No, this has nothing to do with key price

[AwesomeMcCoolName]

I merely suggest that it can be more transparent and there should be human-independent systems to ensure the site's accuracy and credibility, instead of relying solely on mods' integrity. 

There is, it's called proof.

[polar]

With all due respect, I think you are missing my point.

 

I understood your point. I think you are missing the point here. Keys aren't going up in dollar value. Refined is going down as you can see from the prior refined suggestion. Conflict of interest implies that a mod is buying and selling keys for refined. Mods RARELY trade keys : refined. I for example do most of my trading buying hats for 10+ buds value. The key : ref ratio doesn't matter at all since key values / buds are constant (buds go down during sales and events, but have otherwise been at ~19-20 for the last 6 months).

 

My bp value did not "go up" 40 USD when the key suggestion passed. Keys were 1.80-1.90 before the suggestion passed and they are still 1.80-1.90 after the suggestion passed. There is no conflict of interest there.

[Samuel G. Best]

A conflict of interest shouldn't be an issue because 1) the market changed before the suggestion--hence why the suggestion was made, 2) there has to be proof to support the suggestion for it to get accepted. 

 

1. If market changed before the suggestion means no one can profit from manipulating the suggestion, 

no suggestion is needed because you assume all traders are perfectly informed and will trade at the real market price regardless of the suggestion on bp.tf.

 

2. The amount of proof is easily seen but the quality of them requires subjective judging ability to examine. Therefore, there is a large room for the mods to interpret the proof, meaning that merely having user-provided proof is not enough to eliminate the threats of conflict of interests. 

[Samuel G. Best]

I understood your point. I think you are missing the point here. Keys aren't going up in dollar value. Refined is going down as you can see from the prior refined suggestion. Conflict of interest implies that a mod is buying and selling keys for refined. Mods RARELY trade keys : refined. I for example do most of my trading buying hats for 20 buds and selling for 30 buds. The key : ref ratio doesn't matter at all since key values / buds are constant (buds go down during sales and events, but have otherwise been at ~19-20 for the last 6 months).

 

My bp value did not "go up" 40 USD when the key suggestion passed. Keys were 1.80-1.90 before the suggestion passed and they are still 1.80-1.90 after the suggestion passed. There is no conflict of interest there.

 

Please again do not fixate on the key suggestion 

 

I will just make a brief note: 

I have trust in you and I understand your rationale on backpack value

 

My main point is, a human-independent (or at least more robust) mechanism to eradicate potential threats of conflict of interests is absent. 

 

As for the backpack value issue, I perfectly understand that if you sell your bp to experienced traders, they wdnt give a shit to the valuation of your bp shown on bp.tf

However, since the valuation function does exist on this site and it is hence misleading. It is perfectly plausible that there are people taking the bp valuation on bp.tf seriously and in this case, these less informed traders, are jeopardized.

[polar]

My main point is, a human-independent (or at least more robust) mechanism to eradicate potential threats of conflict of interests is absent.

 

We have discussed transferring over key values from tf2finance before and putting an end to key suggestions, but brad's point about the matter was spot on. If people don't trust the site moderators to make the right decision based on the totality of the proof, votes, and comments, then they are welcome to use other sites such as trade.tf or tf2finance or to look at the market themselves to get an idea of key values.

 

This site has been successful for so long due to its transparency. We take into account all these factors in every decision. When there is a discrepancy in any one of these areas (proof, votes, comments, mod experience), then we give a reason for why we accept or reject a suggestion. If people still have an issue with that, there are several other places where they can check their key prices. But at the end of the day, this site is popular due to the faith the community puts in our system, despite a vocal minority of people that complain.

[Samuel G. Best]

We have discussed transferring over key values from tf2finance before and putting an end to key suggestions, but brad's point about the matter was spot on. If people don't trust the site moderators to make the right decision based on the totality of the proof, votes, and comments, then they are welcome to use other sites such as trade.tf or tf2finance or to look at the market themselves to get an idea of key values.

