Philosophical Trading Question

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by freakhappy

He never said something was wrong with the collector just because he wouldn't sell to him on his terms.

Actually, he did make that assertion, repeatedly:

"if someone is working on a set that you have only one card from, that is a common, would you help out the other guy and trade the card? Forget the HOFer vs common, just the basic idea. Was I expecting too much? I have always tried to help other collectors in sinmilar situations where I could and this seemed like a slam dunk for a quick one for one trade."

--In other words, if the collector is willing to make the trade he is helpful to other collectors. If not, he isn't.

"If someone has just ONE card in the set ( and assuming Hank Sauer is not his boyhood hero, growing up in Chicago etc. as Frank mentioned, which I do not think is the case here) , and the other person is working on the set, isn't it common collector courtesy to trade the card if values and condition are equal? Why try to extract the proverbial pound of flesh?"

--So for not making a trade the other collector is characterized as discourteous and compared to Shylock.

"I have since traded with two other "nice" collectors one for one from my dupes."

--If the other collectors are "nice" for making the trades, the necessary implication is that the other collector is not nice for refusing the trade.