opposed to others, he actively conspired to gang up on my team. It was no different than if I encouraged one of my division mates that he should focus on another one instead of me. If you don't think words are enough for conspiracy, then you need to look up the word.

Now, if you still disagree with me, then actually use the SOM rules to show me how I'm wrong. We've always used evidence in our past debates, so you should do so here, or acknowledge that such collusive posts as LMBombers' do go against SOM rules.

I just did use the rules. No one, to the best of my knowledge, has done anything to change the outcomes of the games. You have one guy making a post. Again I order for collusion to occur you need more than one. If lmbombers and another owner have done something to change the outcomes of games as it says in the rules, then you've got collusion. Otherwise you've just got a post you don't like.

Sorry if you feel ganged up on, I suppose I would too, but I still do kot see collusion.

PS. I play in two of jeep's leagues and in just checking bombers is in them. But if honestly I have not had any direct dealings with him. Ask him. I just like a good debate