Trend or me

[Fool Injected]

Has this happened to any of you lately? Is this a trend or am I being an a-hole? Twice in the last 6 weeks this came up. Both times it involved a trader with a rating substantially lower than mine. One was in the 140's and the other one in the 150's. Both of these traders sent me a pm saying we were reliable and should ship at the same time. I pointed out that my rating is 50% higher or more than 120 points and asked that they ship first.

One guy said I since I approached him (responded to a post in the Fantasy forum) and therefore we should ship at the same time. WTF???

In both cases I asked them to ship first. In both cases they seemed to get upset and neither deal went through. Am I doing something wrong by asking them to ship first?

This would have been my first trade with both of these individuals. In my signature, the first item spells out some of my requirements. Do they not read them or just ignore them? Sorry, I am starting to ramble.

Lets here those opinions.

thanks

[montaa]

Its partially you, its partially the way Bartertown works. You say:

Lower Rating Ships First, Period.

That is your rule not a law of Btown.

If someone else's rule is:

Lower Rating Ships First, unless we both have 100+ rating then we ship at the same time.

That's their rule, which conflicts to an extent with yours. No one is wrong, just looking through different colored glasses.

I am assuming the reason they got upset is they feel they have earned their 140+ ratings and deserve to be treated a certain way. If they are not treated that way they are going to be upset. People don't like surprises.

[Fool Injected]

Neither of the trade that fell through had those stipulations as part of the trade. If they were part of the trade requirements then they could be discussed.

If a 140 rating has "earned" something, what about a 270 rating? Have I earned, 2 somethings?

Rule 1 in my signature came about for this very reason. I just don't see how a 140 rating can require a 270 rating ship at the same time.

Oh, well.

Still wanting to here more from the veterans on here.

[JohnHwangBT]

Is this a trend or am I being an a-hole?

Both times it involved a trader with a rating substantially lower than mine. One was in the 140's and the other one in the 150's. Both of these traders sent me a pm saying we were reliable and should ship at the same time.

In both cases I asked them to ship first. In both cases they seemed to get upset and neither deal went through.

Am I doing something wrong by asking them to ship first?

Yes, but I'm not going to specify whether I'm answering either / both questions.

The "lower ships first" is just a guideline in the absence of any other agreement. It isn't graven in stone, and nobody has to accept it.

You can request whatever you want for trade protocol in terms of who ships first, and so can they. If you can't reach agreement, that's just too bad for *both* of you.

After being jerked around, my personal rule is Negatives and Neutrals ship first, regardless of rating. If you had even one Neutral in your 200+ rating, and even if it was years ago, I don't really care - I'm going to expect you to ship first. If you insist that lower ships first, and I insist that Neutrals & Negatives ship first, then we can't reach agreement, and there is no deal. It's the same as if you insist that your painted minis are worth double retail, and I say that they're worth half - we reach an impasse and don't do a deal.

I don't see how this is a problem for anybody. If you wanted the deal, you'd have compromised to do simul-ship. If they wanted the deal, they'd have compromised to ship first. In both cases, it wasn't worth compromising on either side, so things are working just fine.
____

I just don't see how a 140 rating can require a 270 rating ship at the same time.

Then you don't do a deal with them.

But I can tell you this: If I were a 2 rating dealing with a 6 rating, I wouldn't automatically ship first to them.

Ratings only really matter among semi-established traders. Low ratings (20 or less) have no cred. High ratings (100+) are generally reliable. Past 100 or so, I doubt there's any significant difference among traders unless they're "perfect" - meaning that they have clear and effective trading processes.

Anyhow, it amuses me that you're posting about this at all. To me, not doing a deal or two isn't anything to care about.

[MagickalMemories]

Neither of the trade that fell through had those stipulations as part of the trade. If they were part of the trade requirements then they could be discussed.

If a 140 rating has "earned" something, what about a 270 rating? Have I earned, 2 somethings?

Rule 1 in my signature came about for this very reason. I just don't see how a 140 rating can require a 270 rating ship at the same time.

Oh, well.

Still wanting to here more from the veterans on here.

Look at it like this... if you and I traded, and I expected you to ship first, how would you feel about that?
Fairly crappy, I'd imagine.

Now, granted, our ratings are FAR closer than what you referred to, but the point still stands.

After a certain point (like, triple digits), traders start feeling like the "lower rating ships first" tendencies should be put away.
Personally, if I'm trading with someone who's passed the 100 mark, I'm not so particular about who ships first (and, to be clear on how I feel about that "rule," I was the first person to actually put it in their sig line. I live by it ). It's about how you feel about the trader himself.

I can TOTALLY understand why you stuck to your guns on it, and why you feel it's right. I can't/won't fault you for that. At the same time, I can understand why Mr. 140 felt like he should get a bit more leniency. KWIM?

It's a personal thing and, when people like us expect other people to ship first, we can expect to lose some trades over it.


Eric

[flagg07]

In my signature, the first item spells out some of my requirements. Do they not read them or just ignore them? Sorry, I am starting to ramble.

Both, with a little reading comprehension issues sprinkled in. It's my experience that any written stipulations prior to negotiations get misread, misunderstood or otherwise ignored >90% of the time. I can't tell you how many times I've listed trade ads with "NO HOW MUCH? stipulations and get 5+ "how much?" PMs.

The reality is there's not much you or I can do about it. I'll continue writing it in and they'll continue ignoring it, but instead of getting frustrated, I delete the PMs. I look at it like this... If you ignore my initial post, how much of my negotiations are you going to ignore? Every deleted PM is a "Posiible bad trade" avoided. Keeps my blood pressure down too.

