|
Title: Offer language Post by: HornetsGM on July 07, 2005, 09:47:20 AM Would this be construed as an offer?:
"Would you trade x for y?" Title: Offer language Post by: NetsGM on July 07, 2005, 09:50:14 AM Since it's posed as a question, I would say no.
But to avoid any questions, I would specifically say what's not an offer. Some people read things different ways. This is all really just to avoid confusion. Title: Offer language Post by: HornetsGM on July 07, 2005, 09:53:08 AM I think it would be easier to just assume that it's not an offer if it isn't specified, so people don't bind themselves unwittingly. If you specifically say that it's an offer, then I think you should be bound.
Title: Offer language Post by: NetsGM on July 07, 2005, 10:09:29 AM For the most part, yes. But LakersGM specifically said he made an offer in his post in that thread, which is why I commented.
Anyway, my whole point is to be as specific as possible to avoid confusion, not so much to make a specific dialogue in which pm's have to follow. Title: Offer language Post by: HornetsGM on July 07, 2005, 10:20:19 AM I see.
Yeah, we don't want to have to have forms that our PMs have to take, haha. Title: Offer language Post by: SpursGM-old on July 07, 2005, 10:24:52 AM I think one side of the deal HAS to send language to the effect:
I accept go ahead & post it. or ok. post it. Then it is the other GM's responsibility to post the deal. If neither side sends a pm that tells the other to post it then the deal is still in discussion. Title: Offer language Post by: KingsGM-old on July 07, 2005, 10:27:05 AM Oh please don't turn this into lawyer's language. Things are simple, GM should only ask another "Can I Post That" before any post take place. Without permmission there is no post, and that's all.
Title: Offer language Post by: CavsGM on July 08, 2005, 06:57:14 PM It's a first...I agree with the KingsGM... :)
Title: Offer language Post by: KingsGM-old on July 08, 2005, 09:23:49 PM Oh, should i take that as a compliment? :? :wink:
|