[heckienaw]

was just in a game with green_dragon, and mezz08. Mezz was almost out when green bought one green not two but one green to keep him in game and did not help either one
_________________
HeckieNaw & HeckiesWife

[Black_Dragon]

The deal was fine..I could see the others were negotiating. So I put in a good price to block the greens from being taken out.

[heckienaw]

now that was said, you need to look at the trades and offers, I think it might of been some teaming involed.
_________________
HeckieNaw & HeckiesWife

[Black_Dragon]

no teaming. I just outsmarted you on the deal. And it seems you can't handle that. Why does he have to deal with you, with the knowledge that if you get greens, you win..at any price?

To block greens was crucial..and so I offered money to do that...

[CYN]

Doesnt work that way, trades must benefit BOTH parties.
25% reduction to both.
_________________
CYN

ITS ALL GOOD

[Black_Dragon]

I seek clarificatrion on this.

IMO both parties did benefit.

How?

The fellow selling green to me received cash from me (and a good sum too given the game was coming to an end). That enabled him to stay in the game. If he sold the greens to the other party, he would have been eventually bankrupt for sure.

And I gained as Green was blocked from completly being taken over.

[CYN]

One green did not benefit you and it did not help him better his position
_________________
CYN

ITS ALL GOOD

[Black_Dragon]

How is it not beneficial to both parties if the end result is:

a) more money for him in order to survive economic crash.

b) a defensive position for me which ensured my main oponent did not get greens.

Is blocking an oponent from getting a certain colour set illegal?

[heckienaw]

What is there not to understand. The trade only gave him 1 or 2 more trips around the board. If he would of took my trade he would of had monopoly and money to build and last lots longer. THAT'S beneficial to both. Not what you did. Hope that helps.
_________________
HeckieNaw & HeckiesWife

[Black_Dragon]

As mentioned i have illustrated here clear benefits that occured to both parties. There is nothing in the rules covering what the magnitude of those benefits should be. Just that both should benefit. And they did.

Who knows what his motivations were. Perhaps he didnt like the thought of paying $500 everytime he landed on green, and so realsied your offer wasnt really that appealing.

And where does this end? Shall we call people cheats if they dont accept certain offers? What if i want to just take one card with a view of trading that going forward for profit?

And like I said, what is wrong with trying to block a monopoly?

[heckienaw]

funny stuff
_________________
HeckieNaw & HeckiesWife