Stop allowing unusual suggestions based solely off a b/o

[Pie Creepin Round Here]

I've commented about this a couple times, so I figured I would make a forum post about it to get some more feedback. In short, the mods deciding to allow unusual suggestions based on just a b/o was ok at the time, since prices were just being switched over from buds and there were a HUGE amount of very badly converted hats. Now, four months down the line, all that is being accomplished by allowing unusual suggestions based on b/o's is that a lot of very lazy, inaccurate prices are being created, and are being considered accurate by the site. Quite frankly, I would rather have overpriced hats with outdated prices than somewhat less overpriced hats with "valid" prices that can be used to update other unusuals.

 

Case in point http://backpack.tf/vote/id/55b7c704dea9e97f598b4635

The user could have just as easily listed the hat for 70 keys, and you could make a perfectly valid suggestion for the hat to be priced @ 70 keys instead of 59. The fact that the hats price can change significantly based on a number that the seller just made up is ridiculous, and shouldn't be used at all in pricing.

 

You also get shit like this

http://backpack.tf/vote/id/55b95342ba8d884a3b8b4569

http://backpack.tf/vote/id/55b9509dba8d88753b8b4567

 

Where one user is substantially dropping the prices of multiple hats owned by another user, just based on their quickselling thread.

 

tl;dr

 

Dropping hats based on a b/o alone is a shitty practice that we should stop using on this site.

[Kevin the Chicken God]

I don't think this should be a viable way of doing a suggestion either, I understand the argument that a sale wouldn't exceed the buyout anyways, but I've had plenty of occasions where I'll be trying to sell a hat for a pure discount for a while, then I'll remake the trade and it will go in an hour or so, lots of times purely depending on whether or not an interested buyer is watching trade.tf. The mods leave these suggestions open for weeks to see if a sale occurs within a period of time, which also makes the backlog flooded with this kind of stuff.

[The One]

Dropping hats based on buyouts is a perfectly valid with the current rules. Your arguments are they allow suggesters to make lazy suggestions and they create inaccurate prices.

 

Lazy suggestions do happen, but they are not limited to just this rule. Suggesters can make lazy suggestions at any time, such as including only 2 sales when there have been dozens of recent sales. In the premise premise of this rule, I have seen some bad suggestion with buyouts. They usually do not check for recent sales, and/or do not check the amount of time elapsed since the trade opened. This is a problem with the suggester rather than the rule.

 

Something you have to realize is that more accurate prices is more important than the most accurate prices. If a hat is worth 40 keys, backpack.tf says it's 100 keys, and there is an open suggestion based on buyout at 60 keys. Obviously, accepting the suggestion at 60 keys much better than leaving it at 100 keys. 

 

Let's look at your examples.

http://backpack.tf/vote/id/55b7c704dea9e97f598b4635Yes, he could have listed it at 70 keys. But both 70 keys and 60 keys are better than the current 80 keys.

http://backpack.tf/vote/id/55b7c704dea9e97f598b4635 

http://backpack.tf/vote/id/55b9509dba8d88753b8b4567Both of these are mostly valid suggestions. Both hats have no recent sales and both suggestions have new prices that are much better than current.

 

As Kevin said, mods can leave suggestions up for a while to see if more sales occur, as they did in this suggestion: http://backpack.tf/vote/id/557ce480b98d8854788b4569. Here, the new price is obviously much better than the old one.

 

What I do see in your motion is the elimination of using these prices to price other hats. Suppose a hat is worth ~30 keys, was 100 keys on backpack.tf, dropped to 60 keys with buyouts then has a few sales at ~30 keys. If a new suggestion is made that uses the current price of 60 keys, the new suggestion would be very inaccurate. An amendment should be added, that suggesters need to check for recent sales when using these buyout-based suggestions rather than accepting them as updated prices. The expertise of suggesters and mods is crucial in this case, to spot any inaccuracy in suggestions.

 

With this change, this rule of pricing hats based on buyouts should have minimal downsides and provide more accurate prices.

[♠Derpeh♤]

Dropping hats based on buyouts is a perfectly valid with the current rules. Your arguments are they allow suggesters to make lazy suggestions and they create inaccurate prices.

 

Lazy suggestions do happen, but they are not limited to just this rule. 

Something you have to realize is that more accurate prices is more important than the most accurate prices. If a hat is worth 40 keys, backpack.tf says it's 100 keys, and there is an open suggestion based on buyout at 60 keys. Obviously, accepting the suggestion at 60 keys much better than leaving it at 100 keys. 

 

With this change, this rule of pricing hats based on buyouts should have minimal downsides and provide more accurate prices.

 

Whilst I agree that using b/o as some form of proof is acceptable it is unacceptable when a large bulk of the proof in a suggestion is based on b/o. In the past when suggestions from many "suggestion whores" would simply churn out suggestions with a large bulk of proof simply just listing b/os it lead to a lot of unusuals being undervalued because it makes sellers continually undercut each other.

