Jump to content

Suggestion Question: Genuine Original, 2-2.5 keys, Soundtrack + Clean Pocket Purrer, 1.33, Mr Bucket


Duscoda

Recommended Posts

Genuine Original

http://backpack.tf/vote/id/514fdf9fba25363503000015

 

Clean Pocket Purrer

http://backpack.tf/vote/id/514ea8394bd7b8b544000012

 

Not sure why either of these were accepted. The Genuine Original had very little proof of unsuccessful trades older than 48 hours. Heck, most weren't even 24 hours old. The only buyer links provided were quicksell buyers and the few that were buying any were several months ago. There were even 3 links to sold ones at 3 keys that the suggester provided as unsold proof. Had the suggestion been left open a little longer I could have provided this counter proof.

 

 

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/9378162 Traded for a Gold RL worth 5 keys. Gave atleast 1 key.
http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/9174968 A little old but had a buyer at 3 and at 3-3.5 keys.
http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/9504433 Sold for 3 keys to a guy named Meaty.
http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/9248833 Sold for a Festive RL (worth 3 keys).
http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/9434511 Offered a Vintage Tyrants (2-3 keys).
http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/9278512 Offered 1 key + 9 ref (3.22 keys at time of offer).
http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/9478290 Bought one and a key with a Strange Widowmaker (4.5-5 keys at time of trade).
http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/9420763 Offered 3 keys in metal.
 
As for the Pocket Purrer. All but one of the unsold links were sold prior to the suggestion being accepted. What surprises me even more is he even linked to buyers above 1.33 including one at 1.66 ref. He basically proved the suggestion was wrong with his own seller proof.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with this that it shouldn't have been accepted. With every item it takes few days to sell.

it takes few days to sell a Kringle collection at 2 keys. Now what? I have to lower it?

10 pages of unsold Bills hat at 8 keys. Lets lower the price?

 

Genuines are selling even slower, but eventually they usually sell for bp.tf price. Its a smaller market

 

Lately a lot of new trades are put as unsold in proof. That disturbs me. Sold items can't be find on tf2op.

 

And 'sheeps' always vote up if there are a couple of links. Even if the links are bad proof.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with this that it shouldn't have been accepted. With every item it takes few days to sell.

it takes few days to sell a Kringle collection at 2 keys. Now what? I have to lower it?

10 pages of unsold Bills hat at 8 keys. Lets lower the price?

 

Genuines are selling even slower, but eventually they usually sell for bp.tf price. Its a smaller market

 

Lately a lot of new trades are put as unsold in proof. That disturbs me. Sold items can't be find on tf2op.

 

And 'sheeps' always vote up if there are a couple of links. Even if the links are bad proof.

Yeah. I was giving Santa Heavy a hard time about that. Almost all his suggestions are full of trades that are way too young to use as proof.  The scary thing is that he was getting upvotes on suggestions like this. http://backpack.tf/vote/id/514fd34b4bd7b88d56000008

 

To add another suggestion to the list of "Why was this accepted?". The Teddyroesebelt for 1.33-1.55 refalso accepted by Bucket. http://backpack.tf/vote/id/514fc2034bd7b8dd5900000a

Some of the unsold for 1.66 actually sold or atleast had offers at 1.66 ref. Shen noted that some of the unsold from his other suggestion, which was made the other day, had sold at 1.66. http://backpack.tf/vote/id/514eb4acba2536e515000010

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it helps for the Genuine Original at all...I just sold mine 2 days ago via backpack.tf, and it sold within a few hours for assorted items that came out to a bit over 3 keys

 

Screenshot: http://prntscr.com/xrca2

I may have been a bit off with the math, but with "overpay" involved, it still seems like ~3 keys pure trade to me (Note: Brown bomber is clean and painted pink)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I went by the votes both times, if it could go either way, I usually go with the votes. If you think it's a bad price, feel free to make a new suggestion

Admins accept suggestions just purely on votes without researching them selves? :o

 

I have seen many suggestion with upvotes while the suggestion eventually got closed. Really no single suggestion should be accepted based on only votes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Admins accept suggestions just purely on votes without researching them selves? :o

 

I have seen many suggestion with upvotes while the suggestion eventually got closed. Really no single suggestion should be accepted based on only votes.

