I actually considered another option here. This one is more subjective and possibly controversial. Looks like:

- we somehow appoint/vote in a board of 5 GMs.
- if a 'trade back' is done within 15 months, any GM in the league who suspects 'shady business' can ask for an appeal on it. (This appeal can be sent to the 'head' of the board, which if I am on the board, I would take on if people wanted - I've been the trade officer for a bit now and would step up.)
- the appeal should outline why 'shady business' is suspected.
- the board will then take a majority vote on whether the deal should go thru or not. (This process should last no more than 2 days, maybe 3...)

Like I said the downfall here is that this option is very subjective. On the other hand, there are deals that are obviously one way or another. I'm pretty sure everyone can think about a ton of examples.

Don't we already vote on it if someone vetos a trade anyways...?