As far as the ratings go, I firmly believe in lower ships first, even when I'm the lower shipper. That said, I do not fault them for asking for a "simu" trade. "Asking" is within everyone's rights and I'm confident I've done so in similar situations. IF they demanded, or required it, then I feel they've stepped over the line and I can feel your pain.

[Norseman]

I think when someone has reached a rating of 100 you have kinda "Done your time." or "Earned your stripes." I have noticed people loosing up alot since my rating has hit three digits. You can't treat someone with a 100+ rating like a newbie trader or someone with less than 20. In my mind they have proven themselves trustworthy. You have 200+ you have also proven yourself trustworthy. If it comes down to it yes you do have the right to ask someone to ship first if you want, but you may want to temper your stand with a little bit of realistic understanding, and common sense.

Most vets that I have dealt with have had no problem shipping simo with me, and I have also tried to be a little more easy going with 50+ traders as well. Myself being in Canada..shipping can take along time. Sometimes a month and it is a pain in the butt to have to wait 2-3 weeks then wait another 2-3 weeks for the other way to complete a trade. 1-1/2 months is along time to wait.

Myself if you insisted that I shipped first I probably wouldn't have a problem with it, but if a similar offer came up with someone that would ship simo and you would not I would probably go with them.

All in all. You are probably limiting yourself marginally with 100+ traders by being strict with your shipping rules. Some guys may take offense at you not trusting them after 50+ trades.

[Fool Injected]

Actually I have made several trades with people in the low 300's. I had no problem what so ever shipping first. They earned their rating and mine was lower. If the difference in ratings is 20 or so then I am open to talking about it. Of course all this is predicated that there are no "bad" feedbacks in the last 6 months.

Maybe it was your signature that started all this MM!

I will continue to stick by my guns. The rating system is the natural pecking order for things here on Bartertown.

Have you every heard this one, "You responded to my ad/forum post. Therefore we should ship at the same time?". I literally laughed out loud at that. That was a new one on me.

People who I have done multiple trades with, the rules are relaxed. I will actually ship at the same time if we have done business 2 or 3 times in the past. Both of these "lower" rated people had never done business with me.

[Fool Injected]

All in all. You are probably limiting yourself marginally with 100+ traders by being strict with your shipping rules. Some guys may take offense at you not trusting them after 50+ trades.

Actually trust is only earned after a successful trade from me. The rating system allows me to see if I want to do business with you.

If I am limiting myself, that is ok. If I had a 100 rating say ship at the same time. It would not happen. If we had done business in the past then it would be ok and would probably agree to shipping at the same time.

[Fool Injected]

In my signature, the first item spells out some of my requirements. Do they not read them or just ignore them? Sorry, I am starting to ramble.

Both, with a little reading comprehension issues sprinkled in. It's my experience that any written stipulations prior to negotiations get misread, misunderstood or otherwise ignored >90% of the time. I can't tell you how many times I've listed trade ads with "NO HOW MUCH? stipulations and get 5+ "how much?" PMs.

.

Yeah, that is annoying, that people cant read the #Q@$$%@#$ trade requirement.

Again, If I lose a trade or two its ok. I am running out of stuff to trade. How many times has someone with a 100+ trade rating misrepresented their stuff they sent to you? It has happened to me more than once.

[kbolster12345]

Well 2 isn't really a trend.

Also are you sure the trades fell through because you wouldn't simul send?

But in agreement with fool Trade Ratings are for reference. one of the people with the highest ratings misrepresented soemthing to me a couple of years. it happens.

[flagg07]

After being jerked around, my personal rule is Negatives and Neutrals ship first, regardless of rating. If you had even one Neutral in your 200+ rating, and even if it was years ago, I don't really care - I'm going to expect you to ship first.

Agreed...

I can appreciate the opinions of FI relaxing his trade rules for established traders.
I can also appreciate that the feedback rating only deals with past trades, not future trades. Is TDZ still sitting on a 98? How about the Watchman with 4+ BTRs last year?

Imagine this situation:

1) FI agrees to any of the above trades, including the you ship 1st since you replied to me.
2) The trade goes badly
3) This thread is a BTR instead of a vent/ question

How many of you would reply, or atleast think/ agree that he shouldn't have shipped until he received his end?
+1

Edit:
TDZ's FB is 98 with 7 Negatives

[Adunaphel]

For me, it matters what the references say about the trader. At 100+ those traders are probably very reliable. I look for overlap ALOT when I look at a trader's references. If they have done trades (and have good references) with traders that I respect, then I usually would be willing to simulsend. But, they would need to have all positive before I consider that.

I guess I can see why they would be upset. They have grown their own reputation. But, I remember when I was at that level I didn't mind AT ALL sending first to traders who had a 250+ rating.

Trades come and go here. I used to get upset if a trade didn't go through when I wanted something. I don't feel that way so much anymore. Everything comes back around here. I know that the OP knows that, so I wouldn't get too upset.

Karl

[JohnHwangBT]

1) FI agrees to any of the above trades,
2) The trade goes badly
3) This thread is a BTR
How many of you would reply

Of course it is completely his fault. I didn't negotiate and agree to the deal - he did. So it's his decision whether to compromise (or not).

[Stanislav]

I can be lenient with someone that is in the ballpark of my rating, but otherwise, no. Lower rating ships first. Ballpark to me is within a 100 or so rating.

Yes, I was there at one time, and guess what? So was or is everyone else. Just because you have gotten into the 100s does not give you a free ticket to Simo-Shippingville. I have earned my rating, and wheter it is a perk or not, I intend to use it.

On the flip side for me, if Porkuslime or a few others asked me to ship first, I would. If things were not said, I would still assume I would be shipping first on a trade.

As for someone who has gotten their rating up in the 100-200 range and thinks they can demand me to do anything...well, that is what the "foes" button is for. I don't have to see their stupid demands.