There are many different aspects that go into accepting/declining a suggestion. There are really two main parts: votes and proof. Since this is a user-run website, I try and stick with the votes most times. I will check the proof, and often do research myself. Sometimes, a suggestion could go either way, as it is so close. Unless the suggestion is way off, I will usually go with the community, like I did here. Many suggestions do get closed with a positive score, but this only happens when the suggestion is not accurate, if we accepted it, we would be manipulating the price.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are many different aspects that go into accepting/declining a suggestion. There are really two main parts: votes and proof. Since this is a user-run website, I try and stick with the votes most times. I will check the proof, and often do research myself. Sometimes, a suggestion could go either way, as it is so close. Unless the suggestion is way off, I will usually go with the community, like I did here. Many suggestions do get closed with a positive score, but this only happens when the suggestion is not accurate, if we accepted it, we would be manipulating the price.

 

Dont stick too much to the votes since 90% of the voters will upvote almost anything with a couple of links or orange/green belt. Even if they are bad proof. Unless its a obvious price change.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont stick too much to the votes since 90% of the voters will upvote almost anything with a couple of links or orange/green belt. Even if they are bad proof. Unless its a obvious price change.

 

Especially when its to decrease the value of an item. People love to downvote price increases and upvote anything that lowers the cost of something they don't own.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Dont stick too much to the votes since 90% of the voters will upvote almost anything with a couple of links or orange/green belt. Even if they are bad proof. Unless its a obvious price change.

Like I said, if it could go either way and it doesn't make a huge difference, I usually stick with the votes if they are 70% or more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I sad, if it could go either way and it doesn't make a huge difference, I usually stick with the votes if they are 70% or more. 

#Dr.FeelGoodkeysuggestion

 

By the way, why are you sad?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What the shit? Why did you accept the suggestion on the clean Spats? 3 of his 6 unsold links sold theirs and one of them wasn't even a day old. Not to mention I provided links to offers at and over 3.66 ref.

 

I'd still like to know why the Pocket Purrer was accepted. He had 3 links to buyers over 1.33 ref as his own proof. Hell, I'd like to know why he got so many upvotes despite proving his own suggestion wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
{SLTV} Laggylaptop

Just saying, it reeeeeeallly bothers me that admins are going with votes. As people have said, there are tons of backpack.tf lurkers upvoting every blue/green/orange belted suggestion when its wrong, and people who downvote when there is no proof at all yet its right. 

 

I know you guys have a really busy job going through all those suggestions, and I'm trying to keep that in mind since I truly don't know how tough it is, but to me just going with the votes seems a little irresponsible. Maybe that's just me, since I have a ton of time on my hands to go through suggestions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
{SLTV} Laggylaptop

What the shit? Why did you accept the suggestion on the clean Spats? 3 of his 6 unsold links sold theirs and one of them wasn't even a day old. Not to mention I provided links to offers at and over 3.66 ref.

 

I'd still like to know why the Pocket Purrer was accepted. He had 3 links to buyers over 1.33 ref as his own proof. Hell, I'd like to know why he got so many upvotes despite proving his own suggestion wrong.

Just made a re-suggestion on that, I noticed it too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please make separate threads for suggestions handled by different admins--one point of the format is to allow admins to easily see questions addressed to them.

 

Just saying, it reeeeeeallly bothers me that admins are going with votes. As people have said, there are tons of backpack.tf lurkers upvoting every blue/green/orange belted suggestion when its wrong, and people who downvote when there is no proof at all yet its right. 

 

All admins do things differently. Proof is usually the main determiner of prices, but votes do have an impact. I have closed many positively voted suggestions despite no objections to the change because they were clearly wrong. (Like this one by Baloo).

 

That said, admins are not perfect, and that is exactly why we have these topics. I know it can be troubling, but please do not assume the worst of admins (or, for that matter, other users).

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

http://backpack.tf/vote/id/50c189bcba25369a2d00001c

http://backpack.tf/vote/id/50dc9dcdba2536825c00000a

Back in the old days.Laagy what nonsense are you talking about people upvoting Blues

 

http://backpack.tf/vote/id/514fe3854bd7b87d45000011 13 downvotes.

http://backpack.tf/vote/id/514ce6574bd7b8071f000009 or this one 28 downvotes holy mackerel.

 

Yet not a post of why, let alone a link of counterproof.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please make separate threads for suggestions handled by different admins--one point of the format is to allow admins to easily see questions that they need to address.

 

I'll make sure to do that in the future.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Distinctively Vincent

I'd still like to know why the Pocket Purrer was accepted. He had 3 links to buyers over 1.33 ref as his own proof. Hell, I'd like to know why he got so many upvotes despite proving his own suggestion wrong.

 

 

I likely would have put the Pocket Purrer through myself. 1.33-1.66 vs. 1.33 flat is one of those fuzzy differences. There are a lot of hats that could be argued as either one on the site. The difference is a fine one.

