Suggestion: Terror-Watt Valley Forge at 9.5–11 keys

The rules state that if the average value generated from sales is 10 or higher, the sales will have to be rounded to the nearest integer, and if it’s lower than 10, they’d be rounded to the nearest .5. The sales we have would suggest a range of 10-11, which is a bit higher than the seller at 9.5, and I’m not too comfortable making the low-end half a key higher than the seller. I’d also considered excluding 11 and taking a price of 9.5-10, as to now stray too far from the seller at 9.5, which would be lower than 10 keys on average. I decided against this because there’s more evidence for 11 than there is for 10, and because the seller at 9.5 is kinda weak, since adding them or visiting their site is required to trade with them.

For the sake of this situation, I’m hoping an exception to the rounding rule can be made here, otherwise some feedback would help here.

Taking 9.5-11 for now.

I'd like to entertain this possible exception for the sake of an argument at some point, however I don't think the case for this specific suggestion is as strong as you think it is.

I don't remember if I've mentioned it to you before, but Johan's listings should be taken with a grain of salt at best. His listings essentially require you to use a third party site to buy his hat, as direct trade offers are impossible. And I don't see a lot of people trusting a random, unknown website in order to purchase a hat for a slightly low value, so his listings being up for longer than average shouldn't be surprising at all.

However, if Johan wasn't the sole seller at 9.5, then we'd have something worth talking about. I don't speak on behalf of all the mods when I say this(and in fact, after I post this i'm probably going to bring it up with the rest of them), so take my following opinion with a grain of sale for the time being:

If the seller at 9.5 was unsold for an extended period of time(let's say, 3 months), yet the median was still above 10 Keys, there's an argument that can be made that 9.5 should be possible because, valuing a B/O at a higher price than it should doesn't make sense -- on paper of course. But then there's the other side of it, why not round down to 9 instead of rounding up? This would technically be in line with the rules as well. I think this could go both ways -- I'm okay with an exception being made in cases like this, but at the same time I wouldn't be opposed to taking a "harsher" approach by forgoing the usual rounding up rule, for rounding down instead. Of course though, it should all be handled in a case-by-case basis if we decide to go in either direction for this.

TL;DR: I agree that there's an argument to be made for a possible exception to rounding rules, but the seller that you're using is not a good one. Johan's listings should not be taken at face-value most of the time due to reasons I mentioned above and before, so this should be going 10-11 unless another seller decides to match his price, or go even lower.

understood, cheers for that. i figured the fact that it was Johan selling would've been enough to not take them into consideration. i hinted towards them not being the best case for sellers in the listing towards the end of my summary, taking what you said about using them in suggestions a while ago into consideration, but i wasn't sure how far we wanted to go to excluding them in cases like this. will re-suggest.