 

This site has been successful for so long due to its transparency. We take into account all these factors in every decision. When there is a discrepancy in any one of these areas (proof, votes, comments, mod experience), then we give a reason for why we accept or reject a suggestion. If people still have an issue with that, there are several other places where they can check their key prices. But at the end of the day, this site is popular due to the faith the community puts in our system, despite a vocal minority of people that complain.

 

I dun feel like my opinion is valued.

My intention is to further the good faith of the site but what u suggest is settling for complacency. 

The only suggestion you can give to people who point out potential system threats is to use another site. 

 

I am deeply upset by being called "a vocal minority of people that complain"

 

If you want to fixate on your satisfying examination of the last key suggestion, by all means. 

Anyways, I get the impression that a human-independent mechanism to safeguard the credibility of this site is not deemed note-worthy by this particular moderator. 

If that is so, I think I have my answer of my questions together with the reception of my opinions among the moderators.

[polar]

I am deeply upset by being called "a vocal minority of people that complain"

 

This was not in reference to you. I thought your opinion on it was clear. You said you didn't have a problem with the suggestion itself - you were just giving a suggestion to help improve the site. The vocal minority of people I am referring to are the people in groups like "savethekeys" who complain about bp.tf manipulation attempts by moderators.

[jjjon123]

Bp.tf is not a rigid structured business that needs to be regulated with rigid structured ethical rules and standards.

 

It is a close-knit council of individuals who have demonstrated their knowledge and understanding and a subject, which is Tf2 trading and general economic ideas.

 

There is no need or desire by the mod group or the majority of its users to start applying rigid established business ethical rules and guidelines.

[Samuel G. Best]

 

Bp.tf is not a rigid structured business that needs to be regulated with rigid structured ethical rules and standards.

 

It is a close-knit council of individuals who have demonstrated their knowledge and understanding and a subject, which is Tf2 trading and general economic ideas.

 

There is no need or desire by the mod group or the majority of its users to start applying rigid established business ethical rules and guidelines.

 

those guidelines have practical use of promoting an entity's good faith

and I believe, regardless whether bp.tf is a profit-making organization or a social benefit-driven initiative, good faith is of utmost important

especially the purpose of the site is to provide information to less informed traders

 

 

This was not in reference to you. I thought your opinion on it was clear. You said you didn't have a problem with the suggestion itself - you were just giving a suggestion to help improve the site. The vocal minority of people I am referring to are the people in groups like "savethekeys" who complain about bp.tf manipulation attempts by moderators.

 

No matter what, I have made my opinion very clear and I believe you can get my message now.

 

Thank you for your attention

[jjjon123]

those guidelines have practical use of promoting an entity's good faith 

and I believe, regardless whether bp.tf is a profit-making organization or a social benefit-driven initiative, good faith is of utmost important

especially the purpose of the site is to provide information to less informed traders 

I dont really know how to explain it other than this: Bp.tf has other means of ensuring good faith in their moderators.

 

barring potential "conflicts of interest" is just not the way Bp.tf runs things and it would be a great hindrance to the effectiveness of the mods if it was implemented.

[Samuel G. Best]

I dont really know how to explain it other than this: Bp.tf has other means of ensuring good faith in their moderators.

 

barring potential "conflicts of interest" is just not the way Bp.tf runs things and it would be a great hindrance to the effectiveness of the mods if it was implemented.

 

I am talking about the good faith of the site, in other words, the credibility of bp.tf.

But of coz, the good faith of the mods are directly associated with that of the site axiomatically. 

 

in my opinion, even effectiveness is hindered, a robust system preempting threats of conflict of interests should still be sought after

[db thatdamnheathen]

Either suggest an improvement or quit whining, the last thing we need around here is another person going MUH CORRUPTION/BIAS/SAVETHEKEYS.

[AwesomeMcCoolName]

Either suggest an improvement or quit whining, the last thing we need around here is another person going MUH CORRUPTION/BIAS/SAVETHEKEYS.