 

In the case of the suggestion? It was demonstrated that 1.66 can be a difficult price to achieve. Whether it's difficult enough to still be in range or to be removed is largely an opinion matter, there's no solid quantifying rule there. A couple of buyers were shown at 1.44, but that doesn't mean all too much in the case of 1.33 vs 1.33-1.66. A scrap +/- isn't out of the ordinary for a flat price, and 1.44 doesn't well support 1.66. The 1.66 buyer is a level collector, so it can be disregarded. It isn't the slightest bit out of the ordinary to need to go above standard buying price in order to snag the last few evasive levels in a collection.

 

End result, the evidence is strong enough for a 1.33 argument. What's in the comments? One person pointing out that a couple of people are buying for a little higher than 1.33 in the proofs. But, again, 1.44 could fall either way. Otherwise, there aren't people arguing that they sell without too much trouble at 1.66. People aren't bothering to voice that current price is better. Though, neither are people coming it to agree that it's a 1.33 ref item. Ultimately, coments aren't helpful one way or another here.

 

And so, it comes down to votes. It's been very strongly upvoted. Rep-weighted votes are similarly strong. So, while I personally feel it should be a 1.33-1.66 item, the community wants it to be 1.33. With evidence being able to work for either range, all that's left is the community's voice.

 

This is how I'd have approached the suggestion, and ultimatey, I'd have accepted.

 

Flat prices vs. ranges can be nasty nitpicky ones, and they often come down to votes more often than not. I can't recall which item exactly, but there's one that's been flipping back and forth between 1.33 and 1.33-1.66 over the months. It gets proper supporting proof and heavily upvoted every time, and I rather doubt that there's a wave of demand coming and going every month. The issue is that it's a difference where there's rarely enough out there firm enough to say that it should definitively be one way or another. When the evidence can be argued for either side, it then comes down to votes. And if the community heavily upvotes them every time, there's really no other choice but to put them through.

 

Edit: Kinda ignored the issue of the sold pocket purrers prior to suggestion acceptance. When I checked this topic yesterday, I believe only one of them had sold. A couple of extra trades had been closed, but without having sold. More seem to have fully sold since. I may be misremembering though, or getting confused with another item. And that's why I should respond immediately to topics I read instead of leaving them a day for no reason...

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I likely would have put the Pocket Purrer through myself. 1.33-1.66 vs. 1.33 flat is one of those fuzzy differences. There are a lot of hats that could be argued as either one on the site. The difference is a fine one.

 

In the case of the suggestion? It was demonstrated that 1.66 can be a difficult price to achieve. Whether it's difficult enough to still be in range or to be removed is largely an opinion matter, there's no solid quantifying rule there. A couple of buyers were shown at 1.44, but that doesn't mean all too much in the case of 1.33 vs 1.33-1.66. A scrap +/- isn't out of the ordinary for a flat price, and 1.44 doesn't well support 1.66. The 1.66 buyer is a level collector, so it can be disregarded. It isn't the slightest bit out of the ordinary to need to go above standard buying price in order to snag the last few evasive levels in a collection.

 

End result, the evidence is strong enough for a 1.33 argument. What's in the comments? One person pointing out that a couple of people are buying for a little higher than 1.33 in the proofs. But, again, 1.44 could fall either way. Otherwise, there aren't people arguing that they sell without too much trouble at 1.66. People aren't bothering to voice that current price is better. Though, neither are people coming it to agree that it's a 1.33 ref item. Ultimately, coments aren't helpful one way or another here.

 

And so, it comes down to votes. It's been very strongly upvoted. Rep-weighted votes are similarly strong. So, while I personally feel it should be a 1.33-1.66 item, the community wants it to be 1.33. With evidence being able to work for either range, all that's left is the community's voice.

 

This is how I'd have approached the suggestion, and ultimatey, I'd have accepted.

 

Flat prices vs. ranges can be nasty nitpicky ones, and they often come down to votes more often than not. I can't recall which item exactly, but there's one that's been flipping back and forth between 1.33 and 1.33-1.66 over the months. It gets proper supporting proof and heavily upvoted every time, and I rather doubt that there's a wave of demand coming and going every month. The issue is that it's a difference where there's rarely enough out there firm enough to say that it should definitively be one way or another. When the evidence can be argued for either side, it then comes down to votes. And if the community heavily upvotes them every time, there's really no other choice but to put them through.

 

Edit: Kind ignored the issue of the sold pocket purrers prior to suggestion acceptance. When I checked this topic yesterday, I believe only one of them had sold. A couple of extra trades had been closed, but without having sold. More seem to have fully sold since. I may be misremembering though, or getting confused with another item. And that's why I should respond immediately to topics I read instead of leaving them a day for no reason...

Thank you for saying what I was trying to say. This was very similar to my mindset.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...