Bad Trader: Zacmac26

I think this is a perfect example of when to leave neutral feedback. A trade was agreed upon and trade requests accepted. If anyone can not go through with a trade once it's accepted I believe a neutral rating should be applied no matter what the circumstance. Leave a description on why and let others choose to trade with the individual. Who knows, you may start seeing a pattern. It's not a bad rating, but it's also not a good one. So I guess anyone can back out of a trade, even after it's accepted? He gave a good reason if telling the truth, but the trade did not go through due to an error on his side.

 

I bomb proof my shit, and the FedEx store that is closest is a bitch to get to. There would have been some wasted time and effort if I was the OP here, so I'd be frustrated.

And the "no one is out any beer" line is getting old. Just gives folks an excuse to string other BA's along and tire kick on trades.

I like the idea old school ways, you agree and that's it. If you feel you can't complete and the other party is OK with, that's fine.

With the trading system my way of dealing with it is to send a trade request with a note, if they read the note and don't accept, I withdraw the request and move on.

Admittedly, I'm a little salty right now because I've had several people lately definitely agree to a trade, and then ghost me.

 

Red herring. If he needed $1000 to replace the bottle he would've known that ahead of time and taken better care of the bottle in question, and likely would've been pre-packed and stashed away safely. Which is how he should've taken care of THIS bottle.

Which brings us to expectations of a closed trade. If I have any agreed-upon trade with anyone, I expect my trade partner to set aside whatever we're trading so there's very little chance that mistakes can happen - broken bottles, "my brother-in-law drank it" (that one happened to me, and the bottle showed up two weeks later in another trade offer), or whatever. I don't know if that expectation should be written into trading rules, but basic "rule of care" seems to be something very simple that everyone should follow if they've closed a trade. Weird shit happens for sure, but weird shit typically is, and should be with basic precaution, very low probability.

I choose to believe ZacMac26 but if it were me, I'd be sending an apology box for not securing my bottles responsibly enough to complete the trade. But not technically a BT.

 

In the case of a $1,000 bottle, I agree that most people would keep that under lock and key until packaging; package in a bubble-wrapped room, before loading it into a bottle shipper, wrapped inside an even larger bottle shipper, wrapped inside 3 boxes. That said, per OPs comments (and what @John_M was responding to), the statement would apply to any loss of bottle regardless of how it happened. Even in my ridiculously cautious example within this paragraph, the bottle could still get broke or lost when being shipped. I've read at least one story of someone losing a box because "it looked like a fork-lift went through the box."

So, the "He would have taken better care" does not eliminate all questions associated with such a high-value bottle and the potential of loss- and associated "what to do" questions.






For the record, I had a bottle break in a trade I was doing. I was to receive a 2012 BCBCS Bomber. When the trader went to pack the bottle, he said his kid was playing with a ball in the house, it hit the bottle and knocked it off the counter. I already packed and was set to ship the next morning. I chose to believe him, as I had no reason not to. So, I was in a similar position for an even more difficult beer to replace than OPs.

 

This is a beautiful story.

We old people traded for years without a trading system, based solely on trust. While the trading system is great, people need to be a bit more understanding & trusting of their trading partners. I'd like to see this thread deleted. There doesn't appear to be any reason to drag @Zacmac26 through the mud.

 

The right thing to do would be the BT sends the one FO plus several quality replacements for the other "lost?" bottle, with no expectations of receiving his Side Project from the OP. That to me would be the definition of a good trader, winning the trade be damned.

 

I think that's a bit much, expecting @Zacmac26 to send the remaining contents of his side of the trade and add quality replacements for lost bottle, and then not expect any beer at all in return from the OP. How's that fair? That would be 'winning the trade' for the OP all the way. Something like you suggested may be something that's more common among regular trade partners but not people that have never traded before.

People need to be more understanding that things happen. Yes, of course people should hold to their end of the deal but when unexpected things happen, this is where that understanding needs to come in. Maybe something like @not2quick mentioned should be worked out (why can't this become more of a 1:1+?), or different bottle(s) in place of the one that was lost (for whatever reason), or payment for shipping, or something.... not 'here stranger, have all my beer'.

 

Neutral feedback won't get purged...

Also, fuck me if I ever trade a bottle like KBBS and god forbid a forklift destroys my box or FedEx loses the package altogether. I'm not replacing a $1000 bottle. That trade is dead, and I'll refund you your shipping and send an 'I'm sorry box.' But I'm not acquiring another just because you think I should. There's a limit to the type of "contract" that exists here, and I'd love to know what trade platforms would ensure someone is "made" to do this.

 

I believe there still is a loophole in the system, cant remember though, if only one party leaves feedback, the trade is purged. Does anyone know?

 

Used to. Now it stands.

 

Not that I can't believe the broken bottle story but what makes me skeptical is that Zacmac had absolutely zero interest in going through with the trade and replacing or substituting that bottle with another when the OP offered he could do so and still complete the trade. That is just not normal behavior (imo) for someone whose intentions are good.

 

That sucks, this loophole needs to be closed. All someone who has bad feedback has to do is not leave feedback and wait the 6 months out.

 

My understanding was that "closed" in this case no longer means they any feedback is purged. My understanding is just that no one can alter the feedback in either direction.

Also, trades no longer stay open for 180 days. Closer to 90.

Paging @Todd for clarification.

 

Zacmac26 did offer to substitute with a Ground State bottle, per OPs comment. I would qualify Ground State as a quality bottle. Also, @Zacmac26 did return all the bottles when he couldn't complete the trade. If he had 'bad' intentions, he would have kept all the OPs bottles or not communicated anything at all. That to me is a bad trader.

OP can be upset all he wants regarding the not everyone in the BA trading community being on his side of the argument, and he can choose to not trade on his platform (freedom is awesome), but I personally would not call @Zacmac26 a bad trader. The comments in his feedback (26 completed trades) do not indicate that pattern of behavior either. I wouldn't worry about opening a trade with him.