Not what he's saying, but okay. 

[Samuel G. Best]

Either suggest an improvement or quit whining, the last thing we need around here is another person going MUH CORRUPTION/BIAS/SAVETHEKEYS.

 

 

 

As a matter of fact, I have made suggestions, including

requiring more mods to accept a certain suggestion, at least have their names shown so that we know who are responsible for the collective decision

more comprehensive disclosure of the mods trading activities

displaying the quantity of the items concerned the mods have in a thread

 

At least, I pointed out a threat, what did you do?

 

Thank you for being so constructive

[db thatdamnheathen]

 

Not what he's saying, but okay.

Eh as far as I read it looked like they were trying to point out the potential for mod abuse/conflict of interest/ corruption. All of which as been covered ad nauseam.

 

 

As a matter of fact, I have made suggestions, including

requiring more mods to accept a certain suggestion, at least have their names shown so that we know who are responsible for the collective decision

more comprehensive disclosure of the mods trading activities

displaying the quantity of the items concerned the mods have in a thread

 

At least, I pointed out a threat, what did you do?

 

Thank you for being so constructive

 

And what would any of that accomplish besides more claims of mods "manipulating' prices? I fail to see how requiring mods to disclose their trading activity would be of any use. Who cares it a mod owns X of an item if the proof shows that an items sell for the suggested price (provided one person is not the only buyer of said item). All adding a name to who closed your suggestion would do nothing more than provide a target for misguided anger.

 

Also you have essentially pointed out absolutely NOTHING that has not been discussed numerous times before in some form whenever someone (usually a save the keys) comes howling to the forums about corruption/conflict of interest/mods closing or accepting a suggestion.

 

At least I didn't go around crying wolf again, what did you do?

 

Thank you for being so redundant.

[AwesomeMcCoolName]

And what would any of that accomplish besides more claims of mods "manipulating' prices? I fail to see how requiring mods to disclose their trading activity would be of any use. Who cares it a mod owns X of an item if the proof shows that an items sell for the suggested price (provided one person is not the only buyer of said item). All adding a name to who closed your suggestion would do nothing more than provide a target for misguided anger. 

 

Also you have essentially pointed out absolutely NOTHING that has not been discussed numerous times before in some form whenever someone (usually a save the keys) comes howling to the forums about corruption/conflict of interest/mods closing or accepting a suggestion.

 

At least I didn't go around crying wolf again, what did you do?

 

Thank you for being so redundant.

It already says who closes/accepts a suggestion. And, mods steam accounts are clearly linked and visible for anyone to see. 

[Samuel G. Best]

 

And what would any of that accomplish besides more claims of mods "manipulating' prices? I fail to see how requiring mods to disclose their trading activity would be of any use. Who cares it a mod owns X of an item if the proof shows that an items sell for the suggested price (provided one person is not the only buyer of said item). All adding a name to who closed your suggestion would do nothing more than provide a target for misguided anger.

 

Also you have essentially pointed out absolutely NOTHING that has not been discussed numerous times before in some form whenever someone (usually a save the keys) comes howling to the forums about corruption/conflict of interest/mods closing or accepting a suggestion.

 

At least I didn't go around crying wolf again, what did you do?

 

Thank you for being so redundant.

 

Please read carefully before posting arrogant and ignorant remarks.

 

I have said repeatedly, I am NOT claiming there is a current corruption situation going on.

 

All I have said is I see a threat of it in the current system and suggest ways to eliminate the threat. Please do not relate me to the aforementioned vocal minority who make groundless accusation.

 

1. All you have provided to prove the current system is robust is that proof is required in the thread. If what you said is sufficient, first, we do not need voting as the vote does not necessarily reflect the quality of the proof, which is deemed the dominant factor in a suggestion (fyi, the current dominant factor is mod as they make final decision). Second, proof is easy to judge on quantity but not quality, which leaves a considerable room for mods' interpretation.

