Suggestion: Darkblaze Chieftain's Challenge at 435 keys

Price Suggestion

~1810 keys

darkblaze

48 votes up

17 votes down

Related Suggestions

This suggestion was accepted Sun, 06 Dec 20 14:06:49 +0000 by Vijf Kilo Boter (met voetjes).

Comments can no longer be left on this suggestion.

Comments

only recent sale

b/o: https://paste.pics/e1eaec47778567fc92bd6d198d73d7d5

screenshot of accepted trade:

https://paste.pics/f4f17e9773979b9e052b02b2e7fdfa01

backpack compare:

https://backpack.tf/profiles/76561198068732040#!/compare/1602201600/1602288000

https://backpack.tf/profiles/76561198846276257#!/compare/1602201600/1602288000

Something just feels off about this suggestion and the large price jump. I did some digging and it appears that this user has a history of trying to suggest price hikes for unusual hats, usually for personal gain. Most if not all of those attempts have failed. They have a history of questionable practices such as trying to rush / force trades and attempts to use price suggestions as part of trade deals.

It should be noted that this person’s account is low in TF2 value (at the moment) and steam account content, and while not provable, feels/looks like an alt. You could argue they are not due to owning a decent number of items and having ~4000 hours in the game. However, this could then instead point to an account/person used for dirty dealings. If it is not either of those then it is most likely someone whose main focus is ruthless profit. I know this is a damned if you do or don’t situation with no solid evidence and therefore this section should be taken very lightly.

Finally, while minor / unnecessary due to the backpack compare links, there is no direct image of the trade with an accepted banner on it. It should be noted that a screenshot of the old listing is irrelevant and only the sale itself is what matters. Both minor technicalities that should be overlooked.

Despite all that I have said, a single sale for a 1:2 hat would be enough to reprice it and this could/should be passed. However, I implore you to keep what I have mentioned in mind and that it might be better to have someone with a less questionable past to price the item. Otherwise, the next time the item goes on sale or is repriced the current price could be looked at as partially invalid/manipulated.

Failed Suggestions / Price Hiking: https://backpack.tf/vote?creator=76561198846276257&state=0,1,2

Questionable practices: Add/DM me for any names to keep people private.

I talked to the price suggestor in a call with other people present as witnesses:

First Paragraph Revisions:

Most of the users failed price suggestions are because he had no clue what he was doing during these suggestions and many of them were self-closed. This record of constant failed price suggestions has left a scar on his bp.tf profile but should mostly be ignored as many of them are old / repeating items.

Second Paragraph Revisions:

My entire second paragraph can be completely ignored now.

Third and Fourth Paragraph's require no real revisions as many points still hold.

Additional Revisions / Notes:

This user has now learned not to rush people along with learning what other kinds of actions may come off as being shady, this has all been cleared up. This suggestion should be accepted as the sale is completely valid and thus the value increased. However, it should still be noted that due to this incident if it is accepted that it may be cause for shakier pricing grounds in the future. This has essentially turned into a case where numerous facts and misunderstandings that at the surface look shady can be cleared up once going into very deep detail.

https://backpack.tf/suggestion/5f14986725a5472f2942c737 refer to this suggestion, what he did here is perfectly fine, as long as this is the only usable sale then a price increase is ok

please dont go assuming this kind of stuff about others especially since you also have the same kind of "shady history" yourself (https://backpack.tf/suggestion/5caa5a13d38172577d23f762 , using a spelled sale to raise to 70 without checking other sales?)

I had one bad price suggestion from 2+ years ago. It's easy to see that the proposed increase was far smaller both in actual size and ratio wise.

In comparison, this poster has had bad price suggestions more recently as well as other perceived negative trading traits. He was trying to rush trades and make suggestions part of trade deals. Since then the poster has explained a great deal and those shady history occurrences, practices, and traits have been cleared up or fixed.

Your comment appears to bring up material unrelated to this item / suggester and attempts to start trouble. It does not add any concerns/questions about the suggestor or item sale. In addition, it does not add anything to strengthen the reason for why the price should or should not be accepted. I myself, within section 4 of my original post, said that the evidence provided was sufficent and that the suggestion was made properly enough.

I appreciate you showing the other suggestion example within section one. As stated, I agree that since its a 1:2 and a legitimate sale from the seller that the price should be accepted. My original post(s) were merely to bring up concern about the suggestor/buyer and the sheer key volume/ratio price increase.

I apologise if i came across as rude, just that your original comment didn't sit right with me. I was mainly trying to show that this suggestion is fine

No problem and understandable. I believe that we can agree that this suggestion is fine and any cause for concern regarding the suggester and item have been fully cleared up.

I have literally red a detective story, not comments to suggestion.

holy bork mother of dog