Just read an article on the issue of auto drafting/auctioning, which got me thinking.
The author of the article expresses his irritation with having teams that auto-draft, and proposes penalties for them. I'm not sure his complaints are really that big of a deal or come up that often, such that people who miss a draft or auction (or have tech problems) should be penalized. However, it did get me thinking about ways the league could mitigate those problems that do emerge as a result of bot picks.
A simple example of this would be to place an artificial ceiling on individual player salaries for bot picks. This might actually be more impactful in a football league, but the idea being that the auction bot is perfectly happy sinking a huge chunk of its budget into a few players in ways that completely hamstring the bot's team. And the teams that are competing in the bid are penalized for this after a fashion as well. Assuming that the players that command such a high salary are rare commodities, having one team that's willing to bid itself to death for them means that a team that happens to have a roster construction that really needs such a player must either give up or pay significantly above market (due to the presence of the arguably irrational actor, the bot).
A commenter on the article suggested that for auction leagues, you could impose a $10 tax on teams that don't attend the auction. The amount is somewhat arbitrary, but obviously a tax would reduce the bot's economic impact, and the larger the tax, the larger the reduction.
Anyway, these are just examples, I'm not proposing anything in particular. As long as we're at rule change time, though, this seems like the perfect opportunity to discuss this sort of thing. Does anyone else think that the auction bots are problematic, and that we might benefit from imposing certain limitations, restrictions, defaults, whatever, on their use? Or is everyone totally satisfied with their "contribution"? I'm not sure myself, which is why I'm curious what others think.