 

Another problem is that when your a suggestion is accepted for a unusual you own you want to see sales, see the reason why the suggestion is accepted not because some guy who wanted points just copied and pasted some b/os and labelled it a suggestion. Not to mention it creates more work for the mods who have to do a quick background check and delay the process because they have to wait for others to post proper proof if it so happened to be in a similar range.

 

An your example of lowering prices based off pure prices sounds "okay" at first because a outdated 100 keys vs 60 key b/o, 60 may seem better but it creates many problems:

1) The price isnt actually updated suggesters will look at the page and skip properly updating the unusual because it's "up to date"

2) People who use the site will still have an inaccurate price regardless except this time they think it's up to date since it was "updated" recently and doesnt have the outdated mark.

 

 

TL;DR using b/o as supporting proof is fine but when it's a large bulk of your proof no.

[Jacobmeister]

An amendment should be added, that suggesters need to check for recent sales when using these buyout-based suggestions rather than accepting them as updated prices. The expertise of suggesters and mods is crucial in this case, to spot any inaccuracy in suggestions.

 

With this change, this rule of pricing hats based on buyouts should have minimal downsides and provide more accurate prices.

 

Fully in support of this. I'm one of those people who do believe in B/O drops, but care does need to be taken when pricing something off a B/O - I generally check on the item every couple of days and (although it's never really happened) I do update it again ASAP when there are sales. Suggestions based off sales are far more solid.

 

It's not any more work than a normal suggester has to put in, either - whenever I price something with another unusual for example, I always check the other unusual's last suggestion to see if it sells for pure or not, because that's rather crucial too.

[polar]

You also get shit like this

http://backpack.tf/vote/id/55b95342ba8d884a3b8b4569

http://backpack.tf/vote/id/55b9509dba8d88753b8b4567

 

Hats like this - http://backpack.tf/vote/id/55b95342ba8d884a3b8b4569 - are exactly why we allow pricing off b/os to begin with....

 

Anyways, here are the rules that must be met for pricing off b/os ---

 

• B/Os alone can only be used to drop the value on a hat if all three of these criteria are met
  • ​​You are dropping the value on the hat (you cannot raise the value on a hat based on a b/o
  • You must drop the mean value of the hat by at least 15%. (i.e. You shouldn't be dropping a hat from 31 to 30 keys based on a b/o. You SHOULD be dropping the value on a hat from 100 to 50 if 50 can't sell in a month). 
  • The trade must have a reasonable time to mature (and must be reasonably bumped). What is reasonable varies from hat to hat. A good rule of thumb is to go by roughly 25 keys per week. So a trade for a hat <25 keys in value must be up for at least a week. A trade for a hat <50 keys must be up for at least 2 weeks. A trade for a hat <75 keys must be up for at least 3 weeks. For all other hats, the trade must be up for at least a month in order to price them based off the b/o.

 

Most b/o only suggestions get closed.

[AiR²³]

Also, get rid of buyouts "capping" sales...

 

If a guy asks for 500 keys and sells for 700 in unusuals, why is it capped at 500 keys, just because his trade notes said his buyout was 500 keys?

 

I still do not understand this.

[Jacobmeister]

Also, get rid of buyouts "capping" sales...

 

If a guy asks for 500 keys and sells for 700 in unusuals, why is it capped at 500 keys, just because his trade notes said his buyout was 500 keys?

 

I still do not understand this.

 

The B/O is what the seller would take instantly in pure - considering we come up with values for unusuals in pure then why should it be valued at 630 keys when he would've taken 500 straight away?

[AiR²³]

 

The B/O is what the seller would take instantly in pure - considering we come up with values for unusuals in pure then why should it be valued at 630 keys when he would've taken 500 straight away?

 

Because he would have never taken 500 in random unusuals? He would have taken 500 pure.

[DainbowRash]

Honestly I think that the B/O should only be used when making a range. Say you have a sale at 65 but there is a guy who has had his up for 50 for 2 months. Then it should be used. I just don't agree with this rule but everyone is subject to their own opinion ;3

[ShadowMan]

Honestly I think that the B/O should only be used when making a range. Say you have a sale at 65 but there is a guy who has had his up for 50 for 2 months. Then it should be used. I just don't agree with this rule but everyone is subject to their own opinion ;3

 

If 50 can't sell for 2 months, what makes 65 a good trading point? Throw me an example or two.

[DainbowRash]

If 50 can't sell for 2 months, what makes 65 a good trading point? Throw me an example or two.

If it just recently sold. I don't know why the hell someone would buy a 65 key one when there is one selling for 50 but who knows? Maybe he was too damned lazy to check the market? I don't know XD. Just saying if that were to happen

 

Edit: Maybe 2 months was a really crappy time. Sorry >.>