Not that it matters, but I haven't objected to a trade all season. In three leagues: commish of one.
My main point in this thread is this: the commissioner of a league, especially when his league members have raised a stink, cannot himself ok his own trade. He can't. You have an obligation (and I do this when I make a trade in a league I commish) to let someone else judge it. You can either do so via a league vote or by designating someone else in the league as acting commish when you're one of the people making the trade. But it has to be someone other than yourself.
As far as this particular instance is concerned, I don't care how many people in this thread said this trade is non-vetoable. I never said I'd veto it. All I said is that the commissioner himself can't make that call. Go back and read the thread.
This isn't about the fairness of the trade. It's about the fairness of the process which is a different thing entirely.
The process should be laid out pre-draft. If the process allows the commish to "self-approve"... then that's that - likewise, if the commish was foolish enough to have league votes in the rules.. then that's what he has to live by. In my leagues... there is typically a co-commisher or two.
Majority rule votes are joke... most of the teams in my leagues have a sub-500 average. At the least, it should be a unanimous vote (excluding the trading teams).
I apologize for misreading your intentions... there have been several posts in the last few days of owners whining about "collusion" and "unfair" trades.