I don't get people, when paying via PP, they make you put a note? (RANT)

Unlike G2A, a legitimate-sounding neg feedback can be pretty damning for a steam trader. Rep value isn't an e-peen, it's a sign of how many unique, successful interactions the user has managed without getting a [legitimate] negative feedback.

Besides, your business examples only apply to situations where both entities in the transaction are of standing and determined to show respect to one another, or in cultures where there's a business dignity mentality [eg, traditional Japanese business practices]. Otherwise, it's 'big company dictates terms to little company'. And, in retail, it's the full opposite- you've got the initiator (ie, customer) setting all the terms.

It certainly can fit to your ideal business practices, or to your own stance on trading. But it's not some sort of universally valid point.
Basing your actions off a business partner's reputation is key.
Using the business angle a different way: A company will set the terms to an employee with a weak resume, but someone with a suitably noteworthy resume can perhaps be the one to set the terms.

Reputation of character is critical- otherwise we wouldn't have things like credit score ratings [even though those are notoriously inaccurate and poorly managed and.. ugh. Well, attend to the concept, not the actuality].

If someone carries themself poorly, then the specifics of their outlook don't really matter, you ought dismiss them due to the discourtesy or suspicious nature of their habits. Meanwhile, the common system of trading makes perfect sense:

1. In any situation where one user has a low feedback score, and the other user is at least reasonably established, the low-feedback user goes first due to the high risk of scamming on their end. This is normal for any situation- people always have to jump through hoops at first. Think of SG's limited giveaway slots, for example.
2. In a situation where two users have comparable scores, the initiator goes first. That is common sense when dealing on even (or fairly even) ground.
3. In any situation where two users are both established, the initiator goes first regardless of score. Though, typically, it actually ends up being a "whoever notices the other one is online first" affair. I find established traders rarely worry about guarding themselves with other established traders.

If you've had other experiences..
..well, from your tone, you do seem to be referring to Steamtrades, and if that's the case, then I certainly couldn't weigh in there. All I've seen of ST has been.. wanting.
But for Barter- other than the very rare scammy, bigoted, hostile, revenge-feedback user- what I outlined above seems to be pretty universally adhered to.

Just saying, if someone is a dick, that's one thing, and should be addressed by that basis. But discounting a completely sensible anti-scamming/basic acknowledgement of reputation approach because you feel it's out of e-peen, is just.. well, that just doesn't follow. :P

In other words, yeah, rep doesn't matter after a point, but early on.. if a totally new user isn't willing to go first, that's damn suspicious, mainly in the fact that it's a basic courtesy on their end to do so, and so they're already actively disrespecting your earned reputation by refusing to acknowledge it. In other words, they're already being rude to you.

On G2A, the reputation benefit of feedback is minimal, and thus you don't have that same acknowledgement, and thus you don't have the same expectation of respect. (Though I assume if someone manages high positive feedback with no negative feedback at all, then that should still be accountable, even on G2A.)

And, of course, there's the fact that such users are running counter to the normal expectations- Barter and ST both allow you to list your trading circumstances in your bio/trading prompt. If the user didn't bother saying that they wouldn't go first, then they're the ones setting up the bad situation. Again, not a user that merits you bending over to attend to them, or putting in trust where there's certainly no evidenced reason to.

i agree with a lot you said. not with everything, though. :)

It was more in general. I have been contacted by someone who more or less almost did that conversation. :/

yeah, if someone is a dick, better not trade with him. ^^

But whenever someone starts to push how they want me to go first and even start using the rep clause, I usually point out that normally in business it is the party that contacted the other one with their offer "goes first" since they are the one who have the interest in the deal.

i wouldn't agree with that, for several reasons. first, in (real life professional) business you usually don't have the problem that you know absolutely nothing about your trade partner. also, real life business usually means people feel way more responsible than on the internet, and they fear consequences more. i would say the situation is very different in real life. also, if someone contacts you for a trade, how is he then the only one who is interested in the deal? didn't he respond to your offer in your thread, where you made clear first that you are interested in trading your game? aside from that, i am not sure if it should really matter who is more interested in the deal or whatever. if we're talking about forming a general rule that makes trading safer for all of us, i think it should be more about how to judge trustworthiness.

I check the person's SteamRep

i always check it, but it's really not that helpful anymore. they refuse to flag people for all kinds of scams nowadays. they ignore key trades, for instance. if you take into account how steam trading has changed during the last 2 years and how it probably led to more key trades rather than gift trades, i would say the relevance of steamrep is lower than ever. still, if someone is flagged as a scammer on there, that's still a good indicator how to proceed. ;)

barter profile if available for successful trade percentage

i don't see the difference between this percentage and the percentage here on SG (since you say you choose to ignore the positives here). i would say it's always best to check both.

and the content of the negatives here.

yeah, sometimes they say more about a trader than pure numbers. if the last 3 entries are negative, that says a lot. or if all negatives are about a certain type of trade. i also look at how long someone has been trading. a guy with 10/0 who traded for 2 years seems more trustworthy to me than a guy with 100/0 who started a month ago.

ok