Blind upvotes

[JayTuut]

I mean who doesn't blindly upvote me? Amirite?

 

;~;

 

But some friends on steam have said "oh wow a new boom suggestion upvote" and so far so good with my recent-ish suggestions, apart from the hype dying one, so it wasn't inaccurate at the time lmao

[Marty Birdman]

For my first 2-3 months here I only blindvoted, typically whenever someone's proof seemed well organized and their suggested price made sense. Even though I review everything I vote on now, I don't really regret it, because whenever I got a vote wrong I went back and tried to learn from the suggester's mistake. I was better equipped when I started suggesting because of this. Aaroncsn was the last suggester that I was still blind-upvoting back in the day.

 

I appreciate that people have enough confidence in me to blindvote my work, but I definitely still mess up sometimes. And I'm sort of a hard-line perfectionist on top of that, so if you catch me doing something wrong and tell me about it before it winds up set in stone, I'm actually pretty grateful for the correction.

[Teeny Tiny Cat]

 blind accepting is even worse.

 

Nobody does this.

[ѕιи]

Nobody does this.

http://backpack.tf/suggestion/5831f33cc44045560e2d9fe6

 

What about that one ^^^

[HarryG]

http://backpack.tf/suggestion/5831f33cc44045560e2d9fe6

 

What about that one ^^^

Yep, at least one mod definitely does this given this and other suggestions I've seen (anybody remember Towering Pillar of Summer Shades a year ago, lowered based on one never bumped seller?)

[polar]

http://backpack.tf/suggestion/5831f33cc44045560e2d9fe6

 

What about that one ^^^

 

 

Yep, at least one mod definitely does this given this and other suggestions I've seen (anybody remember Towering Pillar of Summer Shades a year ago, lowered based on one never bumped seller?)

 

None of those are examples of blind accepting. If anything those are examples where a mod does their own digging to determine that the suggested price is better than the current one.

 

Blind accepting would be if a user made a suggestion for the wrong item and the mod accepted it without clicking on any of the links.

[ѕιи]

None of those are examples of blind accepting. If anything those are examples where a mod does their own digging to determine that the suggested price is better than the current one.

 

Blind accepting would be if a user made a suggestion for the wrong item and the mod accepted it without clicking on any of the links.

Using the suggestion I provided above, with aged, bumped, and perfectly valid sellers at 8 ref, that suggestion should not have been accepted {even if it was 'better than current'}. My definition of "blind accepting" is when there is something clearly wrong with a suggestion {in this case, the range} but yet it gets accepted anyways.

[FishtheFish]

Fish, Sin, and Marty Birdman are the only people I blind upvote

>blindvoting fish

You've made a terrible mistake.

[HarryG]

None of those are examples of blind accepting. If anything those are examples where a mod does their own digging to determine that the suggested price is better than the current one.

 

Blind accepting would be if a user made a suggestion for the wrong item and the mod accepted it without clicking on any of the links.

The Summer Shades thing I referenced definitely did not involve any digging; the link could not have been clicked on if the only seller link was unbumped and the suggestion was accepted anyways. 

https://backpack.tf/suggestion/5545bad3b98d88c15b8b47be

 

Here's proof that the seller link was never bumped 

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/25855822

[polar]

The Summer Shades thing I referenced definitely did not involve any digging; the link could not have been clicked on if the only seller link was unbumped and the suggestion was accepted anyways. 

https://backpack.tf/suggestion/5545bad3b98d88c15b8b47be

 

Here's proof that the seller link was never bumped 

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/25855822

"classifieds

x2 at 16 and one its white" ???

[Happysedits]

every suggestion thats not made by white belt

[ѕιи]

every suggestion thats not made by white belt

You blind upvote clydE!? o_0

[Happysedits]

You blind upvote clydE!? o_0

if hes other belt than white then yes

[SpotlightR]

http://backpack.tf/suggestion/5831f33cc44045560e2d9fe6

 

What about that one ^^^

http://backpack.tf/suggestion/567c43e2ba8d883e2aa94cc4

http://backpack.tf/suggestion/567ce12adea9e97e487f7833

 

:V

[HarryG]

"classifieds

x2 at 16 and one its white" ???

I'm positive classifieds were only usable as supporting proof at that time. Wouldn't have argued the point if the suggestion was fine based on two classified listings. Furthermore, there are no screenshots of the classified listings, which I believe means that it was before screenshots of classified listings were required for a suggestion. That would also mean that this would be before classifieds alone could be used for a suggestion (because if I remember correctly, the reason screenshots became mandatory was because they were more than supporting proof at that time), much less two listings. Essentially, I'm still right.

[ѕιи]

I guess I might as well share who I blind upvote then.

