Enyo. wrote:Is a pointless message really worth so much to you that you would cancel a blatant overpay trade because of it?
RiverFawn wrote:Enyo. wrote:Is a pointless message really worth so much to you that you would cancel a blatant overpay trade because of it?
No. I meant accept the better trade, but not until after you cancel the others. If they get a trade that better appeals to them, great. I'm not gonna tell them to cancel the better trade. It's common sense not to do that.

Crobar- wrote:Dude.
DUDE.
instead of naming a group 'DONT YOU DARE EVEN CLICK THIS'
lock. the. group.
Crobar- wrote:Dude.
DUDE.
instead of naming a group 'DONT YOU DARE EVEN CLICK THIS'
lock. the. group.

















The dates may be right but you still know this is unfair to me.
.:BuddyMaltese:. wrote:So I sent this trade.
It's not the fact that they cancelled that irritates me - no one is really obligated to accept a trade.
It's their cancel message that bring me to this thread.The dates may be right but you still know this is unfair to me.
(That part wasn't really bolded and underlined. I'm just emphasizing the part I'm ranting about).
... Now I'm not sure why they implied that I had sent a trade that I knew was unfair to them.
In my eyes, it seemed pretty fair. I send out species swap trades all the time and I understand why people cancel most of them. They just don't want horses for their dogs. That's completely understandable but I still continue to send species swap trades because there are a few people out there that do accept them. That trade seemed fair rarity wise.
Now if this trade IS unfair rarity wise: Please note that I didn't know.
I'll also give them the benefit of the doubt and say they might have meant to imply something else in their cancel message.
I apologize if I blew this out of proportion. For some reason that just really got to me.

Users browsing this forum: Dawulf, Sunabi, ᴍᴀᴏᴄɪғᴇʀ and 2 guests