 

2. Equating people with opinions and suggestion regarding the management of bp.tf to people who churn out evidence-less accusation does not strengthen your points.

 

3. If you find that you have been into too many similar discussion before, please feel free to leave the discussion as your irritating manner is not solving any matters at hand.

 

4. Do not talk of what you have opinions about does not make you a better community member, it just shows that you are not contributing to the community. Faulted opinions can be beneficial too.

 

 

It already says who closes/accepts a suggestion. And, mods steam accounts are clearly linked and visible for anyone to see.

 

The point is to show to the members that the suggestion is accepted as a collective decisions of mods named. Disregarding this measure's other functionality, it at least can impart more confidence to the members in bp.tf's credibility.

[AwesomeMcCoolName]

The point is to show to the members that the suggestion is accepted as a collective decisions of mods named. Disregarding this measure's other functionality, it at least can impart more confidence to the members in bp.tf's credibility.

The problem is, with most items the mods don't communicate--they can and often will ask for input from others, but because of the shear number of suggestions, it would be wildly impractical for the mods to discuss and come to a unanimous decision on every suggestion. With that said, if one mod accepts/rejects a suggestion then the other mods would more than likely do the same; but there have been close cases where the suggestion was brought up after it was accepted/rejected, and one mod said he wouldn't have closed/accepted it. It does happen from time-to-time, and when these 'issues' occur a counter suggestion can be made (if applicable).

[Samuel G. Best]

The problem is, with most items the mods don't communicate--they can and often will ask for input from others, but because of the shear number of suggestions, it would be wildly impractical for the mods to discuss and come to a unanimous decision on every suggestion. With that said, if one mod accepts/rejects a suggestion then the other mods would more than likely do the same; but there have been close cases where the suggestion was brought up after it was accepted/rejected, and one mod said he wouldn't have closed/accepted it. It does happen from time-to-time, and when these 'issues' occur a counter suggestion can be made (if applicable).

 

 

I agree it would be tedious to have unanimous or multiple agreement among the mods on every suggestion, so what I am picturing is that only applies to certain items, including currency, frequently traded items, high value items etc. 

[♠Derpeh♤]

you do realise many mods in the past have accepted suggestions which lowered their bp by multiple buds right? (lel puddington)

 

What matters is the proof, if the proof is correct then the mod should accept it, there is no way of manipulating as everything needs to be backed up. Why should bp remain at a incorrect price because of the simple reason that mods own the item?

 

if the proof is correct then they have already made the profit, bp doesnt have to show it. Ive been offered 4-5 buds for many of my unusuals multiple times but bp shows ~3 buds. Does it mean i can only get 3 buds? Again if the proof is valid then they have already made profit.

[Baloo]

Why are people still trying to explain its obvious that every response is simply "no, you're missing the point I'm saying x" even when x was addressed in the comment.

[MC22]

does this thread have something to do with key price? It looks as if it does

[HusKy]

The point is to show to the members that the suggestion is accepted as a collective decisions of mods named. Disregarding this measure's other functionality, it at least can impart more confidence to the members in bp.tf's credibility.

If you don't find bp.tf credible enough, you just don't use it. Simple as that.

 

Also what Baloo said. This thread is going nowhere.

[The G What ™]

I just want to say I got to here and stopped reading. Look, you took an Econ 101 course, we get it. 

 

 

 

 

 

and to address your disapproval:

1) like you said, he can act as a market maker to profit from the bid-ask spread, not necessarily capturing the capital gains in the paypal market

2) conflicts of interests compromise credibility regardless of the extent of the conflicts nor the size of the interests

 

 

 

 

Just... stop.

[Samuel G. Best]

So far all of you have only the following to say:

 

1. The suggestion requires proof, as long as the proof is good, conflict of interests does not occur

2. The last key price suggestion is good

3. The mods are good because they have accepted suggestions that lower their bp value

 

but none of them address the absence of human-independent mechanism to minimize threats of potential conflict of interest.