 

Suggestors:

Shuffle Spy

Fish

hold my beer and watch this {sometimes}

TCP Moose {sometimes}

Zeus_Junior

Alberny

 

{Which is probably why my vote accuracy is so shitty}

[polar]

I'm positive classifieds were only usable as supporting proof at that time. Wouldn't have argued the point if the suggestion was fine based on two classified listings. Furthermore, there are no screenshots of the classified listings, which I believe means that it was before screenshots of classified listings were required for a suggestion. That would also mean that this would be before classifieds alone could be used for a suggestion (because if I remember correctly, the reason screenshots became mandatory was because they were more than supporting proof at that time), much less two listings. Essentially, I'm still right.

 

I think you're missing the big picture which is that we accept suggestions that we believe to be better representations of value than the current price and also take into consideration the votes. If votes are positive, our own digging shows the suggested price is better, we will accept. I would accept that suggestion today with the proof provided there if my digging showed it was a better price. Rules about what constitutes valid proof are in place to make everyone's job easier in both voting and evaluating suggestions. But at the end of the day, we want the most accurate prices reflected on this site.

[FishtheFish]

I guess I might as well share who I blind upvote then.

 

Suggestors:

Shuffle Spy

Fish

hold my beer and watch this {sometimes}

TCP Moose {sometimes}

Zeus_Junior

Alberny

 

{Which is probably why my vote accuracy is so shitty}

Yeah, blindvoting me isn't a good idea. >:^(

[ѕιи]

Yeah, blindvoting me isn't a good idea. >:^(

It's not from you, it's just from blind voting in general

[HarryG]

I think you're missing the big picture which is that we accept suggestions that we believe to be better representations of value than the current price and also take into consideration the votes. If votes are positive, our own digging shows the suggested price is better, we will accept. I would accept that suggestion today with the proof provided there if my digging showed it was a better price. Rules about what constitutes valid proof are in place to make everyone's job easier in both voting and evaluating suggestions. But at the end of the day, we want the most accurate prices reflected on this site.

But isn't taking votes into consideration at all an even worse idea of the value of an item given that the majority of site users are uneducated as to how pricing an item actually works (e.g. just look at any comments page on a currency suggestion). What if a group of people decided to test that and just randomly all downvote an accurate suggestion or vice versa. Additionally, what if that happened at the same time that a staff member didn't do further digging (as has been proven in some cases on this thread). Would it be accepted on votes alone then? That doesn't seem right, does it?

[polar]

But isn't taking votes into consideration at all an even worse idea of the value of an item given that the majority of site users are uneducated as to how pricing an item actually works (e.g. just look at any comments page on a currency suggestion). What if a group of people decided to test that and just randomly all downvote an accurate suggestion or vice versa. Additionally, what if that happened at the same time that a staff member didn't do further digging (as has been proven in some cases on this thread). Would it be accepted on votes alone then? That doesn't seem right, does it?

 

Again, you're taking one small part of what is said and missing the big picture. We look at votes, proof, and look at the market ourselves and take all three factors into consideration when evaluating a suggestion. In the end, we accept suggestions that we believe most accurately represent the value on the item. No one component is the sole determinant. We occasionally go against the votes when we see ourselves that the suggested value clearly does not represent item value. In such cases, mods are mandated to comment for the sake of transparency.

[HarryG]

Again, you're taking one small part of what is said and missing the big picture. We look at votes, proof, and look at the market ourselves and take all three factors into consideration when evaluating a suggestion. In the end, we accept suggestions that we believe most accurately represent the value on the item. No one component is the sole determinant. We occasionally go against the votes when we see ourselves that the suggested value clearly does not represent item value. In such cases, mods are mandated to comment for the sake of transparency.

I addressed all three of those things at some point in the post. Just so that you don't miss any of it, here is my stance on your entire post.

 

 

The votes are pointless, really. The proof can be wrong and is in most if not all of the examples provided. And looking at the market yourselves clearly also doesn't happen sometimes. Almost all suggested prices get positive votes (only cases I could see that are negative are obviously proofless suggestions and in some cases, currency suggestions), and in at least one example (Towering Pillar) there was no mod comment at all even though the market obviously wasn't looked at (the entire market was provided in the suggestion) and the proof was inaccurate (my earlier points on unbumped and the classifieds). So there's all of your points, the entire picture.

 

All I'm trying to say is that blind accepting does occur sometimes on this site, even with that process.

Nobody does this.

So don't say it doesn't.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-HarryG

[Ravenholmzombies]

I blind upvote no one because polar says I'm a filthy price manipulator.

[Teeny Tiny Cat]

<snip>

 

The fact that people occasionally make mistakes or miss things does not equate to "blind accepting happens." Blind accepting, like blind voting, would be accepting suggestions based on nothing more than trust in the user who suggested it. 

[HarryG]

The fact that people occasionally make mistakes or miss things does not equate to "blind accepting happens." Blind accepting, like blind voting, would be accepting suggestions based on nothing more than trust in the user who suggested it.

 

Oh, you mean like the corona where the suggestion was accepted solely because it was Bob's sale? Good grief.