Trade Rant Thread [NEW RULE]

[HeartOfCoal]

Not trying to point fingers at anyone on this, just ranting in general.

I really hate how people say "rares for rares" in their rules. It is so annoying. I mean, I guess I understand their reasoning with the number of people who trade unfairly, but if you offer someone 5 wishlist uncommons, don't you think that would suffice for a 2011 rare? It just bugs me. It makes it even harder for people like me who enjoy keeping my rares to trade for wishlist pets. And it's not like I'm asking for a rare they're not trading. It's a rare in their trading folder, whom they obviously don't want. I figure if they're wanting to trade it, they should be happy to be at least tripling the number of pets they get in return, especially ones on their wishlist.

Oh well, just had to get that off my chest. Not trying to insult or hurt anyone's feelings, so sorry if I did. (And I really hope this was the appropriate place to post this.)

[Iyrs]

>.>
Never gonna send another trade with people who post in the trade forum again.
There's someone who said they were bored and asked for a trade. I send them a trade with a litter swap:
http://www.chickensmoothie.com/trades/v ... rVXVhA_e1w
With the message: "Don't suppose you'd swap? :3"

They reply back with the message "NO WAY". Extremely rude and clearly they were too lazy to check what it was I was offering them. Urg.

[~ dawn ~]

my poor kitty and leopard. Why people ? Why?!?

[tawnypelt3]

"plz"

lol no

[Qutting Cs. T.T]

http://www.chickensmoothie.com/trades/v ... AuFkAZCnEw

[Allizia]

http://www.chickensmoothie.com/trades/viewtrade.php?id=13682319&userid=244495&signature=EwR6xuXnNRfgAuFkAZCnEw

Totally makes sense!


Not even the same rarity XD

[Dragontoasted]

Not trying to point fingers at anyone on this, just ranting in general.

I really hate how people say "rares for rares" in their rules. It is so annoying. I mean, I guess I understand their reasoning with the number of people who trade unfairly, but if you offer someone 5 wishlist uncommons, don't you think that would suffice for a 2011 rare? It just bugs me. It makes it even harder for people like me who enjoy keeping my rares to trade for wishlist pets. And it's not like I'm asking for a rare they're not trading. It's a rare in their trading folder, whom they obviously don't want. I figure if they're wanting to trade it, they should be happy to be at least tripling the number of pets they get in return, especially ones on their wishlist.

Oh well, just had to get that off my chest. Not trying to insult or hurt anyone's feelings, so sorry if I did. (And I really hope this was the appropriate place to post this.)

I guess I should first write a disclaimer saying that I do have a "rares for rares" rule in my trade message, and that I am not offended by this post. I just want to address something.

The part of the quote I put in bold is the main thing I want to respond to. To me (and to many other users), no - five uncommons will not suffice for any rare, unless you're talking 2009 uncommons for a 2011 rare or something similar. That may have worked back in 2010 and before, but the value of recent commons and uncommons has plummeted; however, since rares are always wanted, they remain at higher value. There is a far greater gap in worth between uncommons and rares than there is between commons and uncommons. Also, I'm not sure about other people, but whether the pets are on my wishlist or not hardly makes a difference.

Again, not offended, just putting my two cents in. I respect your opinion and do not deny its rant-worthiness.

[Aurora Storm]

What... is... this?
That is the reason I hate having uncommon wishlist pets >.< People use it as a way to get around locked groups. Plus, the only wishlist pet of mine in that trade is the red-eyed dog, and my rules clearly say I only want wishlist pets. My rules aren't that hard to read, right? There's only four of them for crying out loud...

[tuna]

2010 user. Been active in 2010.

[Samurai!]

Not trying to point fingers at anyone on this, just ranting in general.

I really hate how people say "rares for rares" in their rules. It is so annoying. I mean, I guess I understand their reasoning with the number of people who trade unfairly, but if you offer someone 5 wishlist uncommons, don't you think that would suffice for a 2011 rare? It just bugs me. It makes it even harder for people like me who enjoy keeping my rares to trade for wishlist pets. And it's not like I'm asking for a rare they're not trading. It's a rare in their trading folder, whom they obviously don't want. I figure if they're wanting to trade it, they should be happy to be at least tripling the number of pets they get in return, especially ones on their wishlist.

Oh well, just had to get that off my chest. Not trying to insult or hurt anyone's feelings, so sorry if I did. (And I really hope this was the appropriate place to post this.)

Do you have any idea how hard it is to trade uncommons for rares? xD That's the one and only reason why I don't trade my rares for uncommons. Because basically once it's gone, it's not coming back and I'll be stuck with a bunch of uncommons for the rest of my CS life.

Now that I'm no longer trading up, it doesn't matter to me, but when I had a goal to reach, I couldn't afford taking one step back. It was too hard to take two steps forward at the degree I was facing (I had a LOT of rares).

Besides, less is more. I would take one '08 rare over twenty '08 uncommons any day. My trade groups will be easier to manage, I'll get better quality offers, and I can trade either up or down and not have to deal with commons (which I value at worthless and delete if I don't want them personally).