Just because you don't understand something doesn't mean it can't be based on logical reasoning. I don't mind explaining my rationale but most of these points should not be something a black belt struggles with, most certainly not when you've already asked multiple mods about it (and I know at least one of them (me) has already talked to you about this). Your only valid question is 4 in my eyes, and even that is just a soapbox to call us out.

Point 1:

Has already been addressed in the discord chat - just because the sale cannot be used in reverse doesn't mean it should use a year old price for a 4 month old one - that makes no sense. If you're looking to update something, i.e to give a more recent indication of a hat's value, why would you then rely on a hat much less recently updated?

Point 2:

Has already been addressed in the discord chat (and you damn well know it too because you were the one that bought it): it was listed on tradeit (dare I say for a very long time) at ~145 keys converted: https://imgur.com/a/mhrIPMW

Point 3:

So let me get this straight, you have the biggest issues relying on a 9 month old sale for your indications, but you're fine taking a sale established 3 months earlier? Do you not see how that is really ironic considering this whole suggestion is EXACTLY that?

All I was doing is pointing out that SINCE the suggestion setting its current price was made, the general trend has been that this hat has had lower data points, being a strong indicator that it is really high at current. Just looking at current BOs also shows that, but I tried to get a grasp of how much too high it would be. If the sales since are a dump to tradeit, a sale at ~160, and a sale from tradeit where it has been listed for a good year, at least for some time at 145, one might say that 210 may be as much as 50-60 keys too high

Point 4:

As I stated, I do not really agree with that update myself. I presume it was accepted, not realizing how the warpig sale directly conflicted, and since the sale was aging, a decision was made. While not agreeing with it I understand why it was accepted at the time; I can always opt for reverting something, but I typically dont as long as I can understand their rationale.

That said, it is not unusual for us to accept iffy single-sale cases where we make a note either in the mod comments or in the suggestion comments that its value is probably off by a fair bit due to a variety of reasons, but where we believe it is okay to report the sale as is. We generally grant some leniency with this when it concerns heavily outdated hats where a value is way off (because the USD-key rates that were used at the time really shifted it, for isntance), or collectors purchases, to report values better than current or to satisfy the wishes of collectors to have their sales be reported even though realistically, the value is way too high.

Point 5:

I don't understand your logic here unless you're still referring to the same issue as you pointed out in point 1 - in which case: see point 1. If you meant anything else: see point 6 because I believe these two are tied together

Point 6:

So you're saying if a bunch of items in total amounts for less than 50% of the sale there can't be any uncertainty even though those items could be way off? what?

As per point 3 (a summary of my previous comment), the samur is probably 50-60 keys too high based on past trends and listing prices. As per my original comment, the ballcap's other sale is some 50 keys over a BO in an outlier sale, 100 keys above the next highest sale on that (presumably the one that's going to be used there, or at least the one that should be used there). That'd put the ballcap ~150 keys lower. Personally I believe it's best not to rely on either of those data points for other pricing purposes, but that's an 150 key range of sales where only the very highest point was taken. Not relying on either means this is fully impossible, or that you'd take ~150 at which it was priced prior (which shouldn't be done, but which is ~60 keys lower).

Based on the above, this could be between 50 and 200 keys off, whereas the change induced by this update (and Im going to stress again that it is an update on a recently updated hat) is only 80 keys, and I find that concerning, especially since we're dealing with a raise and the uncertainty is fully due to hats being valued (too) high.

Point 7:

Where's the question here? All you do here is state that you don't expect to sell 50 keys above what you've asked us to value this at within 3 months. I can't think of a way that'd support your case or disprove of